[3.5] Ability Scores below 10 (for humans) ANSWERED

[felinoel]

I have never played under a DM that has allowed starting ability scores to be below ten, as that is the common ability score for a human, straight tens. There are of course other humans with abilities below ten but why would they go out adventuring? Usually my DM says reroll anything below a ten, had this one DM say anything below an 11, this DM says that the rules say to just roll and not stop anything below a ten...

So I ended up with a strength score of 6, strength is the only ability my character will not be using... I looked up what creatures have strength scores this low and found that birds have a strength score of six...
I have the same strength... as a bird?!

Am I unable to carry my own self? Can I not walk? Can I at least crawl?

[Nightmarenny]

Strength is... complicated. In truth a gnome with 18 str is probably not as strong as an Orc with 18 str.

[Toliudar]

The 'below 10' thing is definitely a house rule, and I've played characters with one (or more) of the stats below 10.

A human with a strength of 6 can carry 60 pounds, although with a lower movement speed. Get a handy haversack as soon as you can afford it, and you'll be fine.

Oh, and before you go dissing birds' strength:

Spoiler

Show

[Scoot]

Strength is partialy relative to size. (Check those multipliers for carrying capacity, size makes a HUGE difference)

You can do much more than a bird, because your size is medium.

Compared to other members of your species, you are weak, but unless your STR is reduced to zero, you should be able to function normaly.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

You never have to worry about your weight for carrying capacity, for one.

Also, considering the point-buy system, at lower totals, most characters will probably have at least one stat at the default 8.

[Pink]

I have never played under a DM that has allowed starting ability scores to be below ten, as that is the common ability score for a human, straight tens.

Ten is not common, it's the average. And being the average, it needs scores not only above it, but below it as well.

Player characters, while they should be overall above average (has a total positive Modifier), will have areas where they are above average, but sometimes also have areas below average. Afterall, a character isn't just interesting in their strengths, but also in their weaknesses.

[felinoel]

Strength is... complicated. In truth a gnome with 18 str is probably not as strong as an Orc with 18 str.

But... this is not GURPS? This is 3.5 DnD where all base stats like these are based off of humans, that is why humans have no racial modifiers? A gnome with 18 strength would be the same as an orc?

The 'below 10' thing is definitely a house rule, and I've played characters with one (or more) of the stats below 10.

A human with a strength of 6 can carry 60 pounds, although with a lower movement speed. Get a handy haversack as soon as you can afford it, and you'll be fine.

Oh, and before you go dissing birds' strength:

Spoiler

Show

Yes I know it is a house rule, I was just stating that the four previous DMs I have had have ruled out anything below ten but how can a human that has the strength of a hawk (sorry, I will clarify as to the bird spoken of in the book since you referenced that image) be able to life himself? If you put 150 pounds on a bird it will not be able to move? That is about how much I made the weight of my character and I cannot make him weigh as much as a hawk.

Strength is partialy relative to size. (Check those multipliers for carrying capacity, size makes a HUGE difference)

You can do much more than a bird, because your size is medium.

Compared to other members of your species, you are weak, but unless your STR is reduced to zero, you should be able to function normaly.

Are you serious? Where is this in the books? I could have sworn that there were no strength tiers in DnD?

You never have to worry about your weight for carrying capacity, for one.

Also, considering the point-buy system, at lower totals, most characters will probably have at least one stat at the default 8.

Eight I would have tolerated and not bothered to look up, eight is the lowest I can see any human who would actually go out on an adventure

Ten is not common, it's the average. And being the average, it needs scores not only above it, but below it as well.

Player characters, while they should be overall above average (has a total positive Modifier), will have areas where they are above average, but sometimes also have areas below average. Afterall, a character isn't just interesting in their strengths, but also in their weaknesses.

Indeed, see my above response, but six?! That is just way too low?

[Vladislav]

Six is just as much as outside the norm as is 15. And you wouldn't gush over how "incredibly powerful" that level 1 fighter with Str 15 is right? Then you should be equally unamazed at Joe the Commoner with Str 6.

[felinoel]

Six is just as much as outside the norm as is 15. And you wouldn't gush over how "incredibly powerful" that level 1 fighter with Str 15 is right? Then you should be equally unamazed at Joe the Commoner with Str 6.

But Joe the Commoner with a strength of six cannot carry his own body weight, while I can see that as possible, I don't see why Joe the Commoner would go out adventuring

[Ajadea]

Body weight does not count against carrying capacity.

[BossMuro]

Joe the commoner would go out adventureing the same reason Doug the fighter does. Because he wants to, and because he has skills that make him a good adventurer. It doesn't matter how bad he is at arm wrestling when he can throw fireballs at people.

