D&D ability scores being meaningless

[bestialwarlust]

One thing I've seen over time on various forums is that because ability scores in d&d and od&d confer so little or no score bonus that having a character with a score of 9 and another with a score of 13 means nothing. People and that is mostly players seem to get fixated on the bonuses that these score infer and that if there is no bonus differentiator then why have scores at all. It seems to me that most are missing the point. First the score is used as a descriptive element. A con 7 fighter and a con 12 fighter can be played in two different ways you have the high end average 12 con fighter who might not have heroic levels of stamina can still do things his Con 7 counter part cannot. The Con 7 fighter could be one that is overweight or has asthma or some other health condition (oh no you say I have to be creative and role play my character without picking from a menu list of character flaws and not get any fiddly character build points?!!!)

Secondly they can be used to resolve situations that need to be adjudicated during game play (you mean trust the referee!?? but...but...he's evil and be beaten!!) So in M&M you have some guidelines as to what some of the abilities are used for Str for opening doors, Int for languages, etc.. Over the years different groups have come up with different ways to utilize how they want to use them in their own games (I know thinking for yourself and being creative crazy idea isn't it?) I've used various common methods over the years, roll d20 under, roll xd6 under, multiply the score by 3,4 or 5 to get a percentage, etc..

Lately in my gaming I've been attempting to streamline my game sessions and roll dice only when necessary gently nudging my players to interact more with the imaginary game world then the rules themselves. What I've been doing lately is setting ability score minimums to decide whether or not to have a die roll to see if a complication or interesting situation happens because of a failed attempt, I try not to make my rolls a binary pass/fail.

So for example the group is in pursuit or fleeing a foe up a head they need to cross a narrow bridge, beam, slippery surface, etc.. I decide that anyone with a Dex of 13+ can move swiftly but cautiously and make it across -- no roll, while anyone with a lower Dex has to roll a 1d6 and if any ones roll comes up a 1 or 2 then they have a complication. Such as they slip and will fall to the bottom or they can save themselves say if a fighter by dropping their shield and losing it but that gives them the edge they need to balance themselves and make it across.

Another situation is there is a large fallen stone blocking the path they need to go down. Instead of rolling I might determine that it requires 23 points of strength to move it aside. The burly 18 Str fighter makes his way up I tell him yes you can feel it moving but you think you need help. Low and behold here comes the Str 7 magic user he assists and viola! the two of them can move it. So the Low str character is not always as useless as many think.

A situation where I think is stressful enough where no matter what the ability score is they all need to roll a d6 (yes I prefer the d6) and grant anyone with an exceptional score of 15+ a +1 bonus to the roll and anyone with a 6 or less a -1.

So with that long ramble of mine how do you utilize ability scores and their apparent meaninglessness (is that a word?) in your games?

[makofan]

I just had people roll DEX or less on 3d6 to avoid falling off a rope bridge that had a cable snap.

[Deleted]

People say dumb stuff. Film at 10.

In other news, water wet, sky blue.

[Stormcrow]

May 12, 2014 10:51:35 GMT -6 bestialwarlust said:

So for example the group is in pursuit or fleeing a foe up a head they need to cross a narrow bridge, beam, slippery surface, etc.. I decide that anyone with a Dex of 13+ can move swiftly but cautiously and make it across -- no roll, while anyone with a lower Dex has to roll a 1d6 and if any ones roll comes up a 1 or 2 then they have a complication. Such as they slip and will fall to the bottom or they can save themselves say if a fighter by dropping their shield and losing it but that gives them the edge they need to balance themselves and make it across.

Or try this: Dex 13+ can move across automatically, but anyone with less can roll a die and add it to their dexterity. If you still don't reach 13 you slip, etc.

how do you utilize ability scores and their apparent meaninglessness (is that a word?) in your games?

It is a word.

