Second Thoughts on Attributes

I’ve been thinking about attributes and I have to say I’m not really happy with the solution I settled on. While a modifier-only attribute system starting at 0 is very straightforward, it introduces two problems. First, even low-level characters have really high bonuses to everything, which definitely fails on the elegance front. Second, it creates major issues with a few aspects of the game math, such as hit points and damage. Therefore, I’ve realized that I really want a modifier of 0 to be typical.

To define a modifier of 0 as average, I have two options. The first is to go back to a score and modifier system, with the average score as 10 and average modifier 0. With a 1-to-1 correlation between score and modifier, however, the score itself is basically useless. The second option is to base a modifier-only system around 0. I avoided this on the first pass because I disliked the arbitrary negative score limit; but what if this limit applied in both directions? Attributes could range from -10 to 10, with an average at 0. This feels much cleaner to me, and satisfies my conditions of clarity, simplicity, and elegance.

But wait—I have another condition, verisimilitude. I’m going to look at a few test cases to make sure this system feels right. Most human attributes will be 0 +/- 2; this means that the difference between the best and worst of typical humans is a tier’s worth of experience or a training talent. This seems right—training and experience can overcome weakness, and someone with professional training should be on equal footing with a very talented amateur. Ranging farther out, an attribute of -5 could be defined either as a severe weakness in that area, such as extreme clumsiness (Dexterity) or social ineptitude (Charisma), or as a notable but non-crippling disability, such as a lame leg (Dexterity), lame arm (Strength), or a missing eye or ear (Awareness). An attribute of -10 indicates extraordinary weakness and/or severe disability, such as lacking an immune system (Constitution) or widespread paralysis (Strength/Dexterity). Going in the other direction, an attribute of +5 reflects standout ability, such as that shown by Olympic athletes or genius-level intelligence. An attribute of +10 represents near-supernatural talent and ability such as Herculean strength.

That all feels good for humans. What about creatures and monsters? There are more opportunities for extreme attributes here, but I think it is still workable. The strongest and toughest creatures are also large, which means they have a size bonus that can effectively increase their Strength and Constitution beyond the cap. On the mental side, creatures with superhuman Intelligence or Charisma could certainly exist; however, the upper 3-5 points of the scale are already defined as a supernatural level of ability, so these should work as well.

So there we are, hopefully for good this time. Attributes range from -10 to 10, and most humans have scores of 0 +/- 2. With that fixed, time to move on and discuss some of the system math.