Doesn't it seem kind of silly that having an odd-numbered stat like 15 or 17 is no different than having a stat at the lower value?
The only point of having a stat at that kind of value is for leveling up.
I mean, explain it away as much as you what, but as far as I can tell it seems kind ridiculous.
I feel like, if a character has 17 to strength, they should just have 17 strength not 16.What if your characters don't really level up? Are you just supposed to make their stats even numbered each time?
What if through some effect, you manage to increase a stat from 12 to 13? Does that raise mean nothing?
You might say its too little of a difference to mean anything, that its more like some weird measure of experience or something. But I don't know about that.. I mean 18 to 20 is the difference between peak human ability, and a demigod and 12 to 14 is the difference between a notably strong person and a relative brute.
When you really think about it, there is a lot of middle ground between these two stages. That's just a fact, and to me it feels like you're missing out on the possibility of making a character feel more detailed and tangible while at the same time bringing undo awareness to how a character's stats look instead of what they mean.
Shouldn't there be some kind of actual benefit here independent from leveling or rare effects?
I'll never get over this shit.
>>43899863
>I'll never get over this shit.
have you tried not playing D&D?
>>43899863
I agree.
When I was first introduced to 3E, I thought "I'll put in an odd stat now, and that way I can improve it during the game". Then we only played one session.
>>43899896
Also this
There are some things that use exact numbers and not modifiers. Examples I can come up with off the top of my head are carrying capacity and ability score damage. There are probably others.
>>43899896
seconded.
>>43899896
>>43899906
>>43900132
Wow.
Thanks for respecting my opinion that stat numbers should feel like they mean something.
Fuck actually considering that different people have different ways of playing and thinking about games.
I could've excluded the idea of not leveling up, but still, you guys are fucking dicks.
All I'm trying to say is that putting something in there would make make the character feel more detailed.
is that such a hard thing to understand?
>>43899914
Thanks for actually contributing.
I'm done. Apparently, you guys don't like discussion preferring instead to contribute to this thread through insults.
I thought /tg/ was better than that.
I've discussed plenty of things on /tg/ without getting this kind of /b/ level reaction. Good things don't last apparently.
I mean, really why is it so hard to understand I was just expressing my personal opinion? I wasn't trying to force anything on anyone.
I admit, there was some problems with my logic but that doesn't mean you have to respond like edgy teenagers.
>>43900469
No one's "responding like edgy teenagers" -- "have you tried not-D&D" is merely a way of pointing out that D&D contains a LOT of stupid stuff, and your complaint is barely scratching the surface of all the many stupid things about that system in its various incarnations.
They're saying you might find a better use of your time than nitpicking at the worst edition of D&D.
>>43900384
>>43900469
Why are you acting like it's a personal attack when people calling how D&D's handles attributes dumb? Considering how those posts you're bitching about AGREE with you – you said it doesn't make sense, they agreed/implied D&D had dumb shit in general – I really don't get your reaction.
>>43900384
>people told me the problem lies with the system being shit, which it does because it is
>better sperg at them because deeandee is the only system I've ever bothered to learn
If a man sat on a cactus and complained that it was uncomfortable, would you tell him to stop sitting on a fucking cactus?
>>43899863
Are you retarded?
It's because lots of races have racial bonuses. Also because there's all kinds of gear that increases stats, as well as abilities that DECREASE stats. Or flaws.
It's not my fault your DM is a fly-by-night that can't last more than a session or two.
If you don't like it, house rule it. But don't come crying to me when your house ruling fucks up everything.
>>43899914
I seem to recall a lot of feats requiring 13 in a stat too, but that may just have been the PC versions.
>>43900659
You're analogy fails because this line
>people told me the problem lies with the system being shit, which it does because it is
Isn't true.
If you plan to continue to troll in such a dumb manner, here's a reminder that it is against the rules.
>>43899863
Simple: halve the stats the game operates with.
