|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 25, 2017 14:34:59 GMT -6
In another thread, I did a search for the effects of the six ability scores listed in M&M. I found more than I thought I would!
To quote myself:
What else did I miss?
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Aug 25, 2017 15:36:36 GMT -6
A point of pedantry. Charisma determines the number of retainers. Anyone can hire as many people as he can afford and find.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 25, 2017 15:52:11 GMT -6
A point of pedantry. Charisma determines the number of retainers. Anyone can hire as many people as he can afford and find. My PDF states "Maximum # Hirelings". I kept the terminology. It also states referring to CHA, "primary function is to determine how many hirelings of unusual nature a character can attract." |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Aug 25, 2017 16:41:46 GMT -6
*taps out*
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 25, 2017 17:41:52 GMT -6
The various terms for NPCs (another term on its own) can be very confusing. I don't fully understand all the nuances between them and it's not consistent between editions. But, I agree that in general you can hire pretty much whatever you can afford. |
|
|
|
Post by murquhart72 on Aug 28, 2017 18:45:21 GMT -6
Biggest thing you missed is Referee's fiat! Player want to do something not otherwise covered in the 'rules'? Well, is your relevant ability below or above average? If so, by how much?
Very subjective, I know, but that's how The Game is played! The abilities give a good guideline, and (if needed) the dice can nudge the judgement towards success for failure. This is IMHO, THE reason abilities exist in the first place. They make the character who (s)he is and dictate (more or less) what (s)he is capable of.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 29, 2017 9:18:55 GMT -6
Biggest thing you missed is Referee's fiat! You are right, of course. Ref fiat is always assumed. It underlines the entire concept of an RPG. "Ref fiat" could be the answer to every D&D-related question, so it's kinda not necessary to point it out. But, you do offer a good reminder that with a good ref, you don't need dice, rules, or anything other than imagination to have fun. My OP was more about the text itself, not the philosophy behind it. |
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Aug 29, 2017 9:39:21 GMT -6
Subjective comparison.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 29, 2017 14:44:56 GMT -6
Between PCs? Or do you mean something like: "Must have at least X in [insert ability here] to Y."? Or maybe both? |
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Aug 29, 2017 19:20:04 GMT -6
Scott may have meant that ability scores are used for subjective comparison between characters or to environmental obstacles. It's harder to do when your stats are "XP Bonus" and "# of Hirelings".
|
|
|
|
Post by foxroe on Aug 29, 2017 19:37:45 GMT -6
I like it as is. There's going to be a big difference in the feel of the game if you make this change - It will stop feeling like an RPG and start feeling like any other table-top game, IMO.
That being said, another approach is to reverse your concept: convert all of the rules governing "sub-stats" to directly use the ability score value.
XP Bonus = Prime Requisite score
Starting HP = Constitution score
Survival Chance = Constitution score (on d20)
Missile Bonus... (drop it; unnecessary IMO)
Fiddly Leadership Mechanics = Charisma score
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 29, 2017 23:42:45 GMT -6
I like it as is. There's going to be a big difference in the feel of the game if you make this change - It will stop feeling like an RPG and start feeling like any other table-top game, IMO. That being said, another approach is to reverse your concept: convert all of the rules governing "sub-stats" to directly use the ability score value. XP Bonus = Prime Requisite score Starting HP = Constitution score Survival Chance = Constitution score (on d20) Missile Bonus... (drop it; unnecessary IMO) Fiddly Leadership Mechanics = Charisma score These are really great! Lots of potential in these ideas. And good point about the importance of maintaining an "RPG feel". Oh, and just for the record, I would be more likely to ditch ability scores altogether and just use class and level to make subjective PC vs. PC decisions than make these type of changes. In OD&D, you gotta get creative and do a boatload of house ruling to make the 6 abilities useful beyond the things listed here. Of course, this type of house ruling is all part of the charm. I am in no way advocating getting rid of ability scores and replacing them with these derived stats permanently. This is purely an academic exercise to see what the game would look like without them and how important the actual scores are in game terms. I was curious how critical they are balance-wise and their actual impact on the game as presented in the text. Roll under ability checks, comparisons, and minimums are all good tools for the ref, but you almost have to read these forums to learn about them and see examples of how they would work since they aren't in the text. I just don't remember ability scores ever being used much in these ways but that could be my unique experience with later editions. The derived stats, however, were used constantly. My personal preference is to have zero derived stats and just use the 6 ability scores. The scores tell me almost nothing about the character in game terms but they do communicate very well how characters compare to each other (even if these comparisons rarely ever occur). |