[felinoel]

Body weight does not count against carrying capacity.

Regardless, realistically speaking, if a human were to have the same strength as a hawk, they would not be able to stand? Where is the rules for what happens when a person's ability score is reduced to one or below? I believe I remember the rule for strength stating that they fall under the weight of their own body... is this correct? I may be misremembering...

Joe the commoner would go out adventureing the same reason Doug the fighter does. Because he wants to, and because he has skills that make him a good adventurer. It doesn't matter how bad he is at arm wrestling when he can throw fireballs at people.

This is not a problem with arm wrestling, this is a problem with being unable to move

[Frog Dragon]

But there is no strength score, other than 0 which would be too low for you to move with. Only the weight of gear is an issue. Even normal clothes don't count when worn.

[BossMuro]

Six is a larger number than one, so your argument is invalid. I would, however, agree that a guy with zero strength should not go adventuring, except under extraordinary circumstances.

[felinoel]

But there is no strength score, other than 0 which would be too low for you to move with. Only the weight of gear is an issue. Even normal clothes don't count when worn.

But that doesn't make any sense?

[turkishproverb]

I have never played under a DM that has allowed starting ability scores to be below ten, as that is the common ability score for a human, straight tens. There are of course other humans with abilities below ten but why would they go out adventuring? Usually my DM says reroll anything below a ten, had this one DM say anything below an 11, this DM says that the rules say to just roll and not stop anything below a ten...

I hate DM's like this. They coddle players so much that when a player actually has to use a character with anything resembling a weak point they panic.

So I ended up with a strength score of 6, strength is the only ability my character will not be using... I looked up what creatures have strength scores this low and found that birds have a strength score of six...
I have the same strength... as a bird?!

Am I unable to carry my own self? Can I not walk? Can I at least crawl?

As has been said before, strength is relative to size.

But Joe the Commoner with a strength of six cannot carry his own body weight, while I can see that as possible, I don't see why Joe the Commoner would go out adventuring

Yes, he can carry his own body weight. What he cannot carry is a clone of himself. And frankly, I don't see that as a problem unless he's going all platemail fighter

Regardless, realistically speaking, if a human were to have the same strength as a hawk, they would not be able to stand? Where is the rules for what happens when a person's ability score is reduced to one or below? I believe I remember the rule for strength stating that they fall under the weight of their own body... is this correct? I may be misremembering...

Once again.
1. Size effects strength regardless of stats.
2. Your own weight does not count as encumbrance. I don't know why you seem so desperate to believe that, but it doesn't
3. No, that is not correct. The only piece of writing that might (might) have inspired that was the notices on what happens at 0 strength.

This is not a problem with arm wrestling, this is a problem with being unable to move

No, it is not.

[AslanCross]

Regardless, realistically speaking, if a human were to have the same strength as a hawk, they would not be able to stand? Where is the rules for what happens when a person's ability score is reduced to one or below? I believe I remember the rule for strength stating that they fall under the weight of their own body... is this correct? I may be misremembering...

This is not a problem with arm wrestling, this is a problem with being unable to move

Here you go.
Your strength has to be reduced to 0 for you to collapse.
For sanity's sake, being unable to move due to low strength has been abstracted. "Realism" is not a good thing to always have in RPGs. (Consider HP, for example)

Keep in mind that the average Venerable human has 4 Strength. While they might find many things difficult, they can still definitely walk around.

[Weasel of Doom]

This is not a problem with arm wrestling, this is a problem with being unable to move

But he can move because, as has been said, body weight does not count against encumbrance.

"If you want to determine whether your character’s gear is heavy enough to slow him or her down more than the armor already does, total the weight of all the character’s items, including armor, weapons, and gear. Compare this total to the character’s Strength on Table: Carrying Capacity." [from srd]

Note that it does not mention your character's weight.

I would, however, agree that a guy with zero strength should not go adventuring, except under extraordinary circumstances.

Damn, now I want to play a str 0 psion.

[WarKitty]

Might I suggest this might make more sense if you had some sleep?

[felinoel]

Six is a larger number than one, so your argument is invalid. I would, however, agree that a guy with zero strength should not go adventuring, except under extraordinary circumstances.

My argument was based under the assumption that a person's own weight would be taken into consideration when strength is involved. A kick is a strength based attack, walking means you have to be able to support your own self and since you use your legs makes it a strength check, or so one would think...

I hate DM's like this. They coddle players so much that when a player actually has to use a character with anything resembling a weak point they panic.

No no, I was totally prepared to play a character unable to move, I was going to have my animal companion drag me, I was just surprised that it was actually ruled to be possible...

As has been said before, strength is relative to size.

Yet no one responded to my response about this, I think I said something about how all abilities are based off of the average human being at ten for each?

