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

[dkyle]

I disagree. I don't see any problem with having a hard cap (I'd say about 24-25) but have multiple ways to get there. I think that allows for options in character building rather than eliminates them. One character could get to the strength cap with his level increases on top of natural ability, another could get there by the use of a magical belt and gauntlets, a third could get there because he found some magical tomes of exceptional exercise. They'd all have the same net effect - hitting the strength cap as a very strong character - but they'd have different mojo and narratives behind them.

I think having fewer routes to get to the cap (basically taking all enhancement options to get there) is what reduces options. The main option there is the order in which they are pursued. Everyone who gets there has gotten there with the same tools.

What actually reduces options is high ability scores overpowering the alternatives. If there are meaningful alternatives to be gained by forgoing a max STR, then that's more interesting then everyone getting the same STR, just with superficially different ways to get there. That's what I mean be hard caps being "patches" for bad design. Balance stat increases against alternatives properly, and hard caps do nothing but reduce options.

I guess it all boils down to what we find more interesting: different characters being different because they have different capabilities, or different characters having the same capabilities, but arriving there in narratively different means.

 

[Minigiant]

I disagree. I don't see any problem with having a hard cap (I'd say about 24-25) but have multiple ways to get there. I think that allows for options in character building rather than eliminates them. One character could get to the strength cap with his level increases on top of natural ability, another could get there by the use of a magical belt and gauntlets, a third could get there because he found some magical tomes of exceptional exercise. They'd all have the same net effect - hitting the strength cap as a very strong character - but they'd have different mojo and narratives behind them.

I think having fewer routes to get to the cap (basically taking all enhancement options to get there) is what reduces options. The main option there is the order in which they are pursued. Everyone who gets there has gotten there with the same tools.

More ways to get to the cap allows for more sameness.

Joe the warrior. 18 Str from Start. 18 Dex from Items, 18 Con from Magic, 18 Int from Wishes, 18 Wis from Prestige class, 18 Cha from Feats

Jane the wizard. 18 Str from Items. 18 Dex from Magic, 18 Con from Items, 18 Int from Start, 18 Wis from Prestige class, 18 Cha from Feats

 

[WheresMyD20]

I prefer a hard cap for natural ability scores based on race: humans at 18 and demi-humans a point or two above or below that.

However, I don't think we need a hard cap for magic-adjusted ability scores or for powerful creatures/deities. A Belt of Giant Strength should be able to boost a human's strength to 20 or more and an artifact could take it way beyond that.

 

[billd91]

What actually reduces options is high ability scores overpowering the alternatives. If there are meaningful alternatives to be gained by forgoing a max STR, then that's more interesting then everyone getting the same STR, just with superficially different ways to get there. That's what I mean be hard caps being "patches" for bad design. Balance stat increases against alternatives properly, and hard caps do nothing but reduce options.

I guess it all boils down to what we find more interesting: different characters being different because they have different capabilities, or different characters having the same capabilities, but arriving there in narratively different means.

I think, systematically, there have been meaningful alternatives to raising a single stat like strength ever since 3e came out. The main problem I see is that each player ultimately determines what's really meaningful for his style of play and his character. I don't see many ways for an RPG to get around that.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No cap. Don't force everyone to play a particular style. There should be guidelines, not caps. If you want to play wuxia-style, then START at a higher value, but no caps. You may think this thread isn't about a preferred play style, but capping ability scores IS a preferred playstyle.

Also, who said ability scores will be in 5E?

 

[CleverNickName]

No cap. Don't force everyone to play a particular style. There should be guidelines, not caps. If you want to play wuxia-style, then START at a higher value, but no caps. You may think this thread isn't about a preferred play style, but capping ability scores IS a preferred playstyle

The same could be said for not capping them.

So how about some rules for an adjustable cap, then? A hard cap of 18 for the "old guard," a super-high one for the "new blood," and a 20-ish cap for the rest of us?

It's a nice thought, but I think it would be incredibly difficult to implement in practice. Ability scores are tied to just about everything in the game, from combat and spellcasting to encumbrance and skills. Changing the ability score range would literally change the whole game...and not necessarily for the better.

 

[Ahnehnois]

You know what I really hate in my games that are played in imagination and which are used to engage people's creativity and fulfill their wishes?

Limits.

 

[Gadget]

I'm sorry, but I have to agree with the original post. "limiting play style" just does not sound like a reasonable excuse. It would be child's play to increase this cap (or eliminate it altogether) if that is what floats your boat. 4E just encouraged you to join the arms race of increasing your attack stat at the cost of almost all else. You can differentiate your epic hero in other ways than his/her strength score; I'm pretty sure there will be lots of options for that.

This is especially true if they go back to the old school vibe of rolling your ability scores: those who roll particularly well will reach the cap quicker and either diversify their abilities or chose other options to increase character abilities.

 

[D'karr]

You know what I really hate in my games that are played in imagination and which are used to engage people's creativity and fulfill their wishes?

Limits.

These limits are what I'd like to see as sidebars for specific campaign styles. Next thing some will come up with is level limits for demi-humans.

That is all a matter of preference. Keep your preferences for your game and don't try to stick them in mine.

If there are no limits in the base, and then specific information is given of the "benefits" for certain campaign styles I would not complain.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm more concerned that the caps be soft, rather than the precise mechanism used or place where the cap takes place. Hard caps (can't raise an ability beyond 20) have their own problems. That solves extreme math problems, but it also causes sameness in characters--everyone wants to get to the cap in their primary attribute, as soon as possible.

With soft caps, abilities costing more the higher you get them, people find their own natural stopping place, and it varies from player to player, character to character.

Edit: There is one place for hard caps--a fallback absolute limit well north of the expected results of the soft caps, if going over that limit will clearly break the game. This is more likely to happen with "supplement creep" or house rules than at launch, but it really doesn't hurt much to put such a hard cap in--if, and only if, there is in fact an absolute limit that will break the game.

For example, it might be that the game works best starting with main stats in the 14 to 20 range, and can easily accommodate those going up to 25. OK, make it so that 20 is pretty easy to get, and soft caps discourage most characters from passing 25. But then it is found that going to 30 (or 40 or whatever) just flat out breaks the game in some way. Put the hard cap there. Most people will never get near it, but if someone house rules or uses a wacky supplement, everyone knows where the top limit is.