Strength Score Comparisons AD&D and 3E

[HouseRules]

AD&D	Pound	Modifier	3E	Pound	Modifier
3	105	-2 = -1 hit -1 damage	10	100	+0
4	115	-1 = -1 hit	11	115	+0
5	115	-1 = -1 hit	11	115	+0
6	125	-1 = -1 hit	11	115	+0
7	125	+0	11	115	+0
8	140	+0	12	130	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
9	140	+0	12	130	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
10	140	+0	12	130	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
11	140	+0	12	130	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
12	150	+1 = +1 hit	13	150	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
13	150	+1 = +1 hit	13	150	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
14	160	+1 = +1 hit	13	150	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
15	160	+1 = +1 hit	13	150	+1 = +1 hit +1 damage
16	175	+2 = +1 hit +1 damage	14	175	+2 = +2 hit +2 damage
17	190	+2 = +1 hit +1 damage	14	175	+2 = +2 hit +2 damage
18	215	+3 = +2 hit +1 damage	15	200	+2 = +2 hit +2 damage
18/01-50	240	+4 = +2 hit +2 damage	16	230	+3 = +3 hit +3 damage
18/51-75	265	+5 = +3 hit +2 damage	17	265	+3 = +3 hit +3 damage
18/76-90	290	+6 = +3 hit +3 damage	17	265	+3 = +3 hit +3 damage
18/91-99	340	+7 = +4 hit +3 damage	18	305	+4 = +4 hit +4 damage
18/00	440	+8 = +4 hit +4 damage	20	400	+5 = +5 hit +5 damage
19	590	+9 = +5 hit +4 damage	22	520	+6 = +6 hit +6 damage
20	640	+10 = +5 hit +5 damage	23	600	+6 = +6 hit +6 damage
21	740	+11 = +6 hit +5 damage	24	700	+7 = +7 hit +7 damage
22	890	+12 = +6 hit +6 damage	25	800	+7 = +7 hit +7 damage
23	1040	+13 = +7 hit +6 damage	26	920	+8 = +8 hit +8 damage
24	1340	+14 = +7 hit +7 damage	28	1220	+9 = +9 hit +9 damage
25	1640	+15 = +8 hit +7 damage	30	1600	+10 = +10 hit +10 damage

For the same "Strength", 3E has lower score and higher bonus.

[tomandtish]

Not sure what chart you are using, but in AD&D (1st or edition), the numbers you have seem off...

For example, in AD&D your bonus for an 18-00 strength was +3 hit/+6 damage, and a max weight allowance of plus 300 lbs (so 350 pounds total). In 2nd edition the hit/damage bonuses stayed the same, but the total weight dropped to 335 lbs.

The bonuses at higher strength kept the split between hit and damage. For example, a 24 strength is +6/+12. So one less to hit than a 3E stength of 24, but five more damage.

[LibraryOgre]

Yeah, the numbers here are way off. You didn't start getting any bonuses in AD&D until a 16 strength, and that was a +1 to damage.

[HouseRules]

Anyways, I remember it as a house rule from some site because it has several encumbrance categories

• unencumbered
• moderately encumbered
• encumbered
• overloaded

It was from here http://nagorascorner.blogspot.com/20...cumbrance.html

[Thrudd]

So...why are we comparing some random person's AD&D house rules with 3e?
Yes, the ability scores in AD&D were used differently than in 3e and later. WotC revised the game in major ways from its TSR days.

[HouseRules]

The problem is that AD&D says that beyond unencumbered quantity, there are three encumbered movement speed:

• 3/4 of unencumbered movement speed
• 1/2 of unencumbered movement speed
• 1/4 of unencumbered movement speed

However, there is no specific weight for those different movement speeds available.

[Glorthindel]

Yes, the ability scores in AD&D were used differently than in 3e and later. WotC revised the game in major ways from its TSR days.

Ultimately, I think this is the core of the problem with the current stat-generation rules.

