What would happen if your character or your PCs had an 18 in every stat?

[Privateer]

Having all 18's in a stat would also confuse me on some levels. For one thing having +4 to Stat Bonus to all skill rolls while it may sound great becomes unintreasting, at least to me. The characters should succede at most tasks the majority of the time. The thrill of risk goes away and the game becomes more of a routine task than adventure.

Yes, the "thrill of risk" would go away for mundane tasks. Part of the idea of having all 18's would be that the mundane becomes simple to one of these supermen. However, wouldn't the risks be raised as these extraordinary people get thrown into extraordinary plots that are appropriate to their skill level?

It's a rare person that complains that superheroes don't have thrilling lives, but they are certainly well above the norm, and mundane tasks are not appropriate to their amazing abilities. Nobody complains that Batman or Superman can easily trounce a few thugs, for instance. Why would my proposed characters be any different or more boring?

 

[scourger]

unfulfilling yet interesting

I believe I would find it ultimately unfulfilling based on past roleplaying experiences. I find it is the limitations that make the choices fun. It is more fun to have a character that is good or great at a couple of things but almost inept at most others.

For instance, I had a 2e dwarf fighter/cleric with 3 18s (STR (18/76 or something), CON & WIS) and 3 10s (INT, DEX & CHA). I rolled those stats with some sort of limited trading (I think I traded a 14 to a 16 then got +2 racial bonus on something or other). Anyway, I cherry-picked the placement of the stats; and those choices were optimized for that game and that character. He was fun to play, but it was difficult to be challenged after a time.

Similarly, I recently ran a half-orc ranger with 18 STR, 18 DEX, 16 CON, 11 INT, 13 WIS and 10 CHA. He was very good at what he did, which was to scout around and attack twice a round with two thrown missile or melee weapons. But, the power-gaming goodness wears off soon. If he had been higher level, it might have been more fun with an animal companion and some spells.

By contrast, I've had more fun playing a current human cleric with 16 WIS and all other stats just being above average enough to have a +1 bonus. He's got the knowledge & trickery domains, so I envision him as a sort of an arcane archaelogist. He knows his limitations, so he focuses on figuring stuff out, turning undead and dispelling magic. The latter two pulled some party fat out of the fryer last time. Also, if the chips are really down, he uses a domain spell to turn invisible and runs away (which I've also done recently). Overall, this is a much more enjoyable character to play for me.

Also, I have a mutant lizard with the Partial Action Only defect in an Omega World game. I love that character. Being able to only take one action per round is very defining. Even when the DM presented me the option to get rid of the defect, I declined and got rid of one with much less "game effect" because the Partial Action Only was such an integral part of the character.

So, all 18s would probably get pretty boring to play for me.

It could be interesting if there was no multiclassing. Then, the group would be a party of super-specialists instead of a bunch of super-generalists. One of the problems I find in my current group is that the prevalent multiclassing makes individual characters stronger, i.e. better survivors individually, but the party is weaker because there are no specialists, particularly arcane spellcasters. If the all-18 uber characters were restricted to one class forever, then that would force the players to be a strong group of specialists rather than a weaker group of generalists.

It's an interesting question, especially since I've been pondering how to do a Greek Heroes camapign. The all-18s but no multiclassing may be a good solution. Thanks for posting the question.

 

[Grodd JoJoJo]

Interesting question, because I actually have had the good (or ill) fortune to do just that. I chose an old chestnut - the half-elven fighter/wizard - and I specialized in necromancy. The party was led by a cleric and paladin; both advanced faster, because my focuses were split. I was certainly equally powerful, but the background of the campaign took me out of the running as leader of the group. Further, I didn't advance in a single class as fast as they did. Also, our country had compulsive service, so all of the other characters had been in the military; I was exempted - I wasn't mature when the draft ages came up. My character's been extremely effective and a real asset to the party, but he's never dominated it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I think that what people are missing here is that the entire party will be like this.

As such, having all 18's is almost identical to having all 10's - the GM is going to introduce harder challenges for party members, not introduce normal-level challengs for an above the norm party.

As such, any cries of "there's no challenge" are totally unfounded.

RP-wise, it's an interesting idea. The PC's are much greater than the general populace. However this isn't really going to differ from normal high-level play, except that the heroes are going to be better in almost all regards. Concentrating on the differences between the heroes at low level, and without their class abilities, and normal humans is going to be what characterises the campaign.

In mechanical terms, you're going to have some interesting differences, even taking into account the +1 ecl.

1. All classes will have a lot more hitpoints than normal. 1 level of fighter hitpoints will be made up by level 3, and from then on, it's pure profit. Wizards get an even better deal.

2. Clerics will be really, really good. Only 1 hp per level behind fighters, still plenty of skill points etc etc. Normally clerics are hurt because they have to carefully allocate attributes - every single one counts. With all 18's, the cleric is a powerhouse, especially if he picks up some domains with extra skill selections.

3. Druids who wildshape will be penalised, because wildshape only turns you into an average animal. You might want to think about this. Usually turning into an animal which is reknowned for a quality (strength, endurance, agility) will give you a 19-22 in that ability, but trades most other stats down to the 10-13 range. For a character who normally has all 18's, that's a really small benefit for a really big disadvantage.

