D&D 5E What Does a Strength 20 Look Like (In Real Life)?

[Vaalingrade]

In 30+ years of D&D I don't think I've ever needed to know how far a character could jump.

You are clearly not collapsing enough cliffside temples around the PCs.

 

[MGibster]

You are clearly not collapsing enough cliffside temples around the PCs.

I have failed as a DM!

 

[GreyLord]

Right, so by this logic when we see an elite Special Forces solider hauling heavy loads long distances, resisting interrogation, and hitting targets in dim light with his rifle at 300 yards, it's all down to his Strength, Con, Wis, and Dex and has nothing to do with his training, proficiencies, and class features?

Every single example you've put forward so far are elite, professional athletes. They're not lifting, running or jumping based on inherent strength alone. They've literally received specialized training over years, and are professionals.

Like our Special Forces solider, they would have training and experience (class levels, XP, proficiencies and feats) that contribute to the feats you are putting forward as examples.

In 5e with their shooting...no, it does not.

They only get a proficiency bonus between +2 to +6. That's a +4 difference, and EVERYONE gets that proficiency bonus.

A professor that hasn't touched a gun in their life get's that same proficiency bonus for training.

In 5e it kind of boils down to what your stats are that actually make the biggest differences.

If it was another edition...absolutely...but 5e sort of spits on the entire idea of skills making you actually a lot better than anyone else unless you are a rogue (and I'd think professional soldiers would be more of warriors/fighters/rangers than rogues and bards).

D&D isn't all that great as a simulation of anything, but 5e is worse at it than practically any other edition for doing it...IMO...simply because of how it pushes a bigger emphasis on ability scores rather than getting better mostly from experience and levelling.

In 5e (well, unless your DM does as the DMG suggests which means, most DMs don't) a bumpkin off the street who has a good ability score may have a slightly less chance of pulling off brain surgery than a neurosurgeon, and could have a good chance to succeed based on the D20 roll. In fact, if they have the exact same ability score as that trained neurosurgeon, they only have to roll 4 more than the neurosurgeon...maybe.

(PS: in reference to my above comment, the way I read the book though, which I mostly don't see it played at the tables run by others, is that if someone has a skill they can almost always succeed at tasks they do regularly and only roll for those which may be a challenging situation...and some skills others can't try to suceed at all even if they attempt it if they don't have the skill).

In AD&D, that Special Forces Soldier that was a Fighter at 8th level would have a +7 or +8 greater chance of hitting just based on experience alone, and possibly greater in melee if they had a high enough STR score as only Warriors got to have exceptional strength bonuses (anything that would give a +1 or greater to hit).

A similar situation in 2e and 3e. 4e was more on powers they were using, but as powers were class specific...well...

 

[GreyLord]

Their game just has a feat that does this:

You gain the Remarkable Athlete feature (as a Champion) and gain proficiency in Athletics or Acrobatics. If you already have proficiency in this skill, you instead double your proficiency bonus in it. Finally you double your lifting and carrying capacity.

Well, that gives me another option, flows better with the standing long jump as well (which gave me around a 18 STR by the book in 5e).

That means with an 18 STR I could jump 22 feet with a running long jump regularly with no trouble...

Not that I actually think I'd have an 18 STR if I statted myself out from that age. Pretty high DEX though, I think.

 

[Garthanos]

A similar situation in 2e and 3e. 4e was more on powers they were using, but as powers were class specific...well...

skill powers were not class specific... and very pertinent, and your skill at every adventuring
action was buffing by +1 every 2 levels.

 

[GreyLord]

skill powers were not class specific... and very pertinent.

True, but most of the time combat utilized class specific powers (as we were talking about professional soldiers and such).

So the Commoner couldn't use Twin Strikes, and a Wizard couldn't either, but the Ranger couldn't use other combat powers a Fighter had...etc...etc...etc.

Even Basic At Will attacks were somewhat unique at times except for the very basic version.

That was what I was getting at.