A lot of players and DM's (me and most of my group included) love rolling characters, because that's how we've always done it, and are almost deathly allergic to point-buy and standard arrays as "boring". But the game has changed a lot since we've started, and the importance of stats has changed massively. Rolling stats was perfectly fine back when there wasn't much difference between a Str 9 and Str 16 Fighter (hardly any difference in hit and damage bonuses between those stats, and what little bonus there was was easily lost in the bonusses gained from level and weapon specialisation - and regardless, either way the character would be hoping for Gloves of Giant Strength), but now, the difference is huge, and forms the backbone of your modifiers (especially with bonusses from levels replaced with the much smaller bonus from proficiency).

Somehow the message hasn't really got through to a lot of us older players (I suspect because the stats still have the same names, the values are still in the same range, and rolling stats is still presented as the "main" way to do it).

[HouseRules]

Rulings not Rules.

Rules are for tournament plays and discussion of RAW itself, but not practical outside of that.

[Thinker]

Rulings not Rules.

Rules are for tournament plays and discussion of RAW itself, but not practical outside of that.

If you want to have an honest discussion with other people you have to use the rules as a baseline for that discussion. No one knows what house rules, rulings, or whimsical ideas you and your friends have come up with. If you want to talk about your house rules for strength and encumbrance, you have to start with the published rules and then elaborate on how you've changed them. That does make the discussion more difficult, but it will give you better feedback and a more engaging conversation.

[Morty]

I'm not entirely sure what the point of this comparison is. Yes, attributes mean something different in AD&D 2E and 3E. That's something that should be obvious to anyone who spent five minute with both.

Or is this actually about encumbrance in AD&D 2E, in which case, what do 3E attributes have to do with anything?

[Thrudd]

The problem is that AD&D says that beyond unencumbered quantity, there are three encumbered movement speed:

• 3/4 of unencumbered movement speed
• 1/2 of unencumbered movement speed
• 1/4 of unencumbered movement speed

However, there is no specific weight for those different movement speeds available.

So you're looking for clarification on AD&D encumbrance and movement speed? Or you want to show us your house rules? 1e or 2e? Or are you playing 3e and want to use something from AD&D? What's this actually about?

[Quertus]

Yeah, this thread makes less sense than I usually do. It's hard to keep my "senile old man" cred if there's threads like this.

Try again, take it from the top. What were we talking about?

[wumpus]

to hit: damage: weight allowance


14-15 0 0 55
16 0 +1 70
17 +1 +1 85
18 +1 +2 110
18/01-50 +1 +3 135
18/51-75 +2 +3 160
18/76-90 +2 +4 185
18/91-99 +2 +5 235
18/100 +3 +6 335
19 +3 +7 485

(copied from http://ancientscrossroads.com/adnd_tools/str_table.htm. Can't seem to fix the table...

Note that this includes a "max press" that doesn't fit what I remember from the AD&D (1e) DMG. That basically said you could do a "overhead press" (military press? Olympic clean & jerk?) over your head with 10 times your strength score + any extraordinary strength rating. I didn't like this at all as the military press was always my worst lift.

Note that one of the reasons I hated the first (1e) "Unearthed Arcana" was in addition to trying to balance classes by introducing a "does not play well with others" (bad player actions as a required mechanic? Really?) they also introduced a new class (chevalier) that rolled dice to increase scores. Start a chevalier with a strength of 18(68) and you have a great chance of slipping it by the DM's nose, and then have a 19 strength by level 5 (seriously overpowerd). To make matters worse, the Paladin was also moved from deriving from the Fighter class to this new (broken) chevalier class, so paladins are an even bigger problem.

[LibraryOgre]

Note that one of the reasons I hated the first (1e) "Unearthed Arcana" was in addition to trying to balance classes by introducing a "does not play well with others" (bad player actions as a required mechanic? Really?) they also introduced a new class (chevalier) that rolled dice to increase scores. Start a chevalier with a strength of 18(68) and you have a great chance of slipping it by the DM's nose, and then have a 19 strength by level 5 (seriously overpowerd). To make matters worse, the Paladin was also moved from deriving from the Fighter class to this new (broken) chevalier class, so paladins are an even bigger problem.

Hackmaster makes it so EVERYONE increases attributes as they level. Slowly, but everything but Looks goes up, level by level.