Anyone else out there bothered by the 20 stat cap?

Anyone else out there bothered by the 20 stat cap for character? It breaks the incentive to have high ability scores if you know you are going to cap and waste points. This is particularly true for strength. Why put your highest stat in strength when you know you are just going to cap at 20. And furthermore if you have a reasonable expectation to get one of the "Belts of Giant Strenth". A character with a 20 strength would gain no advantage from the hill giant version and minimal advantage from the others. This is the worst part of first edition please don't go there. It is so painful to have pcs decide to give the giant strength belt to the wimpy wizard because he gains the most from it!! This is just wrong. Please deal in bonuses not flat stats. A strong character finding a belt of giant strength should a pivitol point in a fighter or barbarian's career not "this sucks I already have 20 so this thing is no good for me".

Here is an alternative suggestion:
Instead of a flat stat give a die bonus (Similar to a skill die. And with the added benefit of no attack bonus that would seem to throw off the currnt excellent AC balancing system.)

Belt of Hill giant Strength (+1d4 damage on strength based damage and str skills)
Belt of Stone/frost giant Strength (+1d6 damage on strength based damage and str skills)
Belt of Fire giant Strength (+1d8 damage on strength based damage and str skills)
Belt of Cloud giant Strength (+1d10 damage on strength based damage and str skills)
Belt of Storm giant Strength (+1d12 damage on strength based damage and str skills)

Furthermore this could be expanded for other stats; dex being the most applicable.

Gloves of Minor Dexterity (+1d4 damage on dex based damage and dex skills)
Gloves of Moderate Dexterity (+1d6 damage on dex based damage and dex skills)
Gloves of Major Dexterity (+1d8 damage on dex based damage and dex skills)
Gloves of Superior Dexterity (+1d10 damage on dex based damage and dex skills)
Gloves of Supreme Dexterity (+1d12 damage on dex based damage and dex skills)

In my case I will be house ruling this because I loathe the flat stat bonus currently in the rules. Anyone have any opinions on this except me?
The problem is not the 20 cap, the problem is that ability scores are too easy to come by.

In second edition, players with 19 in a stat was usually something quite significant.


If they removed the stat bonus from class and nerf the +2 stat bonus every four levels then a 20 cap would be reasonable.


It doesn't make sense to make the cap 20 when the average player will get a 20 in a stat by the time they reach 8th level.


So in my opinion, they should make the cap higher or keep the cap but reduce the ability to increase it.
I've never had any problem with stat caps.

That said, I do like your bonus die idea.
I think they should simply get rid of the belts/gloves of whatever. I don't like having "mandatory" magic items in the game.

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/23.jpg)

In 1e and 2e, there was no expectation that any of my characters stats would rise, or would ever break 18 (or 19 for certqain races). On the rare occasions that a character did break 20, they were considered an awesome exception. There was one wizard who ended up with a 22 Int, through many years and levels of adventure and misadventure. We all considered her intelligence to be godlike. She could see through minor illusions, which saved the party's bacon on a few occasions. I prefer to play without the expectation of ever increasing stats, and I prefer a game that doesn't rely on that kind of build.

However, I do like your suggestions for the belt of giant strength. No to hit bonus, just a damage bonus and str check bonus. 
I'm bothered by the 20 cap. It should be 18.
The incentive removal is the entire purpose of the cap, and the reason that the cap is good.
I'm fine with the cap.

I think magic items that set abilities could grant a bonus (+1d4 to checks if you have Strength 20) who hit the cap. pehaps to familiarity to having that high of a ability.

If not, at least make + gear for ALL 6 ability scores.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Um, doesn't a Belt of Giant Strength increase your score to the one granted by the belt? Thats what my Magic Items pdf says on page 24. So a Belt of Hill Giant Strength increases your strength score to 21. The only way you would not get a benefit is if you already had a score of 21, which is impossible with the current cap.
Um, doesn't a Belt of Giant Strength increase your score to the one granted by the belt? Thats what my Magic Items pdf says on page 24. So a Belt of Hill Giant Strength increases your strength score to 21. The only way you would not get a benefit is if you already had a score of 21, which is impossible with the current cap.



True but a score of 21 is essentially the same as a score of 20 because both have the same modifier (+5).  If Next is going to be built around bounded accuracy (a design decision I disagree with btw), then the cap is necessary.  However, IMHO, the isistance on BA without apparently realizing all the implications of it, have created more problems for Next (as of right now) than it's really solved.

