PDA

View Full Version : Max stats (3.5 mostly)



Tormsskull
2008-12-29, 06:52 PM
Does anyone have any experience with limiting stats to a specified maximum? Perhaps allowing certain races to have higher maxes than others based on their description.

I seem to remember 2nd edition had stats max out at 25 IIRC. This would be with magical gear and all.

I think this would make race matter even more, especially at the higher levels. Also, it could cut down on insanely high spell DCs based on a character reading tomes and wearing tons of stat boosting gear.

Anyone tried this?

Eldariel
2008-12-29, 06:58 PM
I personally dislike the idea of making monsters automatically better at X than even the best PCs. One limit I do like though is limiting the bonuses, which is very doable. Just make basically everything that boosts a stat give the same type of bonuses (save for some minor bonuses from Enlarges or so) and you effectively mean that the only way to exceed a certain point is by gaining levels and taking level-up scores. This is actually already the case save for few exceptions: Warhulk (and overall, Str), Shapechanging magic, Owl's Insight and few other mistakes. Other than that, outside your racial points, opening stats and level-ups, you can get +11 to a stat; a +6 stat enhancer and a +5 book.

But yea, the thing you're referring to was actually because of AD&D way the stats worked; the growth was exponential (as opposed to the linear system of 3.5). 3.5 specifically sought to eliminate that by making the system linear and thus removing the need for a cap other than what's achievable; hard cap made the system very limited for monsters beyond certain category (I recall 25 Str was Frost Giant Strength; what about the Tarrasque, which is obviously far stronger than a Frost Giant?). So what you suggest pretty much already exists in 3.5 and only needs some enforcing (again, mostly Polymorph and Epic Spellcasting along with some typos like Owl's Insight). The open-endedness of the system isn't really intended for PCs as much as for making monster creation easier and more natural.


And I actually do play like that (although I haven't gotten around balancing the game with stat boosters restricted/banned and books limited to lower bonuses) - much of the brokenness in the system comes from stats simply being pumpable too high. Fixing the stacking stat boosters fixes much of the system too.

bosssmiley
2008-12-29, 07:56 PM
I've just been looking at this recently (in connection with my skill fix efforts - who could have known that merely trying to make the Craft skill acceptable to the ghost of Adam Smith would have such broad systemic implications :smalleek: ).

It turns out there's already a semi-formal cap on stat boosts pre-Epic. This clocks in at +16 over racial base (+5 inherent, +5 level bumps, +6 stat adder item). Even when you get into epic levels stats don't normally hare off into the stratosphere in the way skill, combat or save bonuses do.*

* These comments do not take into account cheesemongering splatbook exploitation or the absurdly broken joke that is Epic Magic .

As an aside, it turns out that the DCs given in Epic are totally predicated on your character having +5 across the board to stats from cheap wishes, +6-12 to your major stats for item enhancements, a light scattering of level bumps, and so forth.

So, is there a need for hard caps on stats in 3E? I'd say 'no'. It's already quite a drain on available resource (WBL, stat boosts, LA, etc.) to get the majority of your stats into the 20s before Epic. Even the wish economy has its limits.

UpperKrust once talked about innate upper limits in his Epic re-write. In homage to AD&D he suggested that +15 over racial base should be the maximum a character could ever add to a stat without magic. Sober good sense...coming from the man who invented the Neutronium Golem. :smallconfused:


But yea, the thing you're referring to was actually because of AD&D way the stats worked; the growth was exponential (as opposed to the linear system of 3.5). 3.5 specifically sought to eliminate that by making the system linear and thus removing the need for a cap other than what's achievable; hard cap made the system very limited for monsters beyond certain category (I recall 25 Str was Frost Giant Strength; what about the Tarrasque, which is obviously far stronger than a Frost Giant?).

3E Strength follows a weird mix of linear and exponential growth pattern: +10 Str quadruples lift/carry capacity, but increases TH and damage by a linear +5. This disconnect is where the potential for Hurler abuse arises.

memo: break the fingers of whoever drew up the goofy improvised weapon damage by weight table in CWar. :smallannoyed:

1-2E: Frost Giant - 22 Str (+4 th, +9 damage IIRC)
The hard cap was Titan - 25 (+7 th, +14 damage)

Uber-beasts like the Tarrasque, the kaiju (OA), and monsters of myth (D&DG/L&L) got their damage handwaved as huge amounts of damage - usually multiple d10s-worth - no Str bonus applicable.

Eldariel
2008-12-29, 08:02 PM
So, is there a need for hard caps on stats in 3E? I'd say 'no'. It's already quite a drain on available resource (WBL, stat boosts, LA, etc.) to get the majority of your stats into the upper 20s before pre-Epic.

This is provided that shapeshifting Magic isn't allowed. That, among others, throws the whole stat limit part entirely out of the window.


3E Strength follows a weird mix of linear and exponential growth pattern: +10 Str quadruples lift/carry capacity, but increases TH and damage by a linear +5. This disconnect is where the potential for Hurler abuse arises.

memo: break the fingers of whoever drew up the goofy improvised weapon damage by weight table in CWar. :smallannoyed:

More accurately, Str follows a linear pattern. It's just the carrying capacity that follows an exponential pattern (because of the leg and size modifiers and all that; it was never really constructed carefully since the game makers didn't realize that they were going to make the maximum max. mechanically relevant).


1-2E: Frost Giant - 22 Str (+4 th, +9 damage IIRC)
The hard cap was Titan - 25 (+7 th, +14 damage)

Uber-beasts like the Tarrasque, the kaiju (OA), and monsters of myth (D&DG/L&L) got their damage handwaved as huge amounts of damage - usually multiple d10s-worth - no Str bonus applicable.

