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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5850747" data-attributes="member: 59506">I'm fine with ability scores being within a certain range (well, actually prefer), if it improves the game experience also.  But I'm slightly confused by your post, as I haven't said that the numbers need to correspond with the real world... I have said that in my games, I'd have a cap whether D&D Next has one or not.  I also said that I absolutely would not like to see ability scores above 25 due to the game changing nature of such high bonuses, and would actually prefer it around 20 for that same reason (the improving the game experience part you mentioned).  The comparison I made to real world lifting capacities was strictly in response to those that were talking about the realism, or un-realism, of extremely high Strength scores - and for those that wanted to cap it much lower than real world lifting capacities while saying they wanted it for realism purposes (or at least that's what I thought they were saying). I'm not sure where you got the idea that I said the game needs to correspond with the real world.  (My game does, The Game does not...)<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />  I understand what you're saying, and that's great for you and your games.  But D&D has never been designed around a system of relative Ability scores.  They've always had absolute lifting capacities related to them. A relative Ability score system would be interesting, and even useful in some situations, but it's not what is commonly accepted as "D&D".  That would be a rather significant change involving the slaying of a sacred cow for inclusion in the core (if that's what you're proposing), and require DM's to be more educated on how an underlying math affects the system and garners a specific "feel".  You, and most DM's here, probably wouldn't have a problem with that.  But DM's here are not most DM's when it comes to the entire pool of DM's and gamers.  D&D Next needs to work for DM's and groups that aren't as into game mechanics and the underlying math as the DM's and gamers that visit ENWorld and similar sites.  And, I think most people are okay with the slaying of sacred cows, if it's necessary for the basic game, but not just to model certain game styles or feels that aren't the majority preference.  Yeah, D&D Strength scores aren't exactly "scientific", but I think they're more than good enough for <s>government work</s> a game.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> As to how I determined real world Strength scores in comparison with D&D: I used exactly what the D&D designers did - real world weightlifing records (rounded off also).  Which puts the current female weightlifting record holder at 21, and the current male weightlifting record holder at 23 (at least at the time I made my chart).  Also, according to RAW (3E), characters do not retain their Dexterity bonus to A/C (it gets severely limited) nor do they retain their normal movement rate (it also gets severely limited) when lifting certain weights, and the double weight can only be staggered around with.  (4E is a slightly different story...though similar enough in most respects.)  What you say about the way it should be, is pretty much the way it actually is... But, did you look at the pdf?  (It was right there at the bottom of my post, but I recopied it below for your convenience...<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />) To break down how I got the results I did: 3E/4E: 23 Strength Bonus = +6/+6Light Load = 200 lbs. or less/230 lbs. or less (no AC or movement penalty for either 3E or 4E)Medium Load = 201-400 lbs./- (Max Dex +3, Check Penalty -3, speed 20 ft./15 ft., normal run x4) - (no medium load listed in 4E)Heavy Load = 401-600 lbs./400 lbs. (Max Dex +1, Check Penalty -6, speed 20 ft./15 ft, run x3) - (4E = Slowed to movement 2, can't effectively attack or defend)Lift over head (clean and jerk) = 600 lbs. - (no listing for 4E)Lift off ground (dead lift) = up to 1200 lbs. (between 600 lbs. and 1200 lbs. lift, character can only stagger around - no movement, no Dex bonus, cannot perform another physical skill, etc.) - (4E = 400 lbs. ???)Pull/Drag Weight = 3000 lbs./1060 lbs. (3E: up to double for favorable conditions, 1/2 for unfavorable - and doesn't specifically say, but movement is assumed to be minimal also with no attack or defending) - (4E: impossible in difficult terrain, slowed) Hossein Rezazadeh - Clean and Jerk World Mens Olympic Record 578.6 lbs. (D&D 3E: 23 Strength = 600 lbs.) Jang Mi-Ran - Clean and Jerk World Womans Olympic Record 412.3 lbs. (D&D: 20 Strength = 400, if rounding down, 21 = 460, if rounding up)  I used the same formula for all the other people and strengths on the pdf. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses    B-)" data-shortname="B-)" />   <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachments/d-d-legacy-discussion/48804d1307368696-random-height-weight-size-weight-strength-comparison-analysis-d-d-characters.pdf" target="_blank">Size and Weight to Strength comparison and analysis of D&D characters.pdf</a></blockquote>

Verification