Strength of 18? Strength score: 9. Suddenly each point up or down changes the modifier by one. Being an elf gives you 1 more dex. Easy.
>>43900469
In this case, it's sincere advice. D&D 3rd edition and up could handle stats and modifiers better than they do.
You dislike things that D&D does badly, and we're telling you that the solution is to try a different system. Countless fans have been trying to fix it for a decade and a half to no avail.
And yes, other systems tend to be easier to learn than pre-5th D&D is. It's not going to be half as hard as learning 3.5 all over again. You don't have to be stuck in dnd.
>>43900795
>oh god I've broken everything
>>43900795
>the average strength is now 5
>attacks that deal strength damage are now godlike
>>43900678
>It's because lots of races have racial bonuses. Also because there's all kinds of gear that increases stats, as well as abilities that DECREASE stats. Or flaws.
IIRC, 95% of those are in increments of two i.e. drwarves get +2 CON -2 CHA, Belt of Giant's Strength gives +4 STR, etc. It's enough to gain/lose a full bonus and there's no difference between, say, a 12 and a 13; both give +1, and after a +2 racial modifier, both give +2. Being even or odd literally does not matter.
Also I like that that the people that pointed out to OP that D&D has issues are being treated like attackers but the guy that actually engages the question is a hyperagressive moron.
>>43900837
>pre-5th D&D
Pre-3rd D&D is pretty easy to learn too.
>>43899863
TSR D&D has differences between odd and even stats.
>>43901241
Pre-3rd also had you roll under your stats to perform certain things (e.g. roll d20 and try to get under your Strength score to lift something heavy), so odd-numbered stats actually mattered.
3rd edition pretty much just fucked everything up in general.
>>43900876
But strength damage is halved too.
It just werks.
>>43901290
>roll d20 and try to get under your Strength score to lift something heavy
If it's a Feat of Immense Strength you use the Bend Bars/Lift Gates, which is really small, and otherwise you use Max Press.
S-so OP here.. I'm sorry I can't really participate in this thread any more because I'm too embarrassed that I got upset and realized that my opening probably came off defensive or something uh..
Seems like the discussion in places has calmed down.
I just wanted to say, in case I do find myself reading this thread again which happens more than it should when I do things like this, that I didn't really mean to bitch or anything. I was just trying to see if anyone felt the same about the subject or if they did their own weird custom rules to base stats (which you can do, really I've seen it).
But I didn't go about it right and to be honest, I've barely read any d20 system books being mostly a player so far.
So, if you are bumping this thread with rage or something, you can safely stop now.
I didn't mean to start any shit, I just made a bad thread where I focused on the negative aspects of something which probably came off and/or is the product of bitching. But I didn't realize that when I started it.
Any way, that's all.
I don't want to leave a wall of rage behind me if I can help it.
>>43901376
>strength damage is halved
>rounded down
>still does 1 minimum
>>43901415
I mean, I don't know maybe they weren't even mad or anything, but regardless this is what happened and whatever.
Honestly, what's the point of "leveling up"? It's a lot more abstract and arbitrary than something like FFG SW, where you invest XP directly into stats, skills or talents that make sense for your character.
>>43901433
No, you round everything to the nearest half.
>>43900384
>Thanks for respecting my opinion that stat numbers should feel like they mean something.
>>43899906 here, I was agreeing wit you.
>>43899863
>Doesn't it seem kind of silly that having an odd-numbered stat like 15 or 17 is no different than having a stat at the lower value?
Doesn't it seem kind of silly that having half the total experience needed to go from level 5 to level 6 is no different than having just hit level 5?
>>43900699
nope its in tabletop to 13 in a stat for many feats
Personally in my game I make a lot of stat checks/saving throws that are roll under, making each stat a lot more useful.
And all the newfags come out of the woodwork.