Once again.
1. Size effects strength regardless of stats.
2. Your own weight does not count as encumbrance. I don't know why you seem so desperate to believe that, but it doesn't

I have yet to mention encumbrance, only that logic would tell me that if a human was as strong as a bird, they would be unable to support their own weight, my issue was the fact that I used logic it seems

3. No, that is not correct. The only piece of writing that might (might) have inspired that was the notices on what happens at 0 strength

But... that was what I said? Granted I said, "One or zero" but the 'or' gives me leeway in that statement?

No, it is not.

Yes actually it is, but the problem is apparently just overthinking about reality

But he can move because, as has been said, body weight does not count against encumbrance.

See above

"If you want to determine whether your character’s gear is heavy enough to slow him or her down more than the armor already does, total the weight of all the character’s items, including armor, weapons, and gear. Compare this total to the character’s Strength on Table: Carrying Capacity." [from srd]

Note that it does not mention your character's weight.

Note that I never mentioned encumbrance

Might I suggest this might make more sense if you had some sleep?

Ha, no this has been an issue on my mind for a while, and as stated by others, this will never make any sense, one just has to roll with it

[tyckspoon]

Yet no one responded to my response about this, I think I said something about how all abilities are based off of the average human being at ten for each?

Your problem is assuming D&D stats make any kind of sense or are based on any kind of rational assumptions. They do not, and they are not. 10 is the average human score because it's roughly halfway between the two endpoints chosen for the scale. Don't be mislead by the seemingly-'realistic' charts for carrying capacity; pretty much anything related to stats outside maybe the 8-12 range only has functional meaning as a strict game construct. And as a game construct, creatures are not required to 'carry' their own body mass.

[Gorgondantess]

But Joe the Commoner with a strength of six cannot carry his own body weight, while I can see that as possible, I don't see why Joe the Commoner would go out adventuring

Joe the Commoner wouldn't. But Joeythimus the Wizard who doesn't need strength because he uses his mind to do far more than a 22 strength water orc will? Hell yes he'll go adventuring. Actually, it would be reasonable for Joeythimus to have 6-8 strength- he lived a sedentary lifestyle.
Myself, I almost always make a character with a score below 10. Never intelligence, though, because I don't like playing stupid characters.
Also: I cannot benchpress my own body weight. Not even close. I do not consider this a problem. In fact, I think I'm pretty strong. A character with strength 15 who weighs over 200 lbs cannot lift his own body weight. Again, not a problem.

[WarKitty]

I have yet to mention encumbrance, only that logic would tell me that if a human was as strong as a bird, they would be unable to support their own weight, my issue was the fact that I used logic it seems

It's an abstraction, yes. And probably one of the easier ones. If you want to bring actual physics into it...a huge monstrous spider shouldn't even be able to breathe, the body structure is wrong. It's best to ignore such things.

[Greenish]

I would, however, agree that a guy with zero strength should not go adventuring, except under extraordinary circumstances.

Damn, now I want to play a str 0 psion.

Occurred to me too.

Hmm, a telepath 5 for Telepathy (and Mindsight!), then Thrallherd to have people carry you around.

Needs either Ring of Sustenance or the power (or the elan racial), since being spoon-fed by your thrall is a bit demeaning, not to mention the rest…

[Edit]: Or a kineticist with Control Body.

[Hadessniper]

Yet no one responded to my response about this, I think I said something about how all abilities are based off of the average human being at ten for each?

From the SRD

Bigger and Smaller Creatures
The figures on Table: Carrying Capacity are for Medium bipedal creatures. A larger bipedal creature can carry more weight depending on its size category, as follows: Large ×2, Huge ×4, Gargantuan ×8, Colossal ×16. A smaller creature can carry less weight depending on its size category, as follows: Small ×¾, Tiny ×½, Diminutive ×¼, Fine ×1/8.

Quadrupeds can carry heavier loads than characters can. Instead of the multipliers given above, multiply the value corresponding to the creature’s Strength score from Table: Carrying Capacity by the appropriate modifier, as follows: Fine ×¼, Diminutive ×½, Tiny ×¾, Small ×1, Medium ×1½, Large ×3, Huge ×6, Gargantuan ×12, Colossal ×24.

[AslanCross]

Your problem is assuming D&D stats make any kind of sense or are based on any kind of rational assumptions. They do not, and they are not. 10 is the average human score because it's roughly halfway between the two endpoints chosen for the scale. Don't be mislead by the seemingly-'realistic' charts for carrying capacity; pretty much anything related to stats outside maybe the 8-12 range only has functional meaning as a strict game construct. And as a game construct, creatures are not required to 'carry' their own body mass.

Truth.

