[D&D pseudo clone] Dropping the ability modifier, keeping the ability score

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Joined
Jul 8, 2018
Messages
56
Reaction score
105
There are some (many?) who feel having both an ability score and an ability modifier is kinda redundant in D&D and its variants.

What I have seen is a lot of games who dropped the ability score and instead used only the modifier.

Problem is, I have always seen the ability score as the more iconic number. I like thinking about a character's abilities in terms like "weakling 6", "average Joe, 9" or "strong guy 15". So I'd like to keep those and throw away the associated modifiers. I'd like to use these scores directly into the game.

I've seen a few games do that, but usually in roll-under systems. I don't like those. I want roll-over.

Problem is, the numbers are fairly large and it seems to necessitate rebooting the entire system. AC, To hit/bab, saves, etc... I'm imagining fighters rolling a d20+17 and trying to beat an AC of 28 and anticipating headaches.

Am I overestimating the difficulty of the math with the slightly bigger numbers? Is there another solution I'm not seeing?
 
Man, that's a tough one. But yeah, your ability checks will be "beat 20 on 1d20 + ability score" and if you use it as the basis for AC, HP etc. numbers are definitely going to inflate.
 
There are some (many?) who feel having both an ability score and an ability modifier is kinda redundant in D&D and its variants.
Yes, and poor design as in you need a second number based on a first number. Or I should more accurately say lack of design, the modifier arose because people complained that ability scores didn't mean much and the experience point % bonus was not enough. So you get things like the Strength table where it's not just modifiers but a little matrix for bend bars etc. that require even another number.

It's always best to minimize the number of numbers on a sheet that are derived from another number. That is, numbers should be used directly as much as possible. It is certainly not always possible and some you may well want to derive from one or more other numbers (especially for game balance reasons), but they should be few. Granted this is not an easy design goal to achieve.

What I have seen is a lot of games who dropped the ability score and instead used only the modifier.
That works very well depending on the dice mechanic used.

Problem is, I have always seen the ability score as the more iconic number. I like thinking about a character's abilities in terms like "weakling 6", "average Joe, 9" or "strong guy 15".
You realize that is a problem with your conception, and inability to think outside the ways you have been exposed to. I mean I get it, I started with D&D in '77, '78 and that feel got engrained, but it wasn't natural. Scores on a range of 1-10 is the most naturally understood. You play another game a few times and that feel gets engrained too.

So I'd like to keep those and throw away the associated modifiers. I'd like to use these scores directly into the game.
Good idea.

I've seen a few games do that, but usually in roll-under systems. I don't like those. I want roll-over.
Roll over, bad idea for the very reasons you go on to mention. You need to weigh your personal preferences against using a roll over mechanic and it's associated headaches, ones that can easily be avoided with roll under.

Problem is, the numbers are fairly large and it seems to necessitate rebooting the entire system. AC, To hit/bab, saves, etc... I'm imagining fighters rolling a d20+17 and trying to beat an AC of 28 and anticipating headaches.
It may well require a re-boot, not sure if you have ascending AC or descending AC, etc.

But isn't the idea of roll d20+ability score and beat x already done in D&D or one of it's clones?

Am I overestimating the difficulty of the math with the slightly bigger numbers?

No, your are not. It's easier (quicker) to roll a die and compare it directly to your ability than to roll and add and beat a target number. The big thing is no so much for PCs but you as GM running NPCs and monsters. If the target number changes it is even more a pain, and it is less a pain to roll a die and compare it to your ability even with a modifier to said ability (like +1 for easy stuff)

Is there another solution I'm not seeing?
Roll a die with less sides than a d20? Roll 2d6 and add that to the ability to get more of a curve?

It's always hard when you combine a high number is good system to a roll over mechanic. The only way to cleanly do it is add the number to the roll.
When you combine a high number is good system to a roll over mechanic it's like saying you have a 75% chance of succeeding so roll over 25%; it is intuitively backwards. With d20, people have just been trained high is good, which worked fine until one tried to use abilities for anything more than experience point % bonus.[/quote][/quote]
 
Problem is, the numbers are fairly large and it seems to necessitate rebooting the entire system. AC, To hit/bab, saves, etc... I'm imagining fighters rolling a d20+17 and trying to beat an AC of 28 and anticipating headaches.
I don't think this is necessarily a problem. You just need to re-normalize your DCs. For instance, DC 10-11 is typically considered an "average" challenge. In your system, the closest equivalent would probably be DC 20-22.