In 5e, things are more ability score based rather than what you get from experience and leveling (there's only a +4 range of difference between level 1 and level 20).

Even in 4e (as the top level was 30) there was a +15 difference in simply leveling (without any other factors) between the lowest and highest levels of experience.

 

[Flamestrike]

In 5e with their shooting...no, it does not.

They only get a proficiency bonus between +2 to +6. That's a +4 difference, and EVERYONE gets that proficiency bonus.

Is that all a Fighter gets is it? He also gets a +2 to hit from Archery style, and another +1d8 from precise shot maneuver, ignores cover (due to Sharpshooter) and can bullseye someone in the face at long range (Sharpshooter feat), and he can do it twice as fast as an untrained person (thanks to extra attack).

This is my point here. You guys are observing trained professionals doing feats, and then trying to attribute those feats to nothing more than 'inherent natural ability' and ignoring the training (class levels, feats, class features etc) that those professionals likely also have.

 

[Flamestrike]

Well, that gives me another option, flows better with the standing long jump as well (which gave me around a 18 STR by the book in 5e).

That means with an 18 STR I could jump 22 feet with a running long jump regularly with no trouble...

Not that I actually think I'd have an 18 STR if I statted myself out from that age. Pretty high DEX though, I think.

Your DM likely also allows you to exceed the base maximum distance from your Strength based on a Str (Athletics) check. You can jump an additional percentage of your base jump distance equal to a Str (Athletics check) kind of deal.

 

[Garthanos]

Your DM likely also allows you to exceed the base maximum distance from your Strength based on a Str (Athletics) check. You can jump an additional percentage of your base jump distance equal to a Str (Athletics check) kind of deal.

or completely not.... and there is no guidance for doing so.

Is that all a Fighter gets is it? He also gets a +2 to hit

no equivalent for a melee combatant.

from Archery style, and another +1d8 from precise shot maneuver,

once people are taking about the 4 points of advancements I assume they are talking about paltry skill advancement not combat advancement necessarily. I mean multiple attacking obviously expresses advancement in general there is no multiplier for other arenas of skills.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But you'd think it would be inaccurate the other way, right?

Not that the mightiest warriors of Faerun would be soundly styled on by Earth humans in almost every way possible.

Sort of puts all the 'but my goliath should be stronger than any halfling' arguments in their place. You golaith isn't even stronger than most buff dudes.

because casters rule and martial drools

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In 5e with their shooting...no, it does not.

They only get a proficiency bonus between +2 to +6. That's a +4 difference, and EVERYONE gets that proficiency bonus.

I am not a cop, I am not a soldier, saying I have ANY special training in weapons is laughable. However I have played with water guns and paintball guns a fair amount (not in the last 4ish years though). I for sure don't have a high dex. If you compair me to my half brother who is marksman level military trained (that doesn't mean what most of you think it does) there is a HUGE diffrence in our skill levels... but 'in game' we both have prof bonus + dex mod....the d20 will ALWAYs matter more.

 

[Garthanos]

And why would one have to make an athletics check for a running (or standing) long jump?

The rule itself is interesting in that it would have given my High School self different strength depending on whether it was standing, running, or high jump.

Each of which I could do 100% of the time, so it was not something that I "failed" at that age on a skill roll, or was incredibly lucky.

Running Long Jump generally was 22 feet, though sometimes I could get a tad longer. (22 STR)

cannot even guess on that one. It seems to take more skill where as a standing jump seems straight forward. I probably wouldn't even try if failure had implications unless the distance was something I could do standing.

Standing Long Jump normally was a little over 9 feet, barely. (18 STR) [Could occasionally jump further, but that was unpredictable on how far and when. 9 Feet was what I could always jump whenever tested, every time at that age].

mine would have been 16... and my athleticism was only ok.

 

[Flamestrike]

or completely not.... and there is no guidance for doing so.

Yes there is. There is an entire manual for that. It's called the DMG.

no equivalent for a melee combatant.

