Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tales and Chronicles" data-source="post: 8066053" data-attributes="member: 6871653">Because, as CR 12, following XGtE encouter builder, the warlord would be a match for 2 level 20 PCs. So having a level 4-to-8 having the same STR score as a NPC supposedly able to stand its ground easily against a PC of max level feels a little strange. Having 20 STR makes you at more or less the same STR level as a Hill giant, young dragons, orcs chosen by their god or a giant boar and stronger than a horse, an ogre, vampire or minotaurs.I get that ability scores are an abstraction, but having a fighter who just go their subclass, that are barely out of the training-wheel level be able to rivals the STR of aboves creatures does feels weird to me.Ok, so up-and-coming detective Sherlock Holmes is able to start his career with 17 INT. And then what? Is intellectual powers of deduction reach its peak within a few weeks on the job at level 4-to-8? Once he gets to be world famous (say level 12+), his detective brain would not have improved in any way since his few first assignments?&nbsp;To me, that's a boring narrative. I can also presume this is one reason people tend to stop playing after mid-level: they stunt their character progression by capping all the cool stuff as soon as possible, then, once the character sheet is full, they dont know where to take the character. I say, if the game stopped assuming super-heroic stats at semi-high level, it would be possible to have meaningful high level games. But since 5e assumes you can cap your stats and gain most of your cool stuff by level 10 or so, the rest of the character rules feel like padding or afterthoughts. But we can agree to disagree; its only a matter of preference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tales and Chronicles, post: 8066053, member: 6871653"] Because, as CR 12, following XGtE encouter builder, the warlord would be a match for 2 level 20 PCs. So having a level 4-to-8 having the same STR score as a NPC supposedly able to stand its ground easily against a PC of max level feels a little strange. Having 20 STR makes you at more or less the same STR level as a Hill giant, young dragons, orcs chosen by their god or a giant boar and stronger than a horse, an ogre, vampire or minotaurs. I get that ability scores are an abstraction, but having a fighter who just go their subclass, that are barely out of the training-wheel level be able to rivals the STR of aboves creatures does feels weird to me. Ok, so up-and-coming detective Sherlock Holmes is able to start his career with 17 INT. And then what? Is intellectual powers of deduction reach its peak within a few weeks on the job at level 4-to-8? Once he gets to be world famous (say level 12+), his detective brain would not have improved in any way since his few first assignments? To me, that's a boring narrative. I can also presume this is one reason people tend to stop playing after mid-level: they stunt their character progression by capping all the cool stuff as soon as possible, then, once the character sheet is full, they dont know where to take the character. I say, if the game stopped assuming super-heroic stats at semi-high level, it would be possible to have meaningful high level games. But since 5e assumes you can cap your stats and gain most of your cool stuff by level 10 or so, the rest of the character rules feel like padding or afterthoughts. But we can agree to disagree; its only a matter of preference. [/QUOTE]

Verification