In case any of you morons are reading, here's some friendly advice you will find useful while browsing this image board:
1. Sometimes people post things that are intentionally written to be inflammatory. This is called bait, especially when they frequently come back with increasingly illogical replies. This is called trolling. If you pay attention, you'll notice that less stupid users will recognize a troll, and reply with their own bait, as a sort of quip or joke. But most just hide the thread without replying, because they know trolling is shitposting, a.k.a. discussion without discussion.
2. Ability scores before moron edition weren't an ever-increasing video game stat. They were a number between 1 and 20 that was the likelihood of passing a test on 1d20. You roll equal or under to pass. Typically 18 was the absolute maximum for player characters, and crazy powerful monsters might have 19 or even 20. No, there isn't a point to having uneven scores in your dumbass version of the game. It was just so they could make the game seem cosmetically like D&D even though they threw out most or all of the fundamental design choices to make their own product.
3. Lurk more. This prevents you looking like a complete dumbass when you post, and it also keeps you from getting trolled by people who aren't stupid like you.
>>43901415
>in the end OP even admitted to being a faggot
yeah, tell us something we don't know, the thread wasn't awful in itself, your response to people was
>>43901191
13 can auffer more stat damaged than 12.
Its a small bonus, but then its a small difference.
>>43901616
That's still "leveling up". Just in smaller increments.
>>43903455
No that makes perfect sense.
As you get stronger weak enemies are less of a challenge and so fighting them is less of a benefit too your improvement.
Ability scores are another sacred cow D&D should have slaughtered a long time ago. For a d20 system which just uses the modifiers, look at M&M 3e. It works perfectly fine without a set of arbitrary numbers to worry about.
what a bunch of nerds
>>43900384
>Thanks for respecting my opinion that stat numbers should feel like they mean something.
I know you apologize down-thread, so not talking about you in particular now. But I'm noticing among the younger generation this delusion that people are usually entitled to respect. That feeling is strongest among children in college who want opposing views banned, but it's pretty much everywhere.
You are not entitled to respect. Your opinions are not entitled to respect. If you want respect, then say something respectable. Or spend less time popping off at what other people think of your ideas.
Here on 4chan, we're mostly anonymous, so the ONLY thing that matters is how the mob views what you say. I've been told I'm a fucking idiot who should die in a car fire for some posts, and I've been called brilliantly insightful and sensitive and screencapped in other posts. Once, the same person said both things about two of my posts in the same thread, not realizing I'd written both of them.
Now, OP has apologized and he actually does have a point in his original post. We'll deal with that next.
>>43899896
>Have you tried not playing D&D?
>>43904161
>It was just so they could make the game seem cosmetically like D&D
Both of these. If you have experience with other systems, then you'll start to see that every system has its weird idiosyncrasies, often a result of trying to keep backwards compatibility with a previous edition or to try to capture the "feel" of that older popular edition.
If this bothers you so much, then play some other game, obviously. But if you're shopping for a house rule that makes attributes more linear and eliminates the hard breakpoints, then you should ALSO try playing some other system, to see how they handle it. You'll pick up insights that will give you ideas.
In GURPS, human attributes range up to 20 as well. Although GURPS has only 4 primary attributes (IQ, health, strength, DX), they pretty much map one-to-one in terms of how you interpret them. 10 is average, 12 is the best person you know, 14 is the best person you've met, and 16-18 are the best in a generation. 8 is awful and people with a score of 6 is usually disabled somehow. In GURPS, they level all this by making nearly everything a skill roll.
One trick from D&D is that if you're going to have even number breakpoints, then alternate with odd-number breakpoints as well. For example, start with (ability -10)/2, and round DOWN for skills and saves, and round UP for all other effects (hit points, spells, initiative, hit bonuses, damage, etc). That adds complexity (too much to be worth it IMO) but does eliminate the breakpoint.
>>43907232
What were you expecting?
A couple of things I can think of are carry weight and spell memorization, just off the top of my head
