Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="dkyle" data-source="post: 5848133" data-attributes="member: 70707">I disagree with an arbitrary cap like that.  If there are means to raise stats, then they should simply be designed to have a natural cap to them (so limited stacking), and to naturally get harder and harder to raise those stats (again, accomplished by limited stacking).  4E is a good example of a "naturally capped" system, although it did do it by eliminating a lot of the stat bonuses in previous editions.If a mortal is stronger than a god, then either it's a system where that's intentional (gods are intentionally not untouchable), or the gods' stats are poorly designed.  To me, a god shouldn't have stats, unless there's an intention that a PC very well could rise to their level, and punch them in the nose.  Supremely powerful gods shouldn't have stats.As for your examples?  If a character wants a castle, there should be reasons why a castle is potentially more advantageous than maxing their personal stats.  Same with an army.  If the intent is to have a campaign where a castle/army/personal advancement are all viable goals, then there should be mechanics in place to support all of those options.  Or the DM can decide on a world where adventurers have little reason to want a castle or army, in which case it's OK that spending on those things is mechanically disadvantageous.  And if a character wants to donate to the poor, it should cost them something, or it's a meaningless act.  Or, perhaps, if the DM so desires, such donations could have a benefit of their own.  Maybe there's a strong tie between donations, and favor granted from the gods.Ultimately, ability scores are just (at least in previous editions) bonuses to various other stats.   So if there's a problem with having a high STR, then there's also a problem with bonuses to damage, attack, and special combat maneuver DCs.EDIT: as for your poll, "the sky's the limit" isn't quite what I want to see.  There should be a limit.  It's just that it should be a natural product of the available bonuses (like in 4E).  There should absolutely not be ways to increase abilities arbitrarily high, as there were in 3.5.  But that should be true of all stats, not just ability scores.</blockquote>

Verification