-Polaris
Um, doesn't a Belt of Giant Strength increase your score to the one granted by the belt? Thats what my Magic Items pdf says on page 24. So a Belt of Hill Giant Strength increases your strength score to 21. The only way you would not get a benefit is if you already had a score of 21, which is impossible with the current cap.



True but a score of 21 is essentially the same as a score of 20 because both have the same modifier (+5).  If Next is going to be built around bounded accuracy (a design decision I disagree with btw), then the cap is necessary.  However, IMHO, the isistance on BA without apparently realizing all the implications of it, have created more problems for Next (as of right now) than it's really solved.

-Polaris



I do agree. The patch is worse than the problem... 

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/23.jpg)

Yes, the cap is bad, the mechanics for the belt is bad.
The belts should have the cap, but give a bonus to it, so +X cap Y, e.g. Hill Giant +2 cap 21.
Players shouldn't have a cap, but they should have a harder time getting as high as they are, right now, everyone caps 20 early.
They need to bite the bullet and put in stacking rules.  Right now Ioun Stone + Belt is unspecified.

@mikemearls don't quite understand the difference

I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down. - Eric Cartman

Enough chitchat!  Time is candy! - Pinky Pie

Yes, the cap is bad, the mechanics for the belt is bad.
The belts should have the cap, but give a bonus to it, so +X cap Y, e.g. Hill Giant +2 cap 21.
Players shouldn't have a cap, but they should have a harder time getting as high as they are, right now, everyone caps 20 early.
They need to bite the bullet and put in stacking rules.  Right now Ioun Stone + Belt is unspecified.



pretty well specified. the belt increases your strength to the exact number listed, the ioun stone increases your strength by 1. meaning they don't stack, the ioun stone just reduces the bonus of the belt if your natural strength is 20 and you have an ioun stone and a hill giant's belt there is no bonus from the belt as your strength is already 21 without the belt, and if you have a fire giant belt it increases your strength to 25 so +4 from the 21 your strength would be at without the belt.
pretty well specified. the belt increases your strength to the exact number listed, the ioun stone increases your strength by 1. meaning they don't stack



  You'll have to point me to the rule that you can't get two benefits at once.  It will have a pretty big impact on the prayer spell's usefulness if there is one.  If you put the belt on, it increases your strength, if you then equip the stone, it will further increase your strength.

@mikemearls don't quite understand the difference

I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down. - Eric Cartman

Enough chitchat!  Time is candy! - Pinky Pie

pretty well specified. the belt increases your strength to the exact number listed, the ioun stone increases your strength by 1. meaning they don't stack



  You'll have to point me to the rule that you can't get two benefits at once.  It will have a pretty big impact on the prayer spell's usefulness if there is one.  If you put the belt on, it increases your strength, if you then equip the stone, it will further increase your strength.





nope because of the functionality of the belt it will only ever increase your strength to the specified number so if you get a +1 bonus to strength the belts bonus drops because it will only ever increase your strength to the specified number...order doesn't matter.  As soon as you put the stone on the belt goes okay I set your strength to 4 over that number.  I mean if you have 6 of those ioun stones swirling about you and you put on a fire giant belt you get no bonus because your strength is already at 26 and the fire giant' belt only increases your strength to the specified number.  


Belt of Giant Strength
This thick, wide leather belt is decorated with
studs made of a material that varies depending
on the type of belt. For example, a belt of fire
giant strength might have black iron studs,
while a belt of storm giant strength might have
studs made of coral and mother-of-pearl.
Upon cinching this belt around the waist, the
wearer feels no special effect. But his or her
strength is so greatly increased that the wearer
might accidentally pull a few doors off their
hinges or crush a drinking cup while
attempting to pick it up.
Property:Wearing a belt of giant strength
grants you incredible strength. When one is
found, the DM either rolls percentile dice to
determine the belt’s type or selects the desired
type from the options available.
d% Type Strength
01–50 Hill giant 21
51–70 Stone/frost giant 23
71–85 Fire giant 25
86–95 Cloud giant 27
96–00 Storm giant 29
Your Strength score increases to that granted
by the belt. If your Strength is already equal to
the belt’s score or higher, this item does not
benefit you.
Although they look different, the belt of stone
giant strength and the belt of frost giant
strength are functionally identical.
Rarity: Rare (belt of hill giant strength), very
rare (belt of stone giant strength or belt of frost
giant strength), legendary (belt of fire giant
strength or belt of cloud giant strength), or
artifact (belt of storm giant strength).



