the "outrageous attribute" problem

[larsdangly]

I'm not sure I understand the point. In what sense is the game broken if a character has a stat at 18+? You could argue that this is where the point of diminishing returns really kicks in, and if anything you are being a dope for raising a stat further. I always felt like high stats were problematic because there was not much reason to raise them further, so your character is 'fully cooked' and can't change any more, but I never understood how a high stat made the game play differently.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by larsdangly

I'm not sure I understand the point. In what sense is the game broken if a character has a stat at 18+? You could argue that this is where the point of diminishing returns really kicks in, and if anything you are being a dope for raising a stat further. I always felt like high stats were problematic because there was not much reason to raise them further, so your character is 'fully cooked' and can't change any more, but I never understood how a high stat made the game play differently.

First, I never said the game was "broken." YOU said that. (I'm starting to develop a pet peeve about people putting words in my mouth and then arguing against something I never said in the first place -- nothing to do with you personally, but it DOES seem to be a common thread lately regarding TFT.) All I said is that it starts to derail the mechanics at that point.

A ST of 18 means that you will succeed in 3d rolls against ST 97.37% of the time. Indeed, even with a ST of 16, you will succeed the same percentage of the time (since 16, 17, and 18 are always automatic failures). So actually the point of diminishing returns for both ST and IQ is at 16. DX requires a bit more to start materially affecting the game, since it's possible you would need up to 24 or 25 points of DX to exceed your armor/shield deficiencies in DX. However my contention is that when you succeed in everything 97.37% of the time, the game becomes a bit...ah...predictable. Which sort of defeats the purpose in rolling dice in the first place.

[larsdangly]

There is no reason to be upset at anyone (or at least at me in this instance!); 'broken' mechanics means the same thing as thinking the mechanics no long work properly, so I don't think we are actually saying anything different.

In any case, I understand what you are saying about DX scores of 15 or higher, which all provide you with a 95.37 % chance of success on a 3d roll. But I don't agree with the broader conclusion. First, because ST and IQ are mostly significant for their effect on things other than die rolls, and they don't 'saturate' or produce uniform outcomes in this same way. Second, because DX can be usefully traded for armor up to the mid 20's. Third, because DX can be traded for enhanced range or targeting, e.g., a DX 18 combatant throwing a spear at someone 10 hexes away will mis most of the time, whereas a DX 26 combatant doing the same thing will usually hit. Fourth, because there are many things that happen in the game that call for rolls on 4D or more, or incur significant DX penalties (fighting with two weapons, poor lighting or footing, etc.). In these cases, characters with DX 16+ have significant chances of failure, and higher DX scores have value. So, basically the only important thing is that at adjDX 15 or higher you reach a uniformly high chance of success at normal melee or short range missile attacks.