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Aug 30, 2017 13:38:49 GMT -6
Between PCs? Or do you mean something like: "Must have at least X in [insert ability here] to Y."? Or maybe both? Both are valid, but I was thinking of the first one. The main way I see ability scores getting used at my table is players comparing their scores and saying "You're the strong one; you go open the door" or "You're the smart one; you should read it." Perhaps a more specific explanation of this effect is: "guidelines for assignment of tasks by party caller." But I've also seen the other one in old modules, like "only someone with a 15 or higher Strength can move the statue." |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 30, 2017 14:38:37 GMT -6
Thanks for the reply scottenkainen . Quick follow-up question: At your table, is it only a matter of "who does what" or do you combine it with roll-under checks? |
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Aug 31, 2017 9:07:23 GMT -6
I do not use ability score checks. For some physical things, like bashing doors, I'll require a roll (since, in this instance, it can affect surprise conditions), but most of the time, if the high stat person tries it, I'll just say it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 31, 2017 11:34:22 GMT -6
I do not use ability score checks. For some physical things, like bashing doors, I'll require a roll (since, in this instance, it can affect surprise conditions), but most of the time, if the high stat person tries it, I'll just say it works. That makes sense, thank you. I really dig the speed and simplicity. |
|
|
|
Post by murquhart72 on Sept 2, 2017 14:00:57 GMT -6
I do not use ability score checks. For some physical things, like bashing doors, I'll require a roll (since, in this instance, it can affect surprise conditions), but most of the time, if the high stat person tries it, I'll just say it works. That makes sense, thank you. I really dig the speed and simplicity. This is actually what I meant by Referee fiat: using the scores subjectively to make decisions or at least influence die rolls. Sometimes my own simplicity doesn't convey enough information. |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 2, 2017 17:31:21 GMT -6
That makes sense, thank you. I really dig the speed and simplicity. This is actually what I meant by Referee fiat: using the scores subjectively to make decisions or at least influence die rolls. Sometimes my own simplicity doesn't convey enough information. I wish I had more experience with these methods. Care to share any examples of this murquhart72 ? These methods appeal to me, but I also want to be consistent with my players. I'm so used to combat and reaction bonuses and that being pretty much all of it. 5E is a much different story in how abilities are treated and in some ways I like it, but I've always been annoyed with the arbitrary DCs 5E uses for noncombat stuff. What scottenkainen said about pretty much allowing or not allowing noncombat stuff is something I want to try. I also like foxroe 's suggestions of ways to use the actual scores for similar things normally given only as bonuses. Lots of good ideas in here. Thanks everyone! |
|
|
|
Post by murquhart72 on Sept 2, 2017 19:30:07 GMT -6
I'm afraid there isn't much in the way of consistency. It's pretty much an ebb and flow. An art form if you will. The best thing you can do is jump in, make mistakes, find your flow and run with it! Start with Gygax's view in OD&D: a score of below 9 is below average (BAD). Abilities from 9-12 are average (nearly ALL characters, PC or NPC, will have these scores in everything). Abilities above 12 are above average (GOOD). Start there and refine by acknowledging that scores above 14 are "exceptional". Practice and you should be able to take it from there  |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Sept 2, 2017 19:51:27 GMT -6
I'm afraid there isn't much in the way of consistency. It's pretty much an ebb and flow. An art form if you will. The best thing you can do is jump in, make mistakes, find your flow and run with it! Start with Gygax's view in OD&D: a score of below 9 is below average (BAD). Abilities from 9-12 are average (nearly ALL characters, PC or NPC, will have these scores in everything). Abilities above 12 are above average (GOOD). Start there and refine by acknowledging that scores above 14 are "exceptional". Practice and you should be able to take it from there Great advice, thanks! |
|
