Mental stat bonuses are more powerful than strength bonuses.

[Terath Ninir]

Okay, I know that the official party line at WotC is that Strength bonuses are the most powerful stat bonuses in the universe. That's why half-orcs are unplayable in any but the most hack 'n' slash games. But I think that their behaviour proves that, while they *say* Strength is the most powerful attribute, that all mental stats -- even Charisma -- are more important and more powerful.

Take a look through the various WotC books and find all the LA+0 races that have *any* mental stat bonus. Take your time; they're almost impossible to find. I thought there weren't any until I stumbled across the grey elf. While, yes, they have a +2 Int and +2 Dex, they also have a -2 Str and -2 Con, which makes them very close to an unplayable race. I'm sure you could munchkin your way around that in point buy, but those two penalties could easily be killer if you generate stats the official way (with dice).

The thing that really drove the point home for me was the Cyclopean race in Dragon 323. Yes, Dragon is not a WotC publication, but the info in there rigidly follows the standards set out by WotC and, as their cover often proclaims, is 100% Official. (I'd say they often follow the guidelines *better* than WotC, but that's a whole other rant.) The race came in two flavours: an intelligent cyclops, and a brute cyclops. The supposedly intelligent race, though, didn't have a bonus to a mental stat -- nope, they had a +2 Con bonus that went against all the flavor text of the race.

As another interesting side note, this wasn't the writer's choice. It was the editorial staff's choice. They say in their writer's guidelines *not* to include stat modifiers for a race that they will publish. They assign the modifiers themselves. And, I'd say, this is part of their secret WotC-based agenda against mental stat bonuses.

As a further proof against the importance of Strength as a stat: how many monster races have a mental stat bonus above +10? +20? But you see Strength and Constitution bonuses of +10 even on fairly low-level whimpy monsters. No, they give away bonuses to those two stats like candy, because the stats are not really all that important.

Why are the mental stats more important? They are the gateway to magic, which is, as it always has been, more powerful than physical attacks in D&D. But in 3e, moreso than in previous editions, high mental stats give you more magical power. One you start reaching a mental stat of 20 or higher, you start getting a serious boost in spells per day. For a cleric or specialist wizard, the extra 1st level spell from a mental stat of 20 is a 1/3 increase in power at 1st level. For a nonspecialist wizard, it increases your spells per day by a whopping 50%. Compare that to a piddly +1 attack and damage -- which one is really more powerful?

And if you've got a mental stat of 20 at 1st level, the only direction to go is up. By 16th level, you've got at least a 24 in your mental stat (most likely more, if you've managed to wrangle any inherent bonus along the way), giving you a bonus 7th level spell, and a total of 10 bonus spells in all. Meanwhile, the 24 strength orc has a +7 attack and damage. Whoop de doo.

If you're still not convinced, keep in mind that there is a feat that gives you ONE extra spell slot per day, Extra Slot. And that feat doesn't even let you have a bonus spell of your highest spell level! Granted, it's a very low quality feat, worse than Toughness, but it still shows the high regard WotC places on bonus spell slots.

The plain fact is that a +2 to any mental stat is worth WAY more than a +2 to a physical stat, including and especially Strength. Many monsters have strength bonuses of +20 or more, yet the monsters that rely on brute strength have lower CRs than those that cast spells.

Nope, I've figured out WotC's little game. They claim up and down that Str is the uberstat, but the facts tell a whole different story. Mental stats are more important than physical, so they are deathly afraid to give any decent PC race a mental bonus.

Discuss.

 

[Dimwhit]

Ya know, CZ, I might agree with you. My 17th-level Wizard with a modified Int of 30 (+6 stat boost item and a +2 inherent bonus) is tougher, IMO, than a 17th-level Fighter with a 30 Str.

I would argue, however, that at lower levels, you get more out of a +2 to str than you do some of the mental stats. But that disappears rapidly.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

On a number of rolls modified per normal session basis, Strength wins.

That, I believe, is the metric used when decided importance.

 

[Lamoni]

I agree that WotC believes that mental stats are more powerful than physical ones, but I am unsure.

Compare a 17th level wizard with a 19 Int to a 17th level wizard with a 30 Int. Of course the one with 30 int is better, but how much better? There are plenty of effective spells with no saving throws, and many where their effective targets can rarely make the save of even low DC's.

Now compare a 17th level fighter with 19 STR to a 17th level fighter with a 30 STR. Of course the one with 30 STR is better. If he uses a two-handed weapon, that means he has a +6 to hit and a +9 to damage on every swing. Still quite significant in my opinion. On a full-attack, that is 36 more damage.

For the wizard, it might be the difference between a made and a failed save. If the difference is 36 damage, they are even... but then you have to account for the spells with no saving throw that the wizard will often use where the int didn't help at all. Fly, shield, wall of force, improved invis, etc are all just as effective no matter how intelligent you are once you have the required minimum.