4. With a mandatory ECL increase of 1, watch out for spells or abilties that monsters have which are normally countered by spells - the party will often be 1 spell level behind, making those counters unavailable. Often access to an appropriate counter makes the difference between a tpk and an easy fight. With an ECL of 2, this will be significantly more pronounced.

 

[elbandit]

Hmmm

Yes, the "thrill of risk" would go away for mundane tasks. Part of the idea of having all 18's would be that the mundane becomes simple to one of these supermen. However, wouldn't the risks be raised as these extraordinary people get thrown into extraordinary plots that are appropriate to their skill level?

While that is a neat idea, how long do you think you can keep coming up with "extraordinary plots"?

My primary complaint is that the concept has already overdone and I doubt most GMs could keep the plots that extraordinary or intreasting enough to provide me with entertainment. At some point the GM would almost have to introduce the evil perfect counterparts of the player characters, which is not only predictable but extremely uninstreasting to me.

It's a rare person that complains that superheroes don't have thrilling lives, but they are certainly well above the norm, and mundane tasks are not appropriate to their amazing abilities.

I never said that super heroes do not have thrilling lives, I stated that playing the perfect D&D character would be unthrilling to me. Those are two different things entirely.

Please understand that when you ask for opinions somebody will always disagree with the concept. I am apparently that person this time around.

Nobody complains that Batman or Superman can easily trounce a few thugs, for instance. Why would my proposed characters be any different or more boring?

However playing as Batman and Superman in an RPG and easily beating up thugs would get boring real fast. Been there, done that.

I personally do not believe that a higher encounter level will be that much more challenging since the characters have no real weak Stat/Ability to exploit. Regardless, as far as I am concerned it is more of a conceptual issue, so let's look at the initial concept:

The basic concept is that the characters wake up without any coherent memories ...

This has been done so many times on TV and in various RPG modules at one time or another that I am bored to tears with it. The concept no longer appeals to me and hence I would not have fun in a campaign like this. Someone else may greatly enjoy it since not everyone is like me.

...and find themselves to be superior physical specimens.

I will say this is a refreashing twist on the much overused concept, I have to wonder if the PCs will all start naked. Joking aside, the PCs would either had to already be superior physical specimens which means they will quickly discover who they truely are since they should already stand out in society. This would end the mystery rather quickly and unsatisfying.

The only other option that does not involve the inclusion of aliens, is that they were transformed somehow by magic/gods or come from another world. I do not really have an opinion on either possibility.

If your players like the concept then run with it and enjoy.

 

[Privateer]

While that is a neat idea, how long do you think you can keep coming up with "extraordinary plots"?

As long as I need to. If it works for the comics, it can work for me, right?

I never said that super heroes do not have thrilling lives, I stated that playing the perfect D&D character would be unthrilling to me. Those are two different things entirely.

Please understand that when you ask for opinions somebody will always disagree with the concept. I am apparently that person this time around.

I apologize if it seemed as though I was attacking your right to have an opinion, I was just curious as to how you might treat your opinion if the campaign was treated less like traditional D&D and more like a superhero genre game.

However playing as Batman and Superman in an RPG and easily beating up thugs would get boring real fast. Been there, done that.

Hence the "extraordinary plots" line I made. Admittedly, beating up thugs is boring, but superhero comics have far more than that in them (although sometimes seeing how much above the norm you really are is fun). You're proving my point, though -- that simple threats have no meaning to them.

This has been done so many times on TV and in various RPG modules at one time or another that I am bored to tears with it.

Okay, I admit defeat on this point

 

[LurkerFreak]

Whoops, first double post

 

[LurkerFreak]

Thing is, if the DM gives out straight 18s for stats, maybe they have adjusted the BBEG/Monster stats the same way. Your "Super" characters walk through the minions, but Mr Evil hits them like a freight train.

 

[elbandit]

Turning the Tables

I apologize if it seemed as though I was attacking your right to have an opinion, I was just curious as to how you might treat your opinion if the campaign was treated less like traditional D&D and more like a superhero genre game.

Ah, understood! Funny you should mention a traditional super hero game since I am running a Champions game. In some ways D&D is already like the super hero genre since you have heroes that face things normal class citizens could not hope to defeat such as the monsters, evil wizards and warlords that seem to plauge the land.

Honestly if you want to make the game really different, with the super hero genre in mind, you may consider giving each PC a unique special ability, maybe something like increased strength for a limited time frame. While my example is so embarrassing pedestrian, there are a lot of abilities you can pull out of the monster manual, spells and PRC abilities. That may be more intrteasting to do than give them all 18's for Stats.

Hence the "extraordinary plots" line I made. Admittedly, beating up thugs is boring, but superhero comics have far more than that in them (although sometimes seeing how much above the norm you really are is fun). You're proving my point, though -- that simple threats have no meaning to them.

What do you consider to be a extraordinary plot?

 

[Brother MacLaren]

Nobody complains that Batman or Superman can easily trounce a few thugs, for instance. Why would my proposed characters be any different or more boring?

Batman! That's who straight 18's most closely resembles. (Captain America, while the peak of human physical perfection, doesn't seem quite as smart as Batman.)

When I first saw your post, I thought of "The Bourne Identity," which I had just rented. Wake up as a Ftr6/Rog6 with very good ability scores and no memory... but Batman is probably closer to all 18's.