Stats scaling past 18/19

[Croesus]

3.x's problem was two-fold: 1) as you point out, there were no thresholds for stats based on race, so theoretically you could end up with human characters stronger than a (big) dinosaur, and 2) the bonuses were way, way too good at +1 per 2 points above 10.

Having racial maximums would address the first problem. Completely changing the math (and therefore the entire system) would be required for issue two. Easier to simply use a different system, or just live with the significant stat bonuses.

 

[Jacob Marley]

3.x's problem was two-fold: 1) as you point out, there were no thresholds for stats based on race, so theoretically you could end up with human characters stronger than a (big) dinosaur, and 2) the bonuses were way, way too good at +1 per 2 points above 10.

What would make a good ratio? +1/3? +1/4? +1/5?

I think a distribution along the following table would be something interesting to explore:

• 11-13 +1
• 14-16 +2
• 17-19 +3
• etc.

 

[Dandu]

I don't recall there being a difference in stats between male and female characters in second edition. I suppose I could always check in my old players handbook ( I still have it ). If there had been differences in the sexes in this way, I wouldn't have minded it. I quite like the scene in Red Sonja where Arnie and Red Sonja do battle and his strength and her skill are evenly matched. I suppose some feminists might not have liked that, though, but that's a bit out of scope of this discussion.

I might try 3.5 with ceilinged stats and I have got some other ideas as well which would change the game somewhat. Most of them would scale downwards in potential power the characters (player and NPC) can do. Like for example, I'm wondering what would happen to buffs if only one plus can apply to any type of stat or roll (the highest would get priority), so they do not stack. Imagine if a character with a +1 strength bonus gets no benefit from a minor +1 magical weapon because he's using his strength and power to punch the blade through the armour, but a +2 magical weapon forces him to switch tactics to being skillful to gain its benefit, for example. This would need some major thinking. Base attack bonus could easily outclass the + to hit that a magic weapon would give, changing the game significantly.

Perhaps you should play a different game that caters specifically to your tastes.

Have you heard about FATAL?

Let's not get insulting, folks. It doesn't help to get your point across very well. ~ Kamikaze Midget

 

[billd91]

I have a question for you. Do you think that 3.5 might have lost its way when it allowed core stats (Strength, Dexterity, Constituion, Wisdom, Intelligence and Charisma) scale up past the 18/19 mark?

Sort of. Scaling past 18/19? No. Scaling WAY past 18/19? Yes.

It's not scaling past 18 or 19 that is the problem as I see it. It's the open end of the system that's problematic, including the stat bloat that large (and larger) monster tend to have.

 

[Croesus]

What would make a good ratio? +1/3? +1/4? +1/5?

I think a distribution along the following table would be something interesting to explore:

• 11-13 +1
• 14-16 +2
• 17-19 +3
• etc.

Personally, I prefer +1/4, though every time I've mentioned to another player, he gets this really pained look on his face...

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Given the power of spellcasting and such, I'd say any more limits on strength and such would be a very bad nerf to the whole thing. Mundanes are already shafted when it comes to high level play, and you want to screw them even more? In the majority of cases they need it to even lag behind a bit. If this desire to nerf ability scores comes from trying to make things "realistic" then you should really stop right there and think about what D&D actually is. It is fantastic, not realistic, even if there are some rules based on reality as we perceive it.

Keep in mind even reality trumps the "max" in some cases. Design & Development: Proud Nails lists weightlifter Shane Hamman as having 23 strength based on his snatch weight and the rules for carrying stuff and lifting it.

That or he effectively has the Natural Heavyweight feat from the Planar Handbook, but if we're talking reality then that probably doesn't work since humans, as far as we know, are not descended from extraplanar beings.

 

[Sekhmet]

things

[sblock=Lifting Records]
IIRC: Benedikt Magnusson has a 22 Str, his max deadlift is 1,015lb.
Another lifter did a 1,268lb squat, setting him around 23 Str.
Behdad Salimi snatched 472 lb (22 Str). Shane Hamman's snatch record of 430 puts him at 21 Str. [/sblock]

I agree that limiting bonuses seems in poor judgement for the mundane classes, although I'd be open to considering altering mental faculties to reduce bonuses for Int, Wis, and Cha.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Having not come from a background of any pre-3.x editions (briefly dabbled in AD&D in my teens, but not enough to know it solidly), all I know is the stat system you are describing.

I assume the following in addressing your concern:

-PC's are heroes, who are supposed to be greater then the average person

-Players should design PC's that are fun, for everyone involved. If everyone is cool with the Barbarian having a STR of 35, groovy. If not, then something needs to change.

-The DM has the right to pump up monsters any way he or she pleases or simply use higher CR to compensate for any power level the PC's possess.

Keeping these 3 things in mind, I don't see a problem manifesting that couldn't be resolved by a group of people looking to have fun.

 

[Sekhmet]

[MENTION=6674868]RUMBLETiGER[/MENTION] I'd EXP if I could, just to say "in previous editions, the player characters were assumed to be average individuals who became heroic through their exploits."

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

@RUMBLETiGER I'd EXP if I could, just to say "in previous editions, the player characters were assumed to be average individuals who became heroic through their exploits."

Whereas in 3.0 and beyond, steroids are the stuff of heroes!