Lately I have been enamored with the idea that there are three ranks for each ability: inferior, normal, exceptional. Inferior gives a -1 and exceptional gives a +1. When using this array, roll everything on a 1d6 or a 2d6, so that +1 is signifigant.

Working on an 0e retro game with this mechanic now.  At some point I may publish something but for now I'm just enjoying making games.

Well the original set mentioned a breakdown of 9-12 average, 3-8 low, 13-18 high.

That was, I think, just how the dexterity bonus (for missile fire) worked, with +1 for high and -1 for low. The prime requisite, constitution and charisma factors had more categories.

A 1/3 chance was a fairly common default (listening at or forcing doors, surprise, probably some others by the books). So, you could save a step by rolling score 1, 2 or 3, or less, on d6.

isn't that also a true20 and fate/fudge thing?  haven't skimmed those in quite some time, but all that leapt out was lots of pluses & minuses.

I really don't know. I've never read or played fudge or fate or whatever they are.

Here's the table genesis:

I run games for my wife, my daughter and my son. When other families are hiking or going to the baseball, we play games. Mostly, but not always, RPGs.

My son is very tactical at the table. He likes fighting and he likes winning in new and efficient ways. But when it comes to chargen, he is fanciful and likes to allow the dice to fall where they may.

My daughter isn't into fighting much but she's also happy role-playing whatever scores her characters get.

They're both good RPers and good sports.

My wife invariably plays murderhobos.  She's also obsessed with "good stats."  The former I don't mind, but the latter puts pressure on me because it doesn't jibe with the kids' concept of "fun."  I'm sick of my wife lobbying me for character freebies when the kids are happy playing characters as they roll 'em.

Normally I would tell such a player to quit whining and play or just go fuck off, but this is my wife. And I like sleeping indoors.

So in order to take her attention off lobbying for various relative mechanical advantages (honestly, in classic D, high stats are kind of irrelevant), I have been removing the chargen mechanics that lead to those mechanical advantages.

The first attempt at moderating the stat issue was for everyone to roll 2d6+6. That's actually not bad. 8-18. Nobody is crippled in anything. The kids didn't grouse.  My wife only groused about having one 11.

If she's going to grouse about only having five above-average stats instead of six, then the next thing to do was to eliminate numerical stats entirely. This only occurred to me about a month ago. Just go with the modifiers. I think 5e's character sheet put that bug in my ear. Do they do it that way? Emphasize the plus and not the base score?  I think they do.

So if I combine "just the modifiers" with the very limited modifiers of 0e, I get the -1, 0, +1 spread.

Of course on d20, that's just a 5% difference. Hardly worth it. So I shifted to using 1d6 and 2d6 for everything.

A +1 on 1d6 is a 16.7% difference. A +1 on 2d6 varies, but it's around 8% different iirc. When the target number is 6-7, it's bigger than 16%.  

So you get smaller numbers in terms of absolute value but just as much, or more, mechanical benefit.

These smaller pluses and minuses will hopefully get my wife's mind off her obsession. And she can imagine her Exceptional Strength is an 18 if she wants to.

There are other changes I have made too, but this is the one that's germane to this thread.

In any case, even though the change is for a kind of a crappy reason, it's turned out to be simpler and more elegant in actual play.

Ability checks have existed almost from the beginning of D&D.

I don't think a simple system makes sense with them. With a 1-18 scale, you can use the d20 method (which actually killed my first AD&D character, back in '78, when I tried to traverse a log bridge) or things like 3d6/4d6/5d6, depending on the difficulty of the task.

True20 is like 3E D&D for modifier scale, but without the 3-18 stat --it goes from like -3 to +3 or more.
Fudge has scores but they don't adjust skills. Fate has just the skills, and there are 'aspects' which add or subtract 2 from a roll (costing a fate point, or giving a fate point if you're disadvantaged).
Someone ('oldehouserules') on rpg.net did a Pits and Perils that I believe uses a sort of similar idea - yes/no abilities for Str, Dex, Int, etc., and you roll on a table to see what 'exceptional ability' you pick up; I can't say I've bought it to examine in detail though.

I'm actually starting to think of the opposite, making them MORE important.

Like 'roll under your ability score,' and then class stuff calls for different ability checks.

Will: using stats instead of skills is a blind spot in my thinking. Thanks for bringing it up.

But with stats taking on a somewhat greater importance, is there not a 1) risk of inflation and 2) more reason to lobby he referee for freebies?

I don't know whether it's more trouble than it's worth.  Maybe, maybe not.

Well, it could be more structured.

Like:
Roll d20. Get under AC to succeed. If it is class approved, success also under ability score, and critical if below both.

Fighters can use Str or Dex for melee attacks, Dex for ranged. Can use Str to block, Dex to dodge, Dex or Str to parry (basically, AC).
Rogues can use Dex for melee, ranged, dodge.
Wizards can use Int for magical attacks and some magical defenses.

Etc.
Then you could hook it to a simple skill like proficiency system.

I like that Will.

I'm kind of on a crunch-free kick but I'm gonna put that in my back pocket.

Having just the bonuses is also in the Dungeon Robber game, which is both an online flash game and a pdf.

"Abilities: For each of the abilities (Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con, Cha) roll a d6. If you roll a 6, you have a High ability: write "high" next to it. If not, write "Normal." Now give yourself one more High stat of your choice. [...]

"High Strength gives you +1 attack, +1 weapon damage, and +1 to Open Door attempts. [...]

"High Charisma gives you +1 to parlay rolls to make friends with intelligent creatures and lets you have 2 henchmen at once instead of 1."

And then the class gives bonuses to things (eg thief Open Doors) and so on.

For my part, I like 5 ability levels for realism, and 4 for heroic realism. Basically -2 to +2 or -1 to +2. 1 in 6 getting +/-1 and 1 in 36 getting +/-2. I also find players are more likely to accept a poor score if it's at least positive, so that instead of -1 to +2 you have +1 to +4. For example, "roll 7+ on 1d10, add your ability of -1 to +2" is mechanically the same as "roll 5+ on 1d10, add your ability score of +1 to +4", but players will tend to "forget" to add -1, or worse, whinge about it.

That's so funny. In the cloney game I am writing, Exceptional Charisma allows two retainers instead of one.

Using 1d6 (or even 2 or 3 dice) does yield bigger differences from small numbers than 1d20.

They are more generally greater in proportion the smaller the starting chance. 1 to 2 is double the chance of success, 2 to 1 halves the chance of failure, regardless what N the 1/N chance may be.

I've been kicking around a d10 system lately in which 0 is, for character traits, ordinary human average and 2 is top notch for normals. Weapons and armor normally range from 1 to 4.

X (10) is currently a catchall for everything "off the scale" -- such as strength to lift anything from 10 kilotons up -- rather than extending formal ratings to bigger numbers.

My idea is to do most everything as 50% with a reflexive +/- 10% per point of difference, by default capped at 90% and 10%.