Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jmartkdr2" data-source="post: 8183270" data-attributes="member: 7017304">Counterpoint: using the Strength score (as it works in 5e) as a way to represent size is a really bad idea. The entire range of strength scores available to any being in the universe that can move is 1-30. And humans, with no magic involved, take up at least the 3-18 part of that range. So, Godzilla, Super Dimensional Fortress Macross, Unicron (a planet), Galactus the Planet-Eater, or Kord (the physical embodiment of the very concept of strength) cannot, under these rules, be twice as strong as a human could possibly be, nor can he be more than three times as strong as an average dude. Put another way: if the DC for a strength check is 12 to 15, literally any being in the universe can succeed or fail. Ergo: the ability to lift an object cannot reasonably be controlled by one's strength score alone, because you'd have a size of rock that an aphid could lift but Superman might fail to lift.Strength works fine if it measure how strong you are for a creature your size, but size need to be covered by a separate stat (or whatever rule). Alternatively you could change the rules for how the Strength ability score works to make it different from all the other scores.(Note that all the other ability scores work well enough under a human scale - something might be smarter than a human, but we don't need to model anything on a scale that doesn't work for humans.)</blockquote>