The bolded section is the important part here.

though you can stack ioun stones to your heart's content. 
However, that wording can be interpreted 2 different ways.  Yes, the belt increases your Str to 24, and if your Str is already over that, no affect.  However, let's say I have 18 Str, then I put on the belt.  According to the belts rules, it raises my Str to 24.  My Str is now 24.  I put on an item that firther increases my Str, by say +1, The belt put me at 24, not that bonus puts me at 25.  My Str was not already 24 or higher than 24 when I put the belt on, so it's affect goes, then the next items affect happens, on top of the 24.  It does not say they do not stack, it just say if your Str was higher or lower it becomes this.  Now, if they put the word natural into the belts description, this question would go away and you would know it stacks.  If they put the word modified Str in there, you would know it would do nothing, but as it sits, it could be interpreted either way really.
...

Bonus die!

I'd rather have a bonus die than an ability score bonus.

12-13: d4
14-15: d6
16-17: d8
18-19: d10
20: d12

Course I would probably not have that apply to accuracy. Just ability checks & saves.

Gotta think about this.
However, that wording can be interpreted 2 different ways.  Yes, the belt increases your Str to 24, and if your Str is already over that, no affect.  However, let's say I have 18 Str, then I put on the belt.  According to the belts rules, it raises my Str to 24.  My Str is now 24.  I put on an item that firther increases my Str, by say +1, The belt put me at 24, not that bonus puts me at 25.  My Str was not already 24 or higher than 24 when I put the belt on, so it's affect goes, then the next items affect happens, on top of the 24.  It does not say they do not stack, it just say if your Str was higher or lower it becomes this.  Now, if they put the word natural into the belts description, this question would go away and you would know it stacks.  If they put the word modified Str in there, you would know it would do nothing, but as it sits, it could be interpreted either way really.




that's a flawed interptretation of what's happening there.

The belt cannot increase your stats past a specific number meaning any bonus it grants is diminished as soon as you start working more towards a higher strength.  Lets say your natural strength is a 16 and you are wearing a belt of fire giant's strength.  Your strength is now 25.  When you level and put a point into strength the belt would still only increase your strength to 25 even though your strength has increased after you put the belt on and while you had the belt on.  Same thing for the ioun stone.  The belt cannot increase your strength past its specified number hence if its bonus would contribute to a strength over that number the bonus of the belt is instantly reduced with no mind towards order of putting stuff on.
... Bonus die! I'd rather have a bonus die than an ability score bonus. 12-13: d4 14-15: d6 16-17: d8 18-19: d10 20: d12 Course I would probably not have that apply to accuracy. Just ability checks & saves. Gotta think about this.




This could be an interesting system to play around with...I can already tell you I'd have fun playing with it, but the math behind it would be fracking crazy especially for attack and damage stuff, but I do think it would be tons of fun to play around with.
I love the stat cap. I really disliked, in 4e especially, having to min/max stats or be uselss. I like to be able to spread my points around which the stat cap will allow.

Someone can go for an 18 or 20 right away, but in a few levels my 16 will be at the cap too and I won't be completly gimped like before. 
The belt cannot increase your stats past a specific number meaning any bonus it grants is diminished as soon as you start working more towards a higher strength.



  That is your assumption, but it in no way says that, it simply says when you put it on it will increase you strength to a number.  It says nothing about what happens if your strength score changes after you put it on.

  You're assuming the strength granted by the ioun stone wouldn't sit on top of the belt's.  There is no indication that the +1 gets applied before the belt and not after.  As a giant can use an ioun stone, I don't see why there is a problem thinking someone with a belt that gives them a giant's stength can't also.

  As I said, they need stacking rules, not just for this but for the numerous bonuses in the game.

@mikemearls don't quite understand the difference

I don't make the rules, I just think them up and write them down. - Eric Cartman

Enough chitchat!  Time is candy! - Pinky Pie

I dislike the cap...   its an obvious mechanical limit that has no in-world reason.

If the point is to prevent stat min/maxing, just make stats more balanced in importance and remove the "single superstat for both attack roll and damage roll"-system as it is the root of the problem (all problems..).
mostly that players can't play below average statts
which wipes out a lot of concepts
The cap is great and I think 20 is just fine, 18 would also be almost as good.

It frees you from having to slavishly raise your primary stat and allows you to focus more on other stats

I dislike the cap...   its an obvious mechanical limit that has no in-world reason.

It has a very easy in-world reason: It's simply the pinnacle of what a humanoid creature can achieve.
The belt cannot increase your stats past a specific number meaning any bonus it grants is diminished as soon as you start working more towards a higher strength.



  That is your assumption, but it in no way says that, it simply says when you put it on it will increase you strength to a number.  It says nothing about what happens if your strength score changes after you put it on.

