tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post6837224606993293460..comments2024-03-28T06:20:47.668-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: Strength in D&DJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-67032698642028689622011-03-14T02:30:37.798-04:002011-03-14T02:30:37.798-04:00In my games I'm always using the stats.
You...In my games I'm always using the stats. <br /><br />You want to walk across that slippery board? Roll under your dexterity on a D20<br /><br />Want to climb up the side of a cliff? Roll under your strength -10<br /><br />There's a fake wall, roll under your wisdom -5 to notice the breeze coming from it.<br /><br />What are those scribbles on the wall? Roll under your intelligence -15 to realize they're the key to the Karvanian riddle, the solving of which will make you famous in certain circles.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02112589703613958246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-107660334375263722010-10-11T17:28:55.232-04:002010-10-11T17:28:55.232-04:00Muscular strength dictates how fast a weapon can b...Muscular strength dictates how fast a weapon can be swung, and greater speed means more damage. Think of a hitter in baseball. Also, a fast-moving puncture attack will penetrate more deeply; think of a bullet fired from a gun vs. a bullet thrown manually. <br /><br />But as mentioned, one could incorporate almost any attribute into a combat game system, so it depends on desired realism vs. complexity.Steve Lalannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12257236994766166129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-11131224382852096932010-10-07T09:20:40.538-04:002010-10-07T09:20:40.538-04:00I know this is an old blog post, but my question i...I know this is an old blog post, but my question is, if so many people want to see the 3-18 system go away, and that it's useless, why is that? Especially in 3.5 your stats and the bonuses there in contribute hugely to your skills and trickle down into what defines your character's strengths, weaknesses, and overall what they can and can not do on a practical level. I would say without the stats, anyone could be anything simply because they want to be it. The stats practically define the character in the game itself. It gives a certain tangibleness to a game that is imaginary. Does that make sense?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13584878162954242446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-66611881760325715202009-06-28T15:29:24.393-04:002009-06-28T15:29:24.393-04:00Interestingly enough, 4e models each of the traits...Interestingly enough, 4e models each of the traits being used for different attacks. Like mentioned above, some attacks my need intelligence (feinting), some strength, some dex, etc. 4e attempts to model this through the various powers a character has. I would love to see the 3-18 go away, too, as it still is pretty useless.B. Austin Pricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03478667799049182100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-30388897492468844972009-02-20T10:32:00.000-05:002009-02-20T10:32:00.000-05:00Maybe a bit late to comment on this, but consider ...Maybe a bit late to comment on this, but consider the following:<BR/>Strength is not only the brute force that you can use to smash things (cause damage), but the muscles that help you to hold and move objects and your own body. A stronger man can hack&slash with a weapon faster, and can do that for a longer time period than a weaker one. Ask a martial artist to have a little competition with you. Both you and your opponent start kicking and see who is getting tired first. When you are tired, it is more difficult to defend against attacks. The ability to fight effectively longer is represented bye the to-hit bonus of strength.Hafihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17193833520112040100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-39174896371063914212009-01-01T19:47:00.000-05:002009-01-01T19:47:00.000-05:00Perhaps str bonus makes sense for penetrating armo...Perhaps str bonus makes sense for penetrating armour only and not much sense for creatures unless they have thick hides.Kenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11165997449776226774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-66724034724961647942008-04-09T13:40:00.000-04:002008-04-09T13:40:00.000-04:00I think you're right that Gary did actually intend...I think you're right that Gary did actually intend, at least initially, Strength to represent "fighterliness." The question is complicated, of course, because, in OD&D, only a few of the six abilities actually do much of anything, while others do multiple things. I think it's this inconsistency that bothers me at least as much as what any individual score represents.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-9418578455692967212008-04-08T14:19:00.000-04:002008-04-08T14:19:00.000-04:00Strength in D&D isn't so much how force your muscl...Strength in D&D isn't so much how force your muscles can exert so much as it is a measure of your "fighterliness". It's just the name Gary choose for the Fighter's prime requisite.<BR/><BR/>...at least that's one way to look at it.<BR/><BR/>By my reckoning, though, the bonus to damage greatly outshines (statistically if not descriptively) the bonus to hit. So, I'm more than happy to drop the to hit bonus. Especially since I don't see why it should be a double bonus (i.e. a bonus to to hit AND to damage).Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-39984774330461813572008-04-07T11:47:00.000-04:002008-04-07T11:47:00.000-04:00First, I have to agree with the above, that STR ca...First, I have to agree with the above, that STR can play a part in hitting depending on the style.<BR/><BR/>But I think part of the reason might be that a fighter is the STR guy, rogue the DEX guy, etc. It might make more sense to use DEX the bonus to hit, but then the fighter would also have to be dexterous.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-31505723896919876032008-04-06T11:33:00.000-04:002008-04-06T11:33:00.000-04:00I'm of multiple minds on the 3-18 range. You're ab...I'm of multiple minds on the 3-18 range. You're absolutely right that the scores themselves mean nothing in pre-3e <I>D&D</I>. You're also right that they have tradition on their side, so it's a wash overall. Ultimately, I think it'll depend on how closely I want "pulp fantasy <I>D&D,</I>" which won't be <I>D&D</I> at all in terms of branding anyway, to cleave to the specific mechanics of the game and on whether I find a use for the ability scores. I'm toying with some ideas now that use the score numbers in place of saving throw targets, but I haven't yet come to any conclusions.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-48800521051242991532008-04-06T11:21:00.000-04:002008-04-06T11:21:00.000-04:00I agree. I'd just caution against Dexterity-bloat...I agree. I'd just caution against Dexterity-bloat, which True20 is certainly guilty of. With DEX affecting whether or not you hit or get hit, and STR only dictating additional damage, pumping up your DEX and just using a bigger weapon would seem a viable and useful strategy for the warrior. <BR/><BR/>Of course, this wasn't as big an issue when I played Moldvay Basic, as there was the rather simple encumbrance system and frequent stuck or locked doors that needed kicking in.<BR/><BR/>Are you planning on keeping the actual 3-18 score numbers? They are hoary with tradition, but I hardly see the point of the game doesn't actually <I>use</I> those numbers for something after character creation.trollsmythhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-10605655687876699862008-04-06T09:58:00.000-04:002008-04-06T09:58:00.000-04:00Yeah, I don't have any interest in fundamentally c...Yeah, I don't have any interest in fundamentally changing the way that the <I>D&D</I> combat system works, but I would like to regularize it a bit more than it is. Unlike a lot of OD&D fans, I don't have any special fondness for the <I>mechanical</I> infelicities of the game and indeed think a more "rational" set of mechanics, when combined with the wide open nature of the game, would make it a much more appealing product, particularly in this day and age of overly complex RPGs.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-56302390962417492442008-04-06T05:23:00.000-04:002008-04-06T05:23:00.000-04:00In my own fantasy heartbreaker, I created fighting...In my own fantasy heartbreaker, I created fighting styles based on the stat groupings. <I>Dirty fighting</I> was the physical style, and was basically a no-holds barred method that granted you a bonus if you were using another style previously. <I>Dueling</I> was the intellectual style, and offered a bonus if you lulled your opponent by feigning weakness, in essence, by accepting increasing penalties for multiple rounds, and earning a bonus on the round you stopped. Finally, <I>swashbuckling</I> used the emotional stats, and could be used to demoralize your opponents, forcing them to flee or surrender before they'd actually been physically beaten. As these were styles, in essence feats rather than classes, you could mix and match them. And yes, switching from the duelist style to the dirty fighting style could yield a very nasty bonus. They were designed to compliment one another that way.<BR/><BR/>It's fun stuff to play with, but I'm not certain such things have a place in a game that wishes to cleave to visions of D&D's founding designers.trollsmythhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-59909874850330572952008-04-05T18:22:00.000-04:002008-04-05T18:22:00.000-04:00Interestingly, Empire of the Petal Throne did almo...Interestingly, <I>Empire of the Petal Throne</I> did almost exactly as you suggest here: almost every ability score gave bonuses in combat, including Intelligence. While I'm not sure I'd go that far, it's still an intriguing alternative and one that I think goes a long way toward fixing some problems I see in the way <I>D&D</I> has used ability scores over the years.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27107910897304498332008-04-05T16:13:00.000-04:002008-04-05T16:13:00.000-04:00Having been lucky enough to take part in a bit of ...Having been lucky enough to take part in a bit of training based on fighting manuals of the fifteenth (?) century, I can tell you that strength makes a big difference. Yeah, not as big as dexterity, especially if dex also includes situational awareness. But being able to beat past your foe's parry or muscle him around really does open up opportunities for strikes.<BR/><BR/>The problem is, where do you draw the line? Any good fencer knows that lulling your opponent into a pattern greatly improves the likelihood of a successful feint. Is that intelligence? Or maybe charisma? If you sat down and worked on it long enough, you could probably come up with a good reason why any of the stats should offer a to-hit bonus.trollsmythhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01895349218958093151noreply@blogger.com