|
Post by Stormcrow on Mar 9, 2014 4:25:14 GMT -6
A fighter with, say, 17 strength, 13 intelligence, and 12 wisdom would end up with 20 strength. OD&D doesn't cater for 20 strength so it is illogical to make scores of that order possible. A PC with three 18s could in fact achieve 25 strength! That's getting silly even by AD&D standards, and is just nonsense in OD&D. If D&D doesn't "cater for" abilities greater than 18, then you can't raise your prime requisite above 18. There's no need to apply the adjustments blindly. And there's no indication that you must make the adjustments, either. "Clerics can use strength on a 3 for 1 basis," etc. On the other hand, there's no rule (in the original set) saying you can't raise your prime requisite above 18; it just doesn't tell you what that means.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Mar 9, 2014 4:30:29 GMT -6
If I'm reading it right, GH appears to contradict itself in that for fighters it states that adjustments due to "raw" strength are not affected by secondary requisites, while for thieves it states that "raw" dexterity is affected by secondary/tertiary requisites. Raw dexterity adjusted by secondary requisites is no longer raw dexterity. The trouble here is that Greyhawk here introduces effects of abilities that are also prime requisites, something that wasn't true in the original set. Now "for purposes of gaining experience only" takes on a different meaning. It's a dilemma.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 9, 2014 5:59:18 GMT -6
One thing I like about the "virtual" stat swich is that it avoids some of the powergaming (i.e. "min/max") of stat inflation. You can juice up your fighter's strength for Prime Requisite purposes, but his actual in-game strength remains the same. Keeps characters more grounded, in my opinion, and makes those naturally rolled 17's and 18's special.
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Mar 9, 2014 6:09:30 GMT -6
But, even in an "actual" trade off, a fighting man with STR above 14 has no interest in increasing his score: he already has the maximum experience bonus (+10%), and cannot increase his bonuses to fighting ability, for those only apply to the "raw" unmodified score. Trading off points to increase his STR above 18 wouldn't be min/maxing: he would just be a wasting his INT or WIS score.
In the other hand, a player with a "hopeless" STR score (below 8) who really, really, really wants to play a warrior would be more interested by the bargain. He won't gain fighting bonuses, but at least he can avoid exp penalties.
The "raw, unmodified" clause can thus be considered a way to enforce this "anti-munchkinism" safety mesure.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 9, 2014 6:20:29 GMT -6
But, even in an "actual" trade off, a fighting man with STR above 14 has no interest in increasing his score Maybe so, but then there are bragging rights: " I've got an 18 strength." "So what? I've got 19!" "I flick you gnats off, I've got 21." Besides which, I've seen adventures where such and such a door requires an 18 strength to open. And you'll now and then get into an opposed strength situation--where it's down to one strength score versus another--in which higher factors will win out.
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Mar 9, 2014 6:31:17 GMT -6
A PC with three 18s could in fact achieve 25 strength! That's getting silly even by AD&D standards, and is just nonsense in OD&D. Interesting that AD&D ability scores max out at exactly 25. Coincidence, or is it possible the 25 was calculated using this method and therefore clarifies the rule?
|
|
|
Post by Red Baron on Mar 9, 2014 9:24:28 GMT -6
A PC with three 18s could in fact achieve 25 strength! That's getting silly even by AD&D standards, and is just nonsense in OD&D. Interesting that AD&D ability scores max out at exactly 25. Coincidence, or is it possible the 25 was calculated using this method and therefore clarifies the rule? That's definitely not in either the player's handbook or the dmg. (Except for the gauntlets of giant strength, which strangely give strength numbers not mentioned anywhere else.)
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Mar 9, 2014 10:38:48 GMT -6
Besides which, I've seen adventures where such and such a door requires an 18 strength to open. And you'll now and then get into an opposed strength situation--where it's down to one strength score versus another--in which higher factors will win out. But I suppose that those appeared later. By the times of the redaction of the LBB it was just 2 chances in 6, maybe 1 if you're weak, maybe 3 if you are strong. The "roll d20 Under ability score" , if my memory serves well, was introduced by Moldvay .
|
|
|
Post by Mushgnome on Mar 9, 2014 16:03:05 GMT -6
Interesting that AD&D ability scores max out at exactly 25. Coincidence, or is it possible the 25 was calculated using this method and therefore clarifies the rule? That's definitely not in either the player's handbook or the dmg. (Except for the gauntlets of giant strength, which strangely give strength numbers not mentioned anywhere else.) True that, I was away from home and didn't have access to the book to find the citation. It's in Legends & Lore (which we can debate whether or not it's "canon" since it's not a Gygax book; I wonder if maybe the rule came from a Dungeon Magazine article originally?). An illustrative example might be to look at King Arthur (p. 18) whose stats are S:18(52) I:18 W:19 D:16 C:18 CH:18. So he gets integer((19-9)/3)=3 points for his high wisdom and integer((18-9)/2)=4 for intelligence. Assuming we drop fractions (not specified, but a common enough general practice), that means his Prime Requisite (or "virtual strength") score is calculated 18 (strength) + 3 (wisdom) + 4 (int) = 25, the best possible! (For those who don't own the book, 25 = titan strength.) Compare Arthur to Galahad. With his 18(00) Galahad is stronger than Arthur, but with I:15 W:18 his Prime Requisite is "only" 18+3+3=24, equal to the "virtual strength" of a storm giant. Viewed through the lens of Prime Requisite, both are "godlike" but Arthur is ever so slightly "stronger" than Galahad. Prime Requisite is like a 7th stat, a certain "je ne sais quoi" that separates the legendary from the merely great. I am starting to like this concept of "Prime Requisite as Virtual 7th Stat" but I don't think I would use it in my own game.
|
|