Big, Strong, and Dumb

Ahnehnois · Sep 6, 2012

triqui said:
But you said "what a human can reach". I agree that 1st level humans for regular, gritty style campaings (those starting like The Lord of The Ring power level) should have max 18 str. 20 should be restricted to high fantasy, where humans do huge feats of strength. Achiles, Jason, Sigfried, and Wulfgar, the friend of Drizzt Do Urden. Hercules should probably have mythic str, 25+

I don't really agree that caps are the way to do it. I just think that Hercules' divinity/mythicness should in some mechanical form (race/template/mythic levels/etc.) should give him a really big bonus to Strength (and probably many other things), effectively putting him beyond what you'd get out of the normal character creation process.

triqui · Sep 6, 2012

Ahnehnois said:
I don't really agree that caps are the way to do it. I just think that Hercules' divinity/mythicness should in some mechanical form (race/template/mythic levels/etc.) should give him a really big bonus to Strength (and probably many other things), effectively putting him beyond what you'd get out of the normal character creation process.

I also think hercules mythicness should be some kind of template/module/dial to put "on" or "off". Paizo's new Mythic Heroes sound good. Hercules is mythic from level 1 to 20. I always thought you should be able to play "game of thrones" and "Diablo 3" from level 1 to level 20, without losing the feel.

That said, the other issue is something you have to talk about too. You can't say "I want a gritty realistic game" and then allow fighters to have, for example, 24 str. 24 str allow people to do awesome feats of str. With such str, you are stronger than a horse.

If you want a game where humans aren't stronger than bulls, then you need to cap human str to human-like levels.

Ahnehnois · Sep 7, 2012

triqui said:
I also think hercules mythicness should be some kind of template/module/dial to put "on" or "off". Paizo's new Mythic Heroes sound good. Hercules is mythic from level 1 to 20. I always thought you should be able to play "game of thrones" and "Diablo 3" from level 1 to level 20, without losing the feel.

That said, the other issue is something you have to talk about too. You can't say "I want a gritty realistic game" and then allow fighters to have, for example, 24 str. 24 str allow people to do awesome feats of str. With such str, you are stronger than a horse.

If you want a game where humans aren't stronger than bulls, then you need to cap human str to human-like levels.

As far as those kinds of style considerations, I don't think caps are a good way of achieving them. If you simply limit the availability of ability score increases, that issue is addressed. A cap would suggest that some circumstances would arise such that a character would be at 20 Str, would have an ability increase/magic item/etc., and would be unable to use it on Str for a metagame reason. That is needless. A better approach would be to simply not give out any increases at all (perhaps optionally).

triqui · Sep 7, 2012

Ahnehnois said:
A cap would suggest that some circumstances would arise such that a character would be at 20 Str, would have an ability increase/magic item/etc., and would be unable to use it on Str for a metagame reason. That is needless. A better approach would be to simply not give out any increases at all (perhaps optionally).

That's fine for me. I mean in such gritty, realist world, a PC shoudln't have a way to raise his STR beyond 18 by himself. Of course, some plot element might make it so: if the character *Becomes* a dragon, or whatever, he should have the str of the dragon. In Game of Thrones, PC shouldn't have STR beyond 18. That doesn't mean The Mountain That Rides, in Revenant form, couldn't have a STR of 25. It's just that it's a plot device, not something the players have "right" to take because a feat, or level up, says so.

Steely_Dan · Sep 7, 2012

Even 18 is a bit silly, my halfling can be as strong as an ogre, what would the little guy look like?!

Paraxis · Sep 7, 2012

To keep math flat there should be some hard cap on ability scores, I like the idea of 25, I cut my teeth on 1st edition and it just feels right.

That being said there should be a size modifier it can apply to damage, increase carry/lifting amount, ect... So a giant might only have a 21 strength and the human fighter with magic has a 22 the giant hits harder and can carry more.

Make sure giants can do push ups and pull ups. In Shadowrun a troll can't pick himself up off the ground most of the time.

The size modifier can apply for smaller beings too, so a pixie could have a 15 strength but carries alot less.

The key is to not let the size modifier apply to attack rolls, its ok if a giant or dragon hits hard but to keep math flat the bonus to attack should not go up.

ForeverSlayer · Sep 7, 2012

I think ability scores should be limited by level. 1-5 will allow a max score of X, 6-10 will allow a max score of Y etc...

Also, I think magic items should be something that would give you the same strength as a giant if the above route wouldn't work. I can't see someone naturally becoming that strong unless their race had something special that would allow it.

tlantl · Sep 7, 2012

Shadeydm said:
I thought 20 was a stone giant in AD&D? (point taken regardless just saying btw)

Well it would have been if I could have used that one more point the human got as a bonus (21). (I rolled an 18) Stoned or frosted what's the difference? +1 to hit and +1 damage?

But ya, if the point is that these things, that are twice or three times our height and mass, have the same strength scores as the player characters do there is a problem.

Maybe if giant strength started at 22 for hill giants and went to 34 for titans, then it would be more accurate. Not the same since that titan was +7/+14 to hit and damage, but closer, although it wreaks havoc on their bounded accuracy system. ( a titan having a +12 to hit and damage under the current system.) Then again maybe 17 HD monsters can have really high attack rolls from strength.

This whole issue would have cumulative effects if ability bonuses are modified so too would saving throw bonuses and skill bonuses and spell DCs hit points armor classes.

Looks like a big mess to me.

pemerton · Sep 7, 2012

Ahnehnois said:
there's no way a ten foot tall troll should be as strong as a thirty foot tall giant

I can't remember the AD&D sizes, but in 3E Hill, Stone, Frost and Fire Giants are all Large, and hence no taller than 16'. (And mostly shorter than that, except for the tallest Frost Giants.) Cloud and Storm Giants are described as being 18' and 20' tall - still nowhere near 30'.

Ahnehnois said:
I just think that Hercules' divinity/mythicness should in some mechanical form (race/template/mythic levels/etc.) should give him a really big bonus to Strength (and probably many other things), effectively putting him beyond what you'd get out of the normal character creation process.

I'm not sure about this. After all, multiple editions of D&D have noted Hercules as a model for a fighter PC (just as Merlin has been noted as a model for a wizard PC).

Steely_Dan said:
Vaprak the Destroyer, I hope they bring him back

I didn't know he'd gone away!

Mustrum_Ridcully · Sep 7, 2012

Ahnehnois said:
Even if you take humans out of the equation, there's no way a ten foot tall troll should be as strong as a thirty foot tall giant, even if the troll is above average and the giant is below average.

There is no way these creatures could exist in the real world.

Your assumptions are based on the real world - someone that large can't be that strong/weak. But you ignore that the real world doesn't even allow someone that large in humanoid form in the first place, so you can simply not trust your "common sense" anymore, because it is based on a world that is definitely not like D&D or any fantasy world. In the D&D world, it is common sense to assume or at least allow for magical explanations for things. In our world, that would be stupid!