Quote from: cranebump;890337The increased stat bonuses make ability generation a bigger deal than before. If we were in the days of 13-15=+1, 16-17=+2, 18=+3 and that's that, then I think folks would have fewer issues with the numbers. Everything is mod-driven. A secondary effect of the stat-itself would be nice, something like they do with STR minimums for heavier armors, or gaining additional languages based on the INT score, rather than the Mod.  The numbers themselves are just stepping stones to the mods (in most cases).

That is actually one of my largest complaints about WotC D&D paradigms. High mod cascading dependence, paired with tight even progression and equal distribution among stats, causes a stronger "need" for results reliability. The threshold for perceived viability is narrowed, to the detriment of more freeform play.

Which is another reason I like 5e. It constrains PC stats to a max of 20 and if using array or point buy then you are only going to get at best one stat up to 17 or 18. Combined with the limit of +3 max to magic weapons and the more gradual to hit progression for everyone.

But aside from 3 and 4e the bonus escalation was not a real issue. Merely a player perceived need.

The bounded accuracy is definitely a plus in my book, as it shows a distinct end-game. By having a visible upper limit, the rest of magical items are liberated back into lateral creative development instead of bucket o' mod boosts. I still would rather have even less mod reliance in 5e, focusing on PB instead, but it is the only WotC D&D I would ever play again.

Quote from: Omega;890453Which is another reason I like 5e. It constrains PC stats to a max of 20 and if using array or point buy then you are only going to get at best one stat up to 17 or 18. Combined with the limit of +3 max to magic weapons and the more gradual to hit progression for everyone.

But aside from 3 and 4e the bonus escalation was not a real issue. Merely a player perceived need.

It does seem a complete necessity to have an 18 in your prime, though.

Wonder if you could run 5E using the old Mod progression?

Quote from: cranebump;890470It does seem a complete necessity to have an 18 in your prime, though.

Wonder if you could run 5E using the old Mod progression?

1: Uh? No it doesnt. You dont need high stats at all in 5e.

2: To what edition?
A and 2e use the same individual stat progression - which is a mess.
3 to 5e use the same unified progression and gives the baseline a little more chance to get a bonus or negative. Changing it is not going to "fix" anything as the progression is not too far off from previous.

An AD&D character for example with 3 DX is -4 AC. A 5e character with any stat at 3 is -4. Which on its own is actually meaningless as AD&D 3 CON is -2. On average 5e characters get more penalties to balance out the slightly more baseline bonuses.

And OD&D only gave you bonuses to three stats. Strength, Dexterity, and Charisma (though charisma was never explained. And that mod was only +1 for the first two.

D&Ds stat mods have shifted over the decades and much as I like AD&D. I much prefer BX or 3-5es unified progression. Interestingly the two arent too far off from each other either. If you added +1 to BXs progression youd get something vaugly like 3-5es.

So you could just subtract 1 from all the 5e stats and go if you want things harder, or subtract 2 if you want things harder yet.

Quote from: cranebump;890470It does seem a complete necessity to have an 18 in your prime, though.

Actually no, it doesn't.  Because the bonuses and target numbers in general are lower, the most you 'need' to be 'good' is a +2 bonus in your prime stat.

Where you needed 18 was actually 3-4e, because of the constantly escalating numbers.

Quote from: cranebump;890470Wonder if you could run 5E using the old Mod progression?

Which one?  Honest question, because I hear that the current system reintroduced in 3e was actually based an older edition, which is before AD&D.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;890522Actually no, it doesn't.  Because the bonuses and target numbers in general are lower, the most you 'need' to be 'good' is a +2 bonus in your prime stat.

Granted.  Perhaps "good" was a poor term to use. However, it seems that, given the standard array, the expectation would be a +3 (16), practically from the get-go, depending on race bonus, I guess. I also think it's practically a given that you'll be at 18 in short order in the prime stat. Of course, I'm not using feats, so the stat bump really IS a given, if I'm running as basic as possible.

QuoteWhich one?  Honest question, because I hear that the current system reintroduced in 3e was actually based an older edition, which is before AD&D.

I was thinking on the order of 13-15=+1, 16-17=+2, 18=+3. I currently run 5th without Feats. I apply proficiency to all stats, and allow the skills selected by players through their race/class to be "specializations" that grant them advantage when they use them.

You may have already answered my question, however. So, if +2 is good, then the standards ability bumps would nudge most everyone into +2 range, albeit later on.

Of course, now I'm wondering what happens is +3 is the max. And thinking maybe using proficiency dice option might be an option. The results would be swingier, but it might be fun. If I did that, then the skill specs would allow a second proficiency dice, rather than advantage.

Quote from: Omega;8905131: Uh? No it doesnt. You dont need high stats at all in 5e.

