D&D 5E Please Cap the Ability Scores in 5E

[Hassassin]

Real World lifting capacity, using the lifting capacities for Strength Scores in 3E and 4E, put the strongest real world man at 23, and the strongest real world woman at 21.

Olympic weight lifters are very specialized, so I would just leave those who are in that small fraction of a percent of humans outside the normal ability rules. (Maybe they have a feat that increases their strength by X for the purposes of lifting stuff.)

However, if you want them in the rules, I don't see how an adventurer would through ordinary course of adventuring (i.e. levels) advance from Str 18 to 23. That sort of thing takes years of dedicated training and would be better modeled outside normal level progression.

Alternatively, just adjust carrying capacity to make Str 18 a more accurate cap. My point was that 3-18 should be defined as the human range and all other numbers should derive from that.

 

[prosfilaes]

I don't think it's being lazy at all. I don't see any great need for some pseudo-generic system that is mechanically open-ended with statistics and their effects. In other words, if D&D can do what it needs to do in, for example, 25 points of stats (like it did in 1e and 2e), why have more?

I never perceived the AD&D limit of 25 as a cap, though. In my experience, PCs never got to 25. It's like you added a new rule to 3.5E that says stats are capped at 50 or 100; it would have little practical effect. If we want 25 points of stats as a limit, then we should make the system so it fits under 25 points of stats, not add a limit such that you hit it and suddenly can't go higher.

 

[was]

I'd rather have it under control of the DM/group then in the RAW

 

[kitsune9]

To keep the math low, I can see maximum caps on ability scores so that no magic or ability that exceeds it make it irrelevant. But my personal preference if such a system exists is that the cap is kind of high--around 25 or so.

For Wuxia games, definitely no caps.

 

[Minigiant]

My point was that 3-18 should be defined as the human range and all other numbers should derive from that.

See my fear is with
caps
no ability boosts
smaller ability modifiers


Every character's modifiers will look like +3, +2, +2 +2 +2 +2

First level Fighters all have +3 attack/damage 10HP
First level Clerics all have +3 attack/damage 8HP
First level Rogues all have +2 attack/damage 8HP
First level Wizards all have +2 attack/damage 6HP

Tenth level Fighters all have +6 attack/damage 50HP
Tenth level Clerics all have +4 attack/damage 40HP
Tenth level Rogues all have +3 attack/damage 40HP
Tenth level Wizards all have +2 attack/damage 30HP

There are people who want that. I'm not one of them.

 

[S'mon]

Other DMG items raised stats above 18, too, even permanently (such as the many tomes, sometimes found as treasure in published modules for mid- to high-level PCs). Effects in the Deck of Many Things, plus items that granted wishes could accomplish such effects.

Well, you got me to dig out my 1e DMG. It says the opposite, eg Deck of Many Things pg 142:

Star (+2 on your major ability): "If the 2 points would place the character's score at 19, use 1 or both on any of the other abilities in this order..."

Or the Ioun stones that add +1 to stat all say "18 maximum" (page 147).

The Manuals that raise STR & CON don't say either way, so the PHB caps presumably apply. Most stats in the 1e PHB only go to 18, a couple go to 19 with race mods (Dwarf CON, Elf DEX AIR) but no general additional benefits are listed. AIR DEX 19 does give Thief ability bonuses.

 

[Soraios]

The stat is not in a vacuum; my answer to the cap question is therefore, "compared to what?"

Earlier additions addressed this issue with a cap around 25, attainable only through magic items and not universally for all ability scores. There were also lots of ways to take magic away from PCs.

Ultimately, it's up to each DM to set the power level in the game and monitor things. I would say that certain prestige class combinations in 3.x were more unbalancing than uncapped stats.

So in 5th edition/Next, it's just one of many balance factors and has to be weighed against racial and class balance factors too. Assuming that balance even matters or is desirable. There was a point in this game when paladins were better than fighters (getting all fighter stuff PLUS paladin stuff), but it was understood that paladins were rare. Dwarves were better than a baseline human; hence the class level limits.

 

[Sunseeker]

See my fear is with
caps
no ability boosts
smaller ability modifiers


Every character's modifiers will look like +3, +2, +2 +2 +2 +2

First level Fighters all have +3 attack/damage 10HP
First level Clerics all have +3 attack/damage 8HP
First level Rogues all have +2 attack/damage 8HP
First level Wizards all have +2 attack/damage 6HP

Tenth level Fighters all have +6 attack/damage 50HP
Tenth level Clerics all have +4 attack/damage 40HP
Tenth level Rogues all have +3 attack/damage 40HP
Tenth level Wizards all have +2 attack/damage 30HP

There are people who want that. I'm not one of them.

To be fair, the further your class moves from "I hit things with a pointy stick", the less dependent upon to-hit and damage bonus modifiers they become. Sure a wizard still gains extra spells from a high-int, but their spells aren't drastically affected by it being 2-3 points lower.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Given the mess most editions have made of high-level and high-level play, I think this assertion (scaling up is easier) is demonstrably false.

Scaling up or down is difficult if the system is made such that it does not account for the possibility of scaling.

Sorry, I should have been clearer - I didn't mean scaling up in level.

What I meant is that it was easier to add more wahoo to 3e than it was to take wahoo out of 4e. Personally I prefer games with less wahoo, and the more wahoo is in from the beginning, the harder it is to extricate it.

I thought I'd explained in my 'proposed module' the outline of how you could relatively easily add more wahoo to attribute scores from a simple baseline.

Cheers

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

I prefer the caps of the older editions where 19 was the highest possible score possible barring stat boost magic items and a wish.

25 being the highest but you only truly see that on Gods and other superior beings etc.