D&D 5E Idea for removing the ability score cap...

[Remathilis]

I'm leery about that.

Right now, there is a raging debate as to whether non-proficient saves are feasible at high level. Removing the cap (and allowing spellcasters to get a +7 or more to save DCs) will guarantee magic goes unchecked. It will break PC and monster save math badly.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Capped stats are one in a list of small things that make this edition play so well. In fact, if you'll be adjusting the challenges to make for the increase, you may as well just keep the ability score cap and do no adjustment, playing the game with bounded accuracy, the way it was designed to work.

 

[Xodis]

Im sticking with the cap, I like the idea of limits of mortal strength, and it gives monstrous creatures the advantage they dont get with levels. Its like playing Link in the legend of Zelda, need to be stronger? Then go grab those magic gloves and pick up the giant bolder!

 

[Lackhand]

To start with, I've already discarded the base attribute score (so my character sheets have +3[x] instead of 17 (+3), +3[ ] instead of 16). This might make what I'm describing unclear. Sorry, if so!

In my opinion, the way to go past the cap (if that's what you want to do!) is to turn it into a soft cap, such that going past it is _really expensive_ but they can do it. Then, you only start really hurting yourself slowly, and by the time things really devolve, they were going to be pretty busted anyway.

Because by-point-buy you can't actually reach 18 (iirc), that seems like the right level to start the expensive -- a bonus of -4 to +4 requires 2 stat points to purchase each plus; +5 to +8 requires 4 stat points per plus, +9 to +12 requires 6 stat points per plus, etc.

This allows anyone who wants to be obscenely strong (or whatever) to do it, but discourages hyperspecialization, because it gets ludicrously expensive.

 

[Li Shenron]

It only breaks if one lets it break

"There are no broken rules, only broken players"

 

[vecna00]

"There are no broken rules, only broken players"

Indeed there are, and they get so mad when they can't just walk through one of my adventures!

That being said, I appreciate the feedback I've been receiving on the mechanics and why I should keep it as is. But I'm looking for story ideas as to what might happen in a campaign world if a PC breaks those limits placed by a higher power (the rules).

 

[Sadrik]

Indeed there are, and they get so mad when they can't just walk through one of my adventures!

That being said, I appreciate the feedback I've been receiving on the mechanics and why I should keep it as is. But I'm looking for story ideas as to what might happen in a campaign world if a PC breaks those limits placed by a higher power (the rules).

I think it will break the rules. But... if you institute players must select the +1/+1 to two stats instead of the +2 to one, then it is doable... like I mentioned upthread.

The fighter gets 7 stat pumps so could wind up with a 24 (with the right race selection), but that is a fighter. A 24 STR, DEX, or CON is not that bad in the basic game. It adds a little bit to hit and damage per round.

A rogue could wind up with a 23 DEX.
A Wizard or Cleric could wind up with a 21 (there are no +2 INT or WIS races).

Note also that this will delay the higher stats earlier in the game due to the +1/+1 and not +2. Good luck with it.

You could say this is the penultimate ability of humanoids. The gods set in their creation plan all humanoids can only be so strong, bright and so on. That measurement is the stat of 20. If you want a more organic explanation, you could say everybody is a little different really and a 20 is just how effective you are at stuff. You might be a skinny guy with a 20 STR but very effective at leveraging and stuff. The gods capping to 20 is interesting... you could almost make a campaign based on that. It would explain why every PC would have a 20 and be limited there...

 

[beej]

Well if it's a mortal cap, the storyline reason for allowing PCs to break it is to become demigods.

That would be an interesting custom rule module, and I'd buy it if ever.

If I will draft a bunch of houserules I'd probably take my inspiration from PF's Mythic Rules.

But that's just idle thinking on my part. I'm not even sure if it makes sense.

 

[FireLance]

If a +3 weapon isn't going to break the game, neither will allowing ability score increases to exceed the 20 point cap. However, the DM ought to do so with his eyes open. To highlight this, perhaps the standard way to do so should be through artifact-level manuals of gainful exercise and the like.

 

[andargor]

Sorry if this is a stupid question or maybe I am blind, but I can't find the rule about the attribute cap in the Basic rules. Where is this mentioned?