What's the Point of Ability Scores? (Final Random Thoughts)

I make no claims that, in the previous parts of this series, I've covered every aspect of ability scores throughout the history of Dungeons & Dragons. However, I hope I have touched upon enough of them to draw attention to a major flash point, namely the necessity for high ability scores. This necessity is a strange thing, simultaneously the cause and result of a shift in how RPG players imagined the hobby in which they were engaging. 

Starting with Greyhawk, ability scores gained greater mechanical weight. Was this change initiated solely by Gygax, perhaps out of dissatisfaction with the way OD&D handled abilities, or was it a reaction to the desire of players that abilities be more significant? Regardless of its ultimate origin, from that point on, all versions of D&D, most especially AD&D, placed ever greater emphasis on abilities and having high scores in them. Minimum ability scores were established for certain specialized classes or even demihuman races, which fueled the perception that characters needed high ability scores, a perception that Gygax himself encouraged in various ways, as we've seen in previous entries in this series.

This raises many questions, a few of which include:

1. How mechanically robust should ability scores be? 
2. If they're not robust, what purpose do they serve?
3. If they are robust, is it reasonable (or "fair") to generate these scores randomly?
4. Mechanically robust or not, should they be used to limit entry into classes or races?

I don't think there's a "right" answer to any of these questions, but I do think some answers make more sense, depending on one's conception of RPGs. Prior to looking into these matters, I had an uncritical view of abilities and ability scores. Nearly every roleplaying game I'd ever played included them and, in many, if not most, cases did so simply because all previous RPGs had included them. This is a common pattern in the history of game design: because Dungeons & Dragons included X, then all subsequent games must also include X. Of course, the history of RPGs offers many examples where some feature of D&D was modified or even rejected. I can, for example, cite many RPGs – many quite early – that don't include hit points or armor class or alignment, but I have a much harder time thinking of RPGs that don't include ability scores. For the most part, ability scores are almost universal in roleplaying game rules.

I'm not necessarily advocating the abandonment of abilities. Even divorced of mechanics, abilities serve the potentially useful purpose of providing a player with insight into who his character is. Does he have a low Intelligence and a high Wisdom? Perhaps he lacks formal education but possesses considerable common sense or insight. High Intelligence and low Wisdom? He's a book learner with little experience of the wider world. As I said, this is genuinely useful – but only for a certain approach to roleplaying games. If, as Gary Gygax said, it's important that a player be able to "identify with" his character, does that run counter to, for example, random generation? What if I can only identify with a high Charisma character? Or elves or paladins? 

Random generation of ability scores are not universal nowadays, even within the sphere of avowedly "old school" games. AD&D, as we've seen, doesn't outright abandon random generation, but most of its approved methods of score generation stack the deck very much in favor of player preference. These methods assume the player already knows the kind of character he wishes to play rather than letting the dice decide. Couple this with multiple minimum ability scores for races and classes and we see a much narrowed scope for using abilities as a means of differentiating between characters. Look at any two AD&D rangers, a class with above average minimums in four of the six ability scores, and you won't see a great deal of mechanical difference. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does suggest that perhaps ability scores aren't the best – or at least only – way to differentiate between characters.

The tying of ability scores to "survival" is another development that contributes to my questioning their role. If, as Gygax suggests, character survival depends, even in part, on multiple scores well above average (perhaps even beyond those simply needed to meet class/race minimums), then the scope for difference between characters narrows even further. This line of thought takes me to the brink of wondering: do we even need ability scores at all? Would it not be simpler – and more honest – to get rid of ability scores completely, folding their benefits into class abilities, so that, for instance, all fighters gain a damage bonus as they increase in level? 

Alternately, one might prefer to eliminate ability score minimums entirely. Under this scheme, if one wishes to play a paladin or range, one simply does, regardless of the character's randomly generated ability scores. This approach doesn't eliminate the powerful pull toward desiring high scores, given the genuine benefits they have in most versions of D&D, but it does lessen it somewhat. Replacing random generation with point-buy or the so-called "standard array" is another approach, since it ensures that, if a player wishes his character to have high scores in certain abilities, he will have to compensate by having lower ones in other abilities. This certainly addresses some of the questions arising out of this series, but at the cost of some of the variability random rolls provide. It's a trade-off and each referee will need to consider the matter carefully.

As I said earlier, there's no right answer to the questions raised by looking at the development of abilities and ability scores in Dungeons & Dragons. That said, what seems clear to me is that no version of the game has ever properly balanced variability with utility. I'm not even certain that that's possible. Nevertheless, I think these are questions worth pondering and we should be willing to consider unorthodox solutions, such as the complete abolition of ability scores. This all assumes one actually cares about these matters. Until recently, I certainly didn't and I can't blame anyone who is content with the way the matter is handled in their preferred edition of the game. However, I am no longer in that frame of mind. Exactly where my thinking will lead me, I don't yet know, but I will certainly share the fruits of my thoughts in future posts.

Part I | Interlude | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V