Precise strike battlemaster manouver.

once people are taking about the 4 points of advancements I assume they are talking about paltry skill advancement not combat advancement necessarily. I mean multiple attacking obviously expresses advancement in general there is no multiplier for other arenas of skills.

Expertise doubles your skill so there is that.

There are also things like Steady eye, Fast hands, Vanish, Cunning Action, Eye for Detail, Ear for Deceit, Second story work, Hide in Plain sight, Remarkable Athlete, Silver tounge, Reliable talent etc etc etc which are class features that speed up skill use (making them bonus actions), or provide new ways to use those skills, or result in you never rolling under a 10 again, in addition to feats like Keen Mind, Athlete, etc etc etc.

 

[Vaalingrade]

because casters rule and martial drools

They used to at least try to be on the down low about it.

"No, see fighters get feats and at some point, we'll release good ones."

Now it's like

"You will take rolling twice and maybe I will bother allowing you magic items and feats -- but you are NOT allowed to count on them, pleb."

 

[Flamestrike]

"No, see fighters get feats and at some point, we'll release good ones."

Fighters already get all the good ones.

The most commonly banned feats are GWM, Sharpshooter and PAM.

This goes hand in hand with DMs implementing other HR's that nerf fighters (exhaustion at 0hp, fumble rules, insta kills for lava, or falls) etc while simultaneously ignoring the Adventuring day recommendations, allowing the 5 minute work day, imposing the Guy at the Gym fallacy (seen in this very thread) then logging on here to complain how sucky fighters are.

 

[ad_hoc]

The way I see it, Hathor has a Strength of 18.

When your PC fighter has a Strength of 20, he's even stronger than Hathor, which is the way it should be.

Going about it the other way, is simply condemning your PC Fighter to the 'guy in the gym' fallacy, where despite being an epic hero of legend, he's always coming up short against some meathead down the gym.

30 years ago we would be saying that Arnold is the best real life model for 18/00 strength.

30 years ago the strength of today's strongmen wasn't possible.

People are lifting more now than they have ever done before and it is not even close.

 

[Garthanos]

Yes there is. There is an entire manual for that. It's called the DMG.i

imagine what the guy down at the Gym can do and decide based on that the difficulty?
No wait let someone cast jump on you because adventuring without magic is 10 times as hard the players handbook even says it is supposed to be.

nnPrecise strike battlemaster manouver.

archer has that too... are you taking it away? The +2 applies to all attacks.

 

[Garthanos]

, imposing the Guy at the Gym fallacy (seen in this very thread)

It seems encouraged by the system

 

[Garthanos]

Reliable talent etc etc etc which are class features that speed up skill use (making them bonus actions), or provide new ways to use those skills, or result in you never rolling under a 10 again, in addition to feats like Keen Mind, Athlete, etc etc etc.

Do any of those give 4 times the results? Vast majority of your examples are Rogue only.

Fighters already get all the good ones .The most commonly banned feats are GWM, Sharpshooter and PAM.

Cant argue against that but he was referring to 3.x feats at that point in the convo I think.

Well feats are an every man resource IF feats are allowed at the table having some be op is seen as affecting the desirability of other feats reducing things to a bit of a solved equation is how I have heard it expressed and something similar called Feat Taxes in 4e.

Level Up perhaps ironically made GWM... aka Powerful Attacker better. The also made two weapon fighting better.

 

[Garthanos]

I am not a cop, I am not a soldier, saying I have ANY special training in weapons is laughable. However I have played with water guns and paintball guns a fair amount (not in the last 4ish years though). I for sure don't have a high dex. If you compair me to my half brother who is marksman level military trained (that doesn't mean what most of you think it does) there is a HUGE diffrence in our skill levels... but 'in game' we both have prof bonus + dex mod....the d20 will ALWAYs matter more.

The random chance mattering more than in any other edition (unless you cast spells then sometimes it wont) is definitely true