In fact, Joe the Commoner with 10 Strength can lift 200 lbs off the ground and still move with it, albeit slowly staggering. I'm not sure how realistic that is, but I definitely couldn't do that.

[felinoel]

Your problem is assuming D&D stats make any kind of sense or are based on any kind of rational assumptions. They do not, and they are not. 10 is the average human score because it's roughly halfway between the two endpoints chosen for the scale. Don't be mislead by the seemingly-'realistic' charts for carrying capacity; pretty much anything related to stats outside maybe the 8-12 range only has functional meaning as a strict game construct. And as a game construct, creatures are not required to 'carry' their own body mass.

Already noted, thank you for your information

Joe the Commoner wouldn't. But Joeythimus the Wizard who doesn't need strength because he uses his mind to do far more than a 22 strength water orc will? Hell yes he'll go adventuring. Actually, it would be reasonable for Joeythimus to have 6-8 strength- he lived a sedentary lifestyle.
Myself, I almost always make a character with a score below 10. Never intelligence, though, because I don't like playing stupid characters.
Also: I cannot benchpress my own body weight. Not even close. I do not consider this a problem. In fact, I think I'm pretty strong. A character with strength 15 who weighs over 200 lbs cannot lift his own body weight. Again, not a problem.

I built him as a Druid to have an animal companion drag him so he could move

It's an abstraction, yes. And probably one of the easier ones. If you want to bring actual physics into it...a huge monstrous spider shouldn't even be able to breathe, the body structure is wrong. It's best to ignore such things.

What? I always figured that monstrous spiders had different internal anatomy then regular spiders?

[WarKitty]

What? I always figured that monstrous spiders had different internal anatomy then regular spiders?

From what I understand, exoskeletons on terrestrial creatures past a certain size simply aren't physically possible. You could try "it's magic" or just handwave it. But with current physics, the amount of weight and thickness required to support the creature increases at a faster weight than the available space for muscle.

[Hadessniper]

From the SRD

Bigger and Smaller Creatures
The figures on Table: Carrying Capacity are for Medium bipedal creatures. A larger bipedal creature can carry more weight depending on its size category, as follows: Large ×2, Huge ×4, Gargantuan ×8, Colossal ×16. A smaller creature can carry less weight depending on its size category, as follows: Small ×¾, Tiny ×½, Diminutive ×¼, Fine ×1/8.

Quadrupeds can carry heavier loads than characters can. Instead of the multipliers given above, multiply the value corresponding to the creature’s Strength score from Table: Carrying Capacity by the appropriate modifier, as follows: Fine ×¼, Diminutive ×½, Tiny ×¾, Small ×1, Medium ×1½, Large ×3, Huge ×6, Gargantuan ×12, Colossal ×24.

Quickly to add to this and to respond to your assertion that a bird has a strength of 6. A raven is tiny and has a strength of 1 meaning it's heavy load according to RAW is 5 pounds, but they are unable to fly past a light load which would be 1.5 lbs.

[felinoel]

From the SRD

Bigger and Smaller Creatures
The figures on Table: Carrying Capacity are for Medium bipedal creatures. A larger bipedal creature can carry more weight depending on its size category, as follows: Large ×2, Huge ×4, Gargantuan ×8, Colossal ×16. A smaller creature can carry less weight depending on its size category, as follows: Small ×¾, Tiny ×½, Diminutive ×¼, Fine ×1/8.

Quadrupeds can carry heavier loads than characters can. Instead of the multipliers given above, multiply the value corresponding to the creature’s Strength score from Table: Carrying Capacity by the appropriate modifier, as follows: Fine ×¼, Diminutive ×½, Tiny ×¾, Small ×1, Medium ×1½, Large ×3, Huge ×6, Gargantuan ×12, Colossal ×24.

I wasn't speaking of encumbrance

Truth.

In fact, Joe the Commoner with 10 Strength can lift 200 lbs off the ground and still move with it, albeit slowly staggering. I'm not sure how realistic that is, but I definitely couldn't do that.

Have you checked your strength score? A couple years back someone showed me a site for converting yourself into a character sheet... sadly it was for GURPS though...

From what I understand, exoskeletons on terrestrial creatures past a certain size simply aren't physically possible. You could try "it's magic" or just handwave it. But with current physics, the amount of weight and thickness required to support the creature increases at a faster weight than the available space for muscle.

I also assumed it was just magic, because how else did the spider get that big?

Quickly to add to this and to respond to your assertion that a bird has a strength of 6. A raven is tiny and has a strength of 1 meaning it's heavy load according to RAW is 5 pounds, but they are unable to fly past a light load which would be 1.5 lbs.

It is not my assertion but the assertion of the players handbook in the area where it explains ability scores near the front