Abilities Capped at 20 Won't Work

[mcintma]

I want to talk about ability scores again. Here are humans with the highest ability scores of 20. This includes practice, experience and learned feats.
Ability Scores

Air Jordan has awesome stats

 

[Sunseeker]

Damage increases.
Given the abstraction of HP and hitting with tracks in the first place, doing more damage can be directly analogous to better aim and more force/skill with an attack.

More effective/powerful hits? Yes, but not better accuracy. Assuming that defenses scale to some degree as well.

 

[ren1999]

No one can "make" you like flat math (and perhaps "limited" to your eyes) progression...no one can "make" you like a more Basic or 1e D&D experience...and no one should try to. By the same token, you should not be trying to tell everyone else what they like/want/should want is incorrect or misguided because YOU [think you] know differently.

Cheers and happy gaming.
-SD

Steeldragons, actually, I am being won over by the flat math. You seem to be targeting me and verbally attacking me making this personal. I just want to influence the game as you are influencing the game. If you don't like my posts, then stop reading them and stop following me around criticizing me and not my ideas. If you continue dogging me like this I will complain to an administrator about YOU.

 

[Draloric]

I had thought that there was a quote somewhere mentioning ability scores now present BOTH raw talent and experience. A 20 str fighters isn't just strong, but he has trained to use his strength to its fullest advantage.

Am I making that up in my mind?

You're not making that up in your mind. Scores represent talent, training, and competences related to that ability (cf. HtP, p.4). With this definition for what ability scores represent, I think it becomes easier to justify ability increases due to experience/level gain.

 

[steeldragons]

Steeldragons, actually, I am being won over by the flat math. You seem to be targeting me and verbally attacking me making this personal. I just want to influence the game as you are influencing the game. If you don't like my posts, then stop reading them and stop following me around criticizing me and not my ideas. If you continue dogging me like this I will complain to an administrator about YOU.

Duly noted. Didn't realize I was "dogging you".

But thanks for the threat.

This isn't "personal" and I am not "verbally attacking you." I am quite sure I am not "influencing the game"...I don't know what or who you think I am. lol.

To be sure, I am NOT "following [you] around" but lo and behold every other thread in the 5e forum is authored by you...telling us what would work "better", what should be added to the game, and what [yes] you think the game should be doing...and it all boils down to "more math", "more complexity", "more 4e."...which, obviously, 5e is not going to be about....or there wouldn't be a 5e...they'd just keep producing 4e stuff.

I will save us both a lot of time and trouble and put you on my "Ignore" list now so that we don't have to have any further "personal" affronts. Sorry to have offended you.

Cheers and enjoy 5e.
--SD

 

[ren1999]

This isn't "personal" and I am not "verbally attacking you." I am quite sure I
--SD

Of course you're influencing the game. People working on 5th edition read this forum.

Every other thread is not authored by me. That is the kind of verbal abuse I'm talking about.

I do think it would be best if you "ignored" me. I won't be ignoring you as I find your comments helpful.

Getting back to talking about the game, Yes, I think that we can make the ability cap of 20 work. But I want to hear ideas now about making it work.

 

[ren1999]

Retire after 20 levels?

A new question for you all.

Is everyone ready to retire a character after 20 levels?

Let's say that 1 module equals 1 level. After 20 modules, are you ready to start a new character?

Pathfinder seems to have limited character life to about 6 modules in one "Adventure Path" campaign. Yeah, it seems to workout o.k.

I've always got tired of playing a character after 30 levels. But I have played D&D immortals rules and found it to be fun at even higher levels.

Your take on this?

 

[Grazzt]

A new question for you all.

Is everyone ready to retire a character after 20 levels?

Let's say that 1 module equals 1 level. After 20 modules, are you ready to start a new character?

Pathfinder seems to have limited character life to about 6 modules in one "Adventure Path" campaign. Yeah, it seems to workout o.k.

I've always got tired of playing a character after 30 levels. But I have played D&D immortals rules and found it to be fun at even higher levels.

Your take on this?

Nope. I still have one of my original 1e characters and still play him when I play (I mostly DM now). Couple of my players have been with me since the beginning and one still has his very first character (character started in 1e, moved to 2e, then moved to a hybrid of 1e/2e). All hit the level 20 cap long a go. (We use the level 20 cap from 2e.)

Just because you hit the cap, be it level 10, 20, 30, whatever doesn't mean that character has to retire. His "career" isn't over because he quit scaling up in power level.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

A new question for you all.

Is everyone ready to retire a character after 20 levels?

Absolutely not.

My first 3rd game I played until about 26, and still wanted to play, but the game folded. I have plans to play my current Pathfinder characters longer (with out houseruled epic rules).

In a Champions game, I have played the same character for 25 years or so (She's my avatar).

I never retire characters at a certain level - I retire them when their story is over. Some that is 4 months (though not often) most take 3-5 years. Others take decades.

 

[VannATLC]

More effective/powerful hits? Yes, but not better accuracy. Assuming that defenses scale to some degree as well.

Why, though? The entire point of combat is abstracted. Simulationist combat is for LARP or seriously computer aided PnP (IMO). So hitting is an abstraction, where your blow required attention. Missing is where your blow did not.
It could be you're using a dagger against plate-mail, and striking solely st the chest plate. It could be because you're wielding a club against a creature made of stone (I miss hardness rules) it could be because your opponent is drug-crazed, and shrugging off blows that would cripple another. Abilities that then allow damage on a miss, are those where there is enough power or skill involved that it is not possible to ignore them.

And, more damage is the difference between a skilful thrust between the plates of armour, and a jab to an armoured face. Both as hits. Both are threatening. Being better at more damage is also about being better at being accurate. Something with a binary hit/do not hit does not reflect, and neither does random damage (which, to be honest, I'd be happy to see reduced.)