I’ve been thinking of a hack for a long while, now, due in large part to mental health issues. I’ve written thoughts down elsewhere that I’m now posting here to bring everything together. Hacking involves evaluating each part of a system and adjusting it to a new vision, so I’ll be posting bits and pieces as I get to them.
The original rules version specified a few uses for each of the characteristics and then the ratings were used only for roleplaying guides and fictional choices beyond those specific uses. The B/X system uses this same sort of approach. The primary benefit of extraordinary ratings isn’t so much to affect mechanisms in play, rather to provide extra experience toward character development. That’s to show that the more talented PCs have an easier time advancing–the strongest fighters have it easier than those of average strength, the better-coordinated advance as thieves easier than average prospects, and so forth. The approach means that the players have much to do with deciding which fighter PC is more effective when levels are equal, while the character traits define how easy it is to level up.
AD&D is the edition where more differentiation in play begins to be supported. (Some would say this edition is when the power creep that leads to superhero fantasy actually began; HD sizes also got boosted for most PCs.) The +3 maximum bonus for a characteristic rating found in ODD was replaced, with greater bonuses possible (+4 in most regards and a +6 damage bonus for the highest STR rating). The system also provides bonus xp for high ratings, so the PCs with those ratings progress more quickly up the ranks, in addition to getting bonuses for activities in play situations. This is, in effect, a doubling of benefits for high ratings.
So, do I want extraordinary ratings to provide a single type of bonus or two kinds of bonus? If only one type, do I want that to be in long-term development or in situational play?
I think the key to answering such a question requires that I look to the experience of play that I want the system to support. How much support do I want to offer to character differentiation via mechanics as opposed to player choices in play? Do I want better characteristics to provide more benefit in play or player choice to offer more benefit–the latter looking to player skill to provide the difference?
I tend to prefer player skill/choices to make for memorable PCs. I also think a baseline of simulation is necessary for a good game experience, so stronger characters should prove stronger in play mechanically and that long-term development alone based on high STR as a fighter doesn’t really meet that preference. I then have to look at how to use high stats mechanically to provide suitable simulation while still maintaining support of player skill in playing. As the full measure of a character isn’t confined to a primary characteristic, then I can rely on other factors to help in supporting differences in player skill.
Well, how much of a bonus should be possible, then mechanically speaking? As I’m looking to nip in the bud the power creep that starts in AD&D and builds in later editions, I certainly don’t want to be too generous; I’d rather error in way of too little than too much. Playtesting can determine if added benefit should accrue.
At this point, a maximum bonus of +3 for an extraordinary rating is what I figure will be appropriate. I might convince myself that a +4 will work better, though I’m leery of that, as of now.