2: To what edition?
A and 2e use the same individual stat progression - which is a mess.
3 to 5e use the same unified progression and gives the baseline a little more chance to get a bonus or negative. Changing it is not going to "fix" anything as the progression is not too far off from previous.

An AD&D character for example with 3 DX is -4 AC. A 5e character with any stat at 3 is -4. Which on its own is actually meaningless as AD&D 3 CON is -2. On average 5e characters get more penalties to balance out the slightly more baseline bonuses.

And OD&D only gave you bonuses to three stats. Strength, Dexterity, and Charisma (though charisma was never explained. And that mod was only +1 for the first two.

D&Ds stat mods have shifted over the decades and much as I like AD&D. I much prefer BX or 3-5es unified progression. Interestingly the two arent too far off from each other either. If you added +1 to BXs progression youd get something vaugly like 3-5es.

So you could just subtract 1 from all the 5e stats and go if you want things harder, or subtract 2 if you want things harder yet.

I'd rather have B/X as well, I think. For the record, I regard anything 16 or above as "high." A +3 mod seems pretty significant, and you can get one right out of the gate in 5E. Of course, my perception comes from playing a lot of the older editions, when stat scaling wasn't a given, and a +3 was the pinnacle.  Now, I feel like it is an expectation, but, if you really don't have to have it, then I probably could adopt something like you're suggesting without unbalancing the game too much.  Maybe?

At this point, I doubt the group would let me. They're used to the bonuses as they are.

I prefer "the mess," by far. Makes point buy and array less consistently profitable, favoring random and speeding up chargen sessions. Also greater spread of average leaves most mods as sprinkles instead of main courses.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;890522Which one?  Honest question, because I hear that the current system reintroduced in 3e was actually based an older edition, which is before AD&D.

Not OD&D. It uses an even harsher limit. +/-1 only for a stat that qualified. (except for Charisma which could go up to +4/-2)  And only Constitution, Dexterity and Charisma had mods of any sort.

BX seems the closest match. Overall unified stat mods and more mods (good and bad) for average stats.

One interesting thing about this is that 3-5, while giving you better chances at bonuses, also gives you better chances at negatives.

The safe zone in 3-5e is 10-11.
The safe zone in BX is 9-12
The general safe zone in A-2e is 8-13
The safe zone in O for CON is 7-14

Quote from: Omega;890610One interesting thing about this is that 3-5, while giving you better chances at bonuses, also gives you better chances at negatives.

I suspect that increasing inflation of when baseline negatives start is the culprit to perceived need for greater stats. Perhaps it is moreso than the faster access to greater positive modifiers. But 3e/4e "treadmill" probably amplified pressure from both factors...

Quote from: Opaopajr;890625I suspect that increasing inflation of when baseline negatives start is the culprit to perceived need for greater stats. Perhaps it is moreso than the faster access to greater positive modifiers. But 3e/4e "treadmill" probably amplified pressure from both factors...

Likely. I can speak to that "perceived need" myself, simply based on my earlier posts (the "necessity" of having an 18, for which I was corrected twice). So, if there is no real need for high stats, then a rollback to the wider safe zone (which I personally like a great deal) wouldn't be an issue.

(Time to go back into my houserules and do more tweaking).:-)

Quote from: Opaopajr;890573I prefer "the mess," by far. Makes point buy and array less consistently profitable, favoring random and speeding up chargen sessions. Also greater spread of average leaves most mods as sprinkles instead of main courses.

But in 5e's case, the game is built around the assumption of average stats, so what happens when you get 18s and 6s. Just roll with it?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;890759But in 5e's case, the game is built around the assumption of average stats, so what happens when you get 18s and 6s. Just roll with it?

When you say average, do you mean 10-11?

Quote from: cranebump;890630Likely. I can speak to that "perceived need" myself, simply based on my earlier posts (the "necessity" of having an 18, for which I was corrected twice). So, if there is no real need for high stats, then a rollback to the wider safe zone (which I personally like a great deal) wouldn't be an issue.

(Time to go back into my houserules and do more tweaking).:-)

Use AD&D's DEX then. It is a good median between the narrow and the broad. Or BXs as the bonuses are less.

Some general examples.

5es progression is -4 -3 -3 -2 -2 -1 -1 0 0 +1 +1 +2 +2 +3 +3 +4
BXs progression is -3 -2 -2 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 +1 +1 +1 +2 +2 +3
AD&D and 2e DEX -4 -3 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +2 +3 +4 for example
OD&D CON is  -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +1 +1 +1
While OD&D DEX is -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1
And OD&D CHA is -2 -2 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 +1 +1 +1 +2 +2 +4
And nothing for STR or DEX.