Ah, my bad on the Frost Giant/Titan part - it's just that I recall the Belt that set your Str to 25 was called Belt of Frost Giant Strength in one of the BGs. And yea, I know how they were all counted, my point was just that the basic system didn't support them which is what they sought to change in 3.5. They also removed the random bonuses that started occuring after certain amount in stat (like regeneration) that existed in AD&D.

Mushroom Ninja
2008-12-29, 08:16 PM
Does anyone have any experience with limiting stats to a specified maximum? Perhaps allowing certain races to have higher maxes than others based on their description.

I seem to remember 2nd edition had stats max out at 25 IIRC. This would be with magical gear and all.

I think this would make race matter even more, especially at the higher levels. Also, it could cut down on insanely high spell DCs based on a character reading tomes and wearing tons of stat boosting gear.

Anyone tried this?

In 3.X, it would make druids even more "teh uber". If Barbarians can't boost their STR skyhigh, druids would have a monopoly on huge strengths.

Person_Man
2008-12-29, 09:43 PM
In my games, you get 80 total stat points, prior to racial adjustments. You may allocate these stat points however you like, to a minimum of 3 (after racial adjustments) and maximum of 18 (prior to racial adjustments). For example, a Dwarf must put at least 5 points into Cha, and could max out Con to 18, and end up with stats of:

Str 18
Dex 16
Con 18+2 = 20
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 5-2 = 3

Total = 80

You are warned that the DM enjoys using ability damage and penalties. He also thoroughly enjoys Skill checks, and will make every player make these checks (especially social Skills, Spot, Listen, and random Knowledge tests) throughout the campaign. When roleplaying, you must make a good faith attempt to roleplay your stats. Thus, Cha 3 means that you are barely capable of expressing yourself.

I've used this method on and off for a long time, and its been my experience that players tend to end up with stats around 18, 18, 10, 10, 8, 16, with the 20 and 18 in their primary stats. If the player has a desire to play a non-caster, non-ToB, MAD build, higher stats can be negotiated. I do my best to stick generally to standard wealth by level, and if the players want to buy stat boosting items with their treasure, so be it.

The key is that all characters should be created at the same time, at the same table, and that the characters should be roughly balanced in power compared to each other. The stats themselves are not really important. For example, a Wizard with optimized spell choices and all 14 stats can still easily own an unoptimized Monk with all 20 stats. What's important is that no one player is much more powerful then the the other players, and thus dominates combat.

Tormsskull
2008-12-30, 09:05 AM
It turns out there's already a semi-formal cap on stat boosts pre-Epic. This clocks in at +16 over racial base (+5 inherent, +5 level bumps, +6 stat adder item). Even when you get into epic levels stats don't normally hare off into the stratosphere in the way skill, combat or save bonuses do.*


I've never played Epic levels, and I don't plan on it TBH. I think +16 over racial base seems incredibly high. I mean, we describe someone with a 16 Intelligence as very smart, 18 Intelligence is a genius. What the heck is a 34 Intelligence?

I think when the numbers get too high they lose their impact and instead simply become modifiers. I know their main purpose is to be a modifier, but it also serves as a benchmark. We know that a human with an 18 strength is one of the strongest humans around, sans magic.

With just leveling up alone, a character that starts with an 18 Strength can get to 23 Strength by level 20.

I think it might be cool to have racial maximums based on each race, as that would wort of be another advantage/disadvantage to consider when picking your race. And it would definitely reign in the "I have a 34 Intelligence but really I'm just like everyone else" problem.



In 3.X, it would make druids even more "teh uber". If Barbarians can't boost their STR skyhigh, druids would have a monopoly on huge strengths.


Well, wildshape has its own problems. How a racial maximum would interact with wildshape would be interesting. I mean, if a creature had a racial maximum intelligence score of 3, and a druid wildshaped into that race, their Intelligence would drop to 3. That could bring a whole slew of problems to the druid.


All in all, I think it is worth looking into.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-30, 10:26 AM
I've never played Epic levels, and I don't plan on it TBH. I think +16 over racial base seems incredibly high. I mean, we describe someone with a 16 Intelligence as very smart, 18 Intelligence is a genius. What the heck is a 34 Intelligence?

I think when the numbers get too high they lose their impact and instead simply become modifiers. I know their main purpose is to be a modifier, but it also serves as a benchmark. We know that a human with an 18 strength is one of the strongest humans around, sans magic.

With just leveling up alone, a character that starts with an 18 Strength can get to 23 Strength by level 20.

I think it might be cool to have racial maximums based on each race, as that would wort of be another advantage/disadvantage to consider when picking your race. And it would definitely reign in the "I have a 34 Intelligence but really I'm just like everyone else" problem.

There already is a racial maximum. It's called 34 for humans and 36 for elves (not counting age penalties). And those are the stats the game is designed for.

So if you limit them to 24 Int or something, then you absolutely need to subtract 10 from every stat of every CR 20 monster.

Tequila Sunrise
2008-12-30, 10:41 AM
And it would definitely reign in the "I have a 34 Intelligence but really I'm just like everyone else" problem.

I don't think it's a problem. No matter how smart a PC is, he can never know everything, so he's still going to make mistakes just like everyone else. Not quite as often, but he will.

Also consider this: high ability scores sound more extreme than they really are because ability scores are artificially inflated beyond their actual value. 34 sounds like a big number, but it's really just 12 bonuses more than the average human. Imagine an average guy playing chess with an Int 34 guy; we'll resolve the game with an opposed Int check. Yes, the smart guy is 60% more likely to win but it wouldn't take a miracle for him to roll low enough for the average guy to win. Again, you can't know everything no matter how smart you are.

TS