Clearly STR is better for melee types and int is better for wizards, but the question should be, does a +2 Int improve the wizard more than a +2 improves a fighter? I would answer maybe, but not positively. Over many rounds in a battle I think the fighter benefits more. If you don't have several rounds and need a one-shot kill, the improved int for the wizard can be much more beneficial.

 

[Victim]

Hmm. I think you've got a point Cyberzombie. For further examples, look at existing class features and spells. Rage is +4 STR, with other bonuses (and drawbacks). Rage also scales up to +8 STR at level 20. The closest equivalent for casting is the DC boost granted to the rage mage, which is a half casting class - so it'd be like a barbarian with wizard Bab. Polymorph can provide a huge bonus to STR, but does nothing for mental stats and there are no other spell equivalents that provide a comparable bonus. Wildshaping is like polymorph. The bear warrior can gain +30 STR.

Even if the wizard uses spells that don't require saves, he'll have more of them with a higher INT.

Of course, at high levels, the difference between +8 STR and +8 INT might be 50 or damage per round versus a 40& greater chance of instant death. So the lack of INT boosting things is understandable.

 

[Andre]

I can't speak to WOTC's view, but I've thought this for quite a while.

The number one priority for any dedicated spellcaster is boosting save DC's. As Lamoni points out, not all spells require saves, but many of the most common and most powerful do. And at higher levels, many combats turn on which side first misses their saves against "save or die" type spells. Bonus spells, extra skill points (Int), boost to Will saves (Wis), and such are less important, but still very useful. Add it all up and it's clear (to me) that the mental stats have more bang for the buck as the character's level increases.

BTW - this is why I'm seriously considering not allowing mental stat boosting items in my next campaign. IME, physical stat boosters aren't unbalanced, but giving the spellcasters boosts to their primary stats is too good.

 

[IndyPendant]

It sounds good, Cyberzombie, but unfortunately there's one major flaw in your argument. As has already been stated somewhat by a few people, the issue here isn't the single bonus provide, so much as the amount of times it's used per day.

A warrior only gets +1 atk and dmg (or 1.5 dmg if a 2h weapon) per +2 Str. But he may make as many as 100 attacks in any one day. That's a pretty hefty bonus!

Meanwhile, the caster gets 1-2 extra spells and a +1 DC. That's about it. They are significant boosts--but they aren't used nearly as often as the warrior's attacks.

Now, ironically, this works in reverse for monsters. This is because while the party goes through lots of encounters before resting, the monster is really only supposed to be there for one battle. Per encounter, +1 atk and dmg don't impact *nearly* as much as an extra spell or two would. So, physical boosts are not given nearly as much importance for monsters as mental (etc) boosts.

When you think about it, it actually balances out quite well. At *most*, I would argue that the physical stats are not more important than mental ones. But they are at least equally important, and I do think points can be made to argue that the physical stats are in fact more important.

Have fun!

Edit: Changed for readability, and to compensate for my apparent love-affair with commas.

 

[apesamongus]

Okay, I know that the official party line at WotC is that Strength bonuses are the most powerful stat bonuses in the universe.

I think it more accurate to say that they think that a strength bonus is more powerful than a mental penalty, which is actually pretty accurate.

 

[fafhrd]

It sounds good, Cyberzombie, but unfortunately there's one major flaw in your argument. As has already been stated somewhat by a few people, the issue here isn't the single bonus provide, so much as the amount of times it's used per day.

A warrior only gets +1 atk and dmg (or 1.5 dmg if a 2h weapon) per +2 Str. But he may make as many as 100 attacks in any one day. That's a pretty hefty bonus!

Meanwhile, the caster gets 1-2 extra spells and a +1 DC. That's about it. They are significant boosts--but they aren't used nearly as often as the warrior's attacks.

Maybe my experience varies from the majority, but I'd say the flaw in your argument is that a few area effect or multi-target spells shore up those numbers rather quickly. It gets worse as the levels scale upwards. Fights get fast and furious. Throw in quickened spells and the casters are potentially causing each opponent to make multiple rolls per round. Finally if you factor in Andre's point regarding save or die spells and the victory falls squarely to mental stats. A fighter may technically be able to make those hundred attacks per day but we can see from WotCs reasoning with the warlock's at will abilities that x/day(where x is a large number) isn't by itself a practical measurement of power.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

IME a bonus to a mental stat is very powerful - but in practice, any stat boost can be powerful. Mental stat bonuses are considered more powerful because they can boost save DCs - the only way to penalize one without boosting the LA while keeping the race balanced is a Con penalty, which is nasty no matter what class you're playing. However, some stats don't matter much if you penalize them.

A Strength, Int or Cha penalty mean virtually nothing for a lot of character concepts (note that none penalize a saving throw). Wizards rarely need Strength or Cha, unless you want to deal with demons (and even then your Strength won't do much for you). Barbarians rarely need Int or Cha - your Intimidate ranks are far more important than your Cha modifier.