If there's a problem, it's that a system that uses the actual ability as the die roll modifier is going to yield more automatic outcomes and less randomness than one modified by a much smaller range. For instance, if you have a DC of 25, that's going to be completely impossible for those with an ability score of 3-4, and if you have a DC of 18, that's going to be automatic success for an ability score of 17-18. So that leaves you a pretty small range of DC values where any human can potentially succeed or fail - only 19-23! With traditional ability modifiers, the same DC window ranges from 5 to 17.

That might be what you want. The real question when you use a modifier and a die roll is their relative magnitude. If your modifier is between -3 and +3 and the die is a D20, then the modifier doesn't make a huge difference at all. If the ability itself is the die modifier, then your modifier is really +3 to +18, or if normalized to zero, -7.5 to +7.5. The larger the modifier range relative to the die size, the greater the impact of the modifying trait and the lower the importance of chance.

tl;dr What you want to do is feasible but it will reduce the randomness of D20 ability checks. Whether or not that's acceptable depends on what you want to achieve.
 
Thanks for your input guys!

I went over it further and was unable to find a solution. Using a smaller die than the d20 to compensate for the larger numbers of the ability scores dramatically shrunk the randomness. Played around with the idea of using roll-under and I was underwhelmed.

And Xanther, you are totally right that holding on to the ability score range is a nostalgia thing. I just wanted to hold on to it at this point. Now if proceed, I'll decide between keeping both score and modifier, or using a completely different stat range (but that wouldn't feel very D&D to me).
 
Using a smaller die than the d20 to compensate for the larger numbers of the ability scores dramatically shrunk the randomness.
If that's in response to my post, I think you misunderstood something. It's the other way around; the larger numbers of ability scores are already responsible for reducing randomness, so like David Johansen David Johansen says, you'd really need to use a larger die to get similar distributions.

Anyway, the big thing to keep in mind is that they are all just numbers to rate abilities. Use them however you like as long as they achieve the ranges of results that you're looking for. You can test that with a few scenarios, focusing on the edge cases (e.g. strong character vs. weak character, etc.).
 
Really if you look at my Break 20 thread, I wrestle with the same thing. My own solution is lots of big, negative modifiers!
 
If that's in response to my post, I think you misunderstood something. It's the other way around; the larger numbers of ability scores are already responsible for reducing randomness, so like David Johansen David Johansen says, you'd really need to use a larger die to get similar distributions.

I understood that the larger scores themselves were reducing randomness. But I also wanted to keep the numbers manageable and felt I needed to keep at least one number a single digit consistently.

Anyway, the big thing to keep in mind is that they are all just numbers to rate abilities. Use them however you like as long as they achieve the ranges of results that you're looking for. You can test that with a few scenarios, focusing on the edge cases (e.g. strong character vs. weak character, etc.).

Yup, I'm going to explore a few options. I could always check old games like Unisystem to get ideas. It's just that I'm losing that D&D feel.
 
The first ways I saw we’re roll under Your attribute in 1d20 or 3d6; the later had more of a old school D&D feel. Maybe because this appeared in JG products often in modules and associated with traps and such. I think your “dilemma” is treating roll over as a sacred cow, I think that roll over is later addition (ie 3rd edition) to the D&D religion.
Alas though if you find a solution with the roll over you may have something there.
 
I can see a two basic ways to do this.

1. Just try roll under. That's how 2e profs worked.

For combat, it's trickier. You could make AC base something like 30-Dex, lowered by armor. You have to roll under AC to hit. Then maybe damage is a 2nd roll of how much you rolled under your strength, multiplied by a fraction for weapon, dagger=1/3 the value. greatsword=value. Then add bonuses for class.

Maybe HP=Con score + level. Or con score + (level*class mod) where wizard=1, barbarian=5, everything else in between. The up front Con bonus instead of a bit every level gives greater level 1 survival but contributes less at higher levels.

2. Go roll over for less mind bending math and adjust targets for rolls. Actually, adding scores instead of bonuses make abilities more important as they have twice the range as bonuses.
 
As D&D is a class system, I’d make it d20 roll highfora class function

Any thing attribute based would be 3d6 roll under

You need a bonus? Roll 3d6 under attribute and if you make it a +1, make it withadouvke in there +2, or make it witha triple +3.

If an attribute or class could do it, I’d lower the effective attribute with modifiers to place attribute values on par with the class level of your choosing for those certain things. This is to favor class over attributes.

No formuli, and keeps Modifiers to single digits.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top