I use them as you describe in your post: in whatever ad-hoc manner I prefer to judge whether the character has the ability to perform the feat in question. I don't like to roll "ability checks"; I don't feel that this results in the correct probabilities. Too often it leads to over- or underqualified characters failing or succeeding in dumb ways for no good reason.

[jdjarvis]

As they are not meaningless there isn't much meaningless to address.

They describe relative capacities in six different areas that in and of itself isn't meaningless.

Success is certain for anyone of STR 13+ is a legitimate use of an ability score.

[Finarvyn]

I think that one key thing to consider is that not all "+1"s are the same. Even if you totally disregard the actual numbers and focus on the bonus numbers, adding a point to a stat may or may not increase the bonus based on what the original number was before the boost.

In other words, if I do a B/X attribute scale where 13-15 is +1 bonus, and two characters with strength 13 and 15 each gain a strength point, they don't feel the same effect. The 13 guy is still at +1 bonus but the 15 guy moves up to +2. This means that those numbers do have meaning even if they aren't used directly.

And, like Makofan, I often do stat checks instead of bonus checks. I often use the actual number.

[Deleted]

Or, of course, one could always actually look at the number.

An intelligence of 12 is somewhat above average. Not astonishingly, but noticeably.

So... "Would a "bright" person be able to figure this out?" is a perfectly viable way to evaluate what somebody can do with INT 12.

[bestialwarlust]

May 12, 2014 15:10:16 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Or, of course, one could always actually look at the number.

An intelligence of 12 is somewhat above average. Not astonishingly, but noticeably.

So... "Would a "bright" person be able to figure this out?" is a perfectly viable way to evaluate what somebody can do with INT 12.

I tend to do that first before making a judgment call if a roll is needed. Though that seems to be lost among the newer crowd.

Stormcrow interesting idea on rolling the d6 and adding it to the score I never thought of that one.

[geoffrey]

I just rolled the following character, 3d6 in order, set in stone:

Str: 12
Int: 11
Wis: 8
Con: 6
Dex: 10
Cha: 14

That tells you a lot right there, completely independent of any numerical advantages or disadvantages. He lacks common sense and gets sick and tired easily. That said, he is very likable and quite good looking! Those six numbers give you a good character profile.

[scalydemon]

May 12, 2014 15:33:05 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

He lacks common sense and gets sick and tired easily. That said, he is very likable and quite good looking!

Have we met before?

[talysman]

Aside from adding ability bonuses to d6 or d20 rolls, or rolling d20 or 3d6 under a score, there's also using abilities as thresholds to determine when to roll. Stuff like "Strength 16+ moves the boulder easily, otherwise roll 5+ on 1d6." I'm moving more in that direction myself, with few if any bonuses. I decided I like that approach best. Other people like one of the other approaches.

On the other forum where a conversation about ability scores is underway, I tried to make the point that the original rules don't say which of those methods to use because not everybody is going to like any one method, and some may prefer different methods for different situations.

[Leonaru]

I usually use scores for score checks (d20 roll under) or drop them entirely.

[Finarvyn]

May 12, 2014 15:33:05 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

I just rolled the following character, 3d6 in order, set in stone:

Str: 12
Int: 11
Wis: 8
Con: 6
Dex: 10
Cha: 14

That tells you a lot right there, completely independent of any numerical advantages or disadvantages. He lacks common sense and gets sick and tired easily. That said, he is very likable and quite good looking! Those six numbers give you a good character profile.

I agree. Much nicer than a "bonus only" character profile.
Str: +0
Int: +0
Wis: -1
Con: -1
Dex: +0
Cha: +1

I took Geoffrey's sample character and applied the B/X model which I use most (-3 for a 3, -2 for 4&5, -1 for 6-8, +0 for 9-12, +1 for 13-15, +2 for 16&17, +3 for 18) and clearly you lose a bunch of the flavor even if the character is the "same" mechanically.

[machpants]

I like using the roll under score for tests of various sorts, not a d20 though. I use 2d6 for really easy task (thus, as mentioned above a 13 and your fine) 3d6 for hard task and 4d6 if it is really tricky. 5d6 for super crazy stunts!

[Stormcrow]

May 12, 2014 16:57:58 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Much nicer than a "bonus only" character profile.

This is just a matter of proper scaling. There are many games whose ability scores really are just the bonuses, and yet nicely describe the character as well. My first game like this was Rune, which was based on Ars Magica. Another favorite of mine is Doctor Who: Adventures in Time and Space, in which every roll is [Attribute + Skill + 2d6 vs. target number]. Then there are games like GURPS where the ability score forms the basis for skills.

[idrahil]

Again, this goes to the difference between a role-playing game and a roll-playing game.

My kids like to roll their attacks and immediate use attribute checks and skill uses but I have started rolling more in secret so that they are paying more attention to what their character is doing, rather than what they need to be rolling like it's a craps table.

[bestialwarlust]

May 13, 2014 8:25:56 GMT -6 idrahil said:

Again, this goes to the difference between a role-playing game and a roll-playing game.

My kids like to roll their attacks and immediate use attribute checks and skill uses but I have started rolling more in secret so that they are paying more attention to what their character is doing, rather than what they need to be rolling like it's a craps table.

Agreed that's why OD&D is my preferred version to run.

[sepulchre]

Finarvyn wrote:

I think that one key thing to consider is that not all "+1"s are the same.

This.

It's a question of granularity not meaninglessness. I don't use ability scores, archetype/class abilities(like those of fighting men or static abilities like a ranger's 3in6 to surprise)or racial abilities (human and demi-human) are ample modifiers to the dice in question, most often to the (d6) dungeon (doors, traps etc.) or (d6) wildness key (getting lost, finding food, etc.).

[Deleted]

May 12, 2014 16:57:58 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

I agree. Much nicer than a "bonus only" character profile.
Str: +0
Int: +0
Wis: -1
Con: -1
Dex: +0
Cha: +1

I took Geoffrey's sample character and applied the B/X model which I use most (-3 for a 3, -2 for 4&5, -1 for 6-8, +0 for 9-12, +1 for 13-15, +2 for 16&17, +3 for 18) and clearly you lose a bunch of the flavor even if the character is the "same" mechanically.

You could write this character as "Wis -1, Con -1, Cha +1". This is much shorter and good for NPCs since you only need to list exceptional stats.

However, by using base-0 ability scores, you can play the above character next to ones with abilities like "Str -1, Reflex +1, The Force +2" and "Rad -1, Int +3, Psi +2", etc.

Each score that's not listed is assume to be average. Thus characters from a variety of genres: sci-fi, post-apoc, western, etc, can be created with games having different ability score lists, yet can be played side-by-side with those from regular fantasy D&D. You even could, if you wish, give the different non-human races not just bonuses to certain ability score but entirely new ability scores only they possess, Size for Ogres, Grudge for dwarves, Luck for elves, or whatever you can imagine.

Doing this moves ability scores from a means of quantifying or classifying characters into a means of expressing a character's unique gifts and talents.

Plus you can use 2d6+mod >= 7 to test an ability score and end up with results almost exactly the same as d20 <= score.

[ravenheart87]

May 15, 2014 8:57:18 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

Plus you can use 2d6+mod >= 7 to test an ability score and end up with results almost exactly the same as d20 <= score.

Umm, not really. d20 has flat distribution. 2d6 has a curved distribution and you have bigger chance to get values closer to the average.

[Deleted]

May 15, 2014 9:06:47 GMT -6 ravenheart87 said:

Umm, not really. d20 has flat distribution. 2d6 has a curved distribution and you have bigger chance to get values closer to the average.

The d20 has a flat distribution, but the ability score modifiers don't (I'm assuming B/X style modifiers). An 18 will pass a d20 check 90% of the time, a 2d6+3>=7 will pass 92% of the time. A 16 or 17 will pass 80% and 85% of the time, 2d6+2>=7 will pass 83%, just about average of that. Etc.

[Keps]

Playing below average people and rolling up new characters twice a session stinks, especially for kids. At least use the shopkeeper rule for them. Let them be heroic, allow that massive +1.

[idrahil]

May 15, 2014 18:25:44 GMT -6 Keps said:

Playing below average people and rolling up new characters twice a session stinks, especially for kids. At least use the shopkeeper rule for them. Let them be heroic, allow that massive +1.

At the risk of offending purists, one possible solution to this is the DAGGER rule system for kids. I did that for my son who just recently "graduated" attributes. The DAGGER rules have young kids in mind and has no attributes. It works very well with regular rules meaning the rest of my group used regular rules and my son used the simple DAGGER rules.

[Torreny]

May 15, 2014 21:12:12 GMT -6 idrahil said:

At the risk of offending purists, one possible solution to this is the DAGGER rule system for kids. I did that for my son who just recently "graduated" attributes. The DAGGER rules have young kids in mind and has no attributes. It works very well with regular rules meaning the rest of my group used regular rules and my son used the simple DAGGER rules.

I'm not familiar with this DAGGER. Could you provide a link to it? I play "the dungeon game" with the youngest (5 and 8) in the family when I get the chance. I got them to roll the dice and told them "You're strong as The Hulk! Pretty as Wonder Woman!" and etc. for their "stats". Their dad's got them really hooked on the Marvel and DC universes, so it's pretty easy to give them an idea of what they can do. One's a tree man and the other a fairy princess.

[idrahil]

May 16, 2014 3:12:28 GMT -6 Torreny said:

May 15, 2014 21:12:12 GMT -6 idrahil said:

At the risk of offending purists, one possible solution to this is the DAGGER rule system for kids. I did that for my son who just recently "graduated" attributes. The DAGGER rules have young kids in mind and has no attributes. It works very well with regular rules meaning the rest of my group used regular rules and my son used the simple DAGGER rules.

I'm not familiar with this DAGGER. Could you provide a link to it? I play "the dungeon game" with the youngest (5 and 8) in the family when I get the chance. I got them to roll the dice and told them "You're strong as The Hulk! Pretty as Wonder Woman!" and etc. for their "stats". Their dad's got them really hooked on the Marvel and DC universes, so it's pretty easy to give them an idea of what they can do. One's a tree man and the other a fairy princess.

Hey Torreny,

I'm at work so I can't do too much surfing blogs but I know you can get it here:

rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/111525/Dagger-for-Kids-Free-Version-Supplemental-Rules-for-Classic-Roleplaying-with-Kids?manufacturers_id=2505

It is free. There is also a $1 version with more art I guess? but the free one comes with the rules and a character sheet. They were developed by a guy who played with his kids and came up with these rules then John at Brave Halfling made a product out of it.

In my opinion it works because it has almost nothing crunchy to it. It has the attack rolls, that's it. From there you can slowly add more rules. The "Knight" class is what my son loves and the rules state Knights attack twice per round. That became a bit overpowering in some cases but a while back Zenopus posted in the Holmes section here some "1HP monsters". Those are what I use to offset his attacks He gets to fend off various creepy crawlies that pop up.

At any rate, its free so you can check it out risk free.

[inkmeister]

I wouldn't claim D&D ability scores are meaningless, but in OD&D they seem to lack a consistent or sure meaning outside of personal interpretation. For those who enjoy the creative interpretation of the numbers, more power them, I say. On the other hand, I tend to prefer to ignore the whole ability score aspect of the game and let player imagination determine character traits. While it can be fun to play what you get (by random rolling), it can also be a downer for certain players who would prefer to play what they want to play based on their imagination. More than anything, since my games are highly lethal, and we do a lot of one shot games, it seems more fun for us to write a few notes on an index card and get into the game without bothering with excess rolls. In other words, I tend to embrace the Searchers of the Unknown philosophy; "if it's enough for monsters, it's enough for players."

[Zenopus]

May 16, 2014 7:27:51 GMT -6 idrahil said:

That became a bit overpowering in some cases but a while back Zenopus posted in the Holmes section here some "1HP monsters". Those are what I use to offset his attacks He gets to fend off various creepy crawlies that pop up.

That is fantastic & exactly what I had in mind for the 1 HP'ers. Thanks for letting me know.

I sympathize with the impulse to remove ability scores. I like the concept of "D&D From Memory" which has been discussed here before - only playing with what you can remember without looking in a rulebook - and the less rules used, the easier this is.

But in the end I like having the six ability scores. It's part of the flavor & history of the game. Plus a great vocabulary builder for the kids.

I'd guess I'd rather ditch the bonuses and keep the scores themselves. A Str 14 fighter is stronger than a Str 13 fighter.

[Finarvyn]

Another way to look at character stats is that they define a persona for the player to play. While this may have little impact on the mechanics of play because OD&D doesn't come with many bonuses in the core rules, it certainly can have an impact on the style.

In other words, let's suppose for a moment that I got rid of all stat bonuses and stat checks. Return to the character that Geoffrey rolled.
Str: 12, Int: 11, Wis: 8, Con: 6, Dex: 10, Cha: 14

I would still have the ability to look at these numbers and decide how to play my character. Based on those numbers, I see a character who is charismatic but not so healthy. This sparks some creativity. Perhaps my adventurer is a politician or a con artist. This gives me a layer of personality that I can play in addition to a pile of combat stats.

Just me thinking out loud.

[jeff]

May 12, 2014 16:44:02 GMT -6 Leonaru said:

I usually use scores for score checks (d20 roll under) or drop them entirely.

I absolutely loathe d20 under ability score checks. I've had a DM who used them consistently for everything and my PC would die to simple traps that should have been easy to avoid (slow swinging axe in a 10' corridor). I think it leads to ability score inflation and the desire to have high scores.

IMO, it's a slippery slope that often gets very slippery, very quickly. Furthermore, it's not something that can get applied to monsters easily. What if you have 2 goblin followers and a troll follower. What are their DEX scores?

I do like the idea of defining a PC by their bonuses instead of by a number. Having a character with STR +1, DEX +1, and CHA -1 is meaningful and I believe would personally help players forget about getting an 18. Furthermore, monsters could be identified much easier by a simple +1 or -1 value.

[Vile Traveller]

Sept 30, 2014 12:31:10 GMT -6 jeff said:

May 12, 2014 16:44:02 GMT -6 Leonaru said:

I usually use scores for score checks (d20 roll under) or drop them entirely.

I absolutely loathe d20 under ability score checks. I've had a DM who used them consistently for everything and my PC would die to simple traps that should have been easy to avoid (slow swinging axe in a 10' corridor). I think it leads to ability score inflation and the desire to have high scores.

IMO, it's a slippery slope that often gets very slippery, very quickly. Furthermore, it's not something that can get applied to monsters easily. What if you have 2 goblin followers and a troll follower. What are their DEX scores?

I do like the idea of defining a PC by their bonuses instead of by a number. Having a character with STR +1, DEX +1, and CHA -1 is meaningful and I believe would personally help players forget about getting an 18. Furthermore, monsters could be identified much easier by a simple +1 or -1 value.

I reserve ability score check for situations where there are serious risks and consequences involved. If players can convince me that a trap is avoidable, it's avoidable with no dice rolled (unless there's a sneaky second trap ...). Most traps rely on surprise, anyway, and are easy to circumvent if you know about them. After all, that's how those dungeon denizens live with them all over their lairs.

I also roll 3d6, not 1d20. And trolls and goblins have 3d6 Dexterity of course. All from Holmes.