  You're assuming the strength granted by the ioun stone wouldn't sit on top of the belt's.  There is no indication that the +1 gets applied before the belt and not after.  As a giant can use an ioun stone, I don't see why there is a problem thinking someone with a belt that gives them a giant's stength can't also.

  As I said, they need stacking rules, not just for this but for the numerous bonuses in the game.




there is no order of operations for the effects.  Putting the belt on first or second does not matter.  The effect of the belt, the constantly occurring magical effect of the belt is a Boolean operator: if strength >= x then no effect, if strength < x then set strength to x.  essentially any time something affects your strength score the Boolean is rechecked because that is the actual magical effect of the belt.


In essence the magical effect isn't raise str to x or +y to str.  The magical effect is: If str is less than x then raise str to x else no effect.

(ALSO: HOLY **** One site are you serious right now that if I put in an if statement you just straight bork yourself?) 
However, that wording can be interpreted 2 different ways.  Yes, the belt increases your Str to 24, and if your Str is already over that, no affect.  However, let's say I have 18 Str, then I put on the belt.  According to the belts rules, it raises my Str to 24.  My Str is now 24.  I put on an item that firther increases my Str, by say +1, The belt put me at 24, not that bonus puts me at 25.  My Str was not already 24 or higher than 24 when I put the belt on, so it's affect goes, then the next items affect happens, on top of the 24.  It does not say they do not stack, it just say if your Str was higher or lower it becomes this.  Now, if they put the word natural into the belts description, this question would go away and you would know it stacks.  If they put the word modified Str in there, you would know it would do nothing, but as it sits, it could be interpreted either way really.




that's a flawed interptretation of what's happening there.

The belt cannot increase your stats past a specific number meaning any bonus it grants is diminished as soon as you start working more towards a higher strength.  Lets say your natural strength is a 16 and you are wearing a belt of fire giant's strength.  Your strength is now 25.  When you level and put a point into strength the belt would still only increase your strength to 25 even though your strength has increased after you put the belt on and while you had the belt on.  Same thing for the ioun stone.  The belt cannot increase your strength past its specified number hence if its bonus would contribute to a strength over that number the bonus of the belt is instantly reduced with no mind towards order of putting stuff on.



Though when you level and add, that is your natural stat score, not your modified stat score.  Again, the belt does not say outright if it affects natural or modified score.  In such a case, it could be interpreted either way, the Belt make your Natural Str 24 or the belt makes your Modified Str 24.  It is unclear and open to interpretation.

I agree, I like your interoretation.  If you have the belt on, your score is 24, reguardless of any other bonuses.  That is the way I would rule at as well.  However, I can see how a rules-lawyer or min/maxer might -want- to see it the way I described.  Therefore, I agree that the rules need to be clarified slightly, just to prevent these types of arguments.

I like having a hard cap on Abilty scores, and Bounded Accuracy in general.  I would prefer slighty different math though:

1d20 + (Ability Score - 10) + Class/Feat/etc based bonuses vs Ability Score + class bonuses, with Ability Score bonuses capped at 18 and Class/Feat/etc based bonuses capped at +8 (for PCs and mundane creatures - Legendary creatures can have higher scores/bonuses). 

Thus a Trip attempt from my Fighter 1 (who for simplicity sake, does not yet have a class based bonus for Trips) with 15 Strength against an Orc with 13 Strength would be 1d20 + 5 vs 13. 

This makes odd Ability scores meaningful.  It makes the math simple and easily understood.  And it creates a Bounded Accuracy with a good balance between the importance of the randomness, the Ability Score, and your Class/Feat/etc abilities. 
I dislike the cap...   its an obvious mechanical limit that has no in-world reason.



Uh, it has a very clear in-world reason.

It is the max humanoids can get without magical assistence. It is the peak that their bodies are capable of.

And the bonuses of race simply show a natuaral propensity in their people, but the core races at least have the same maximum, which I think is awsome. If I want to be a burly Elf, I won't ever be effed over, never being able to match say...a Dwarf.

So, it makes sense, and only produces good.

“Pride, envy, avarice - these are the sparks have set on fire the hearts of all men.” ― Dante Alighieri, Inferno

"Feelins'? Look mate, you know who has a lot of feelings? Blokes what bludgeon their wives to death with a golf trophy! Professionals have standards. Be polite. Be efficient. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet." ―Sniper

"there is no order of operations for the effects" - right, that's the whole point of the discussion, is that there needs to be.  Right now, the order of operations is undefined, and so the ability score result of


(Str + x) + Belt


is different than


(Str + Belt) + x.


There's nothing that says the belt over-rides the ioun stone, but there's nothing that says it doesn't, either.  The point is that it can be interpreted multiple ways, and needs to be clarified.  I acknowledge the semantics of "belt trumps ioun stone", but at the same time, I see nothing to prevent "ioun stone augments belt".

But back to the OC, I'm fine with a 20 limit, and saying "this is the pinnacle of what a humanoid is physically capable of."  Magic items may take you over that limit, and that's why they're magical.  After all, what's the point of a Belt of Giant Strength if I can raid a few dungeons for XP and be as strong as a giant myself?  That makes no sense.


"there is no order of operations for the effects" - right, that's the whole point of the discussion, is that there needs to be.  Right now, the order of operations is undefined, and so the ability score result of


(Str + x) + Belt


is different than


(Str + Belt) + x.


There's nothing that says the belt over-rides the ioun stone, but there's nothing that says it doesn't, either.  The point is that it can be interpreted multiple ways, and needs to be clarified.  I acknowledge the semantics of "belt trumps ioun stone", but at the same time, I see nothing to prevent "ioun stone augments belt".

But back to the OC, I'm fine with a 20 limit, and saying "this is the pinnacle of what a humanoid is physically capable of."  Magic items may take you over that limit, and that's why they're magical.  After all, what's the point of a Belt of Giant Strength if I can raid a few dungeons for XP and be as strong as a giant myself?  That makes no sense.





That is not the operator the belt fracking represents.

The belts magical effect is not + or - or * or /

The belts magical effect is literally a boolean operator.

if str less than x, then str = x, else no effect.

There is no + belt because addition has nothing to do with the belt.  You are misinterpreting the text and applying mathematical functions that do not exist as a part of that belt's magical effect. 

It is a fracking boolean operator using a simple to understand if then else statement in order to determine its application.

 AGAIN:


(Str + x) + Belt


is different than


(Str + Belt) + x.




are both incorrect interpretations of how the belt fracking works.  Neither of those actually represent what is going on with the magical effect as it is described.
Sleeps,

I think you are wrong here.  Here is the PRECISE wording from the packet regarding belts of giant strength:

Your Strength score increases to that granted by the belt.

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you.



There is nothing in that that says that your strength can't be increases further with magic items (like ioun stones).  It only says that when you put it on, it replaces the strength you already have it it's lower.

Thus the order of operations does seem to matter.

-Polaris
I love the cap, as far as I am conserned a cap should have always been there.


I don't mind that items can break the cap, I mind that only 1 stat has the items.



I also belive that if you have a 16 str the belt makes it a 21, but the ioun stone makes it a 17 that becomes 21    

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Sleeps,

I think you are wrong here.  Here is the PRECISE wording from the packet regarding belts of giant strength:

Your Strength score increases to that granted by the belt.

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you.



There is nothing in that that says that your strength can't be increases further with magic items (like ioun stones).  It only says that when you put it on, it replaces the strength you already have it it's lower.

Thus the order of operations does seem to matter.

-Polaris




its a friggin if statement right there:

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you. 

This statement makes the whole thing a boolean operator.

literally applying addition or any other mathematical function within the frame of this bonus is not properly evaluating the words describing its effect.  The magical effect is a boolean operator operating on an if then else basis.  Any other interpretation is flawed because it includes an incorrect mathematical function.

It doesn't matter that it says what the thing does given the passing of the boolean function first then lists the boolean function.  Isolating the scentences as you have to come to your conclusion is not how reading a paragraph, and comprehending the meaning of said paragraph, works.

Did you guys never learn how to properly evaluate a word problem or something?  
I'm good with the cap. I'd even lower it to 18, so that stats put less pressure on Bounded Accurary. It'd also be more in line with previous edition's humans and demihumans limit of 3-18.
I agree that the order of operations needs to be clarified. Just for future reference the Ioun Stone Entry says:

"Pale Blue Rhomboid (Very Rare): Your Strength score increases by 1."

The Ioun Stone doesn't have any restrictive text like the Belt does, so an entry about only applying to your base score, or your modified score would clear up this confusion.  Fortunately, the Gauntlets of Ogre Power are a non issue since they work like the Belt but only raise your score to 19. Which now that I think about it seems rather wimpy, considering how easy it is to get a score to 20. 

I'm good with the cap. I'd even lower it to 18, so that stats put less pressure on Bounded Accuracy. It'd also be more in line with previous edition's humans and demihumans limit of 3-18.

I've thought about that as well. My only change would be to let the cap change at the different tiers. So after the apprentice tier the cap raises to 19, then after the adventurer tier it raises to 20.

Sleeps,

I think you are wrong here.  Here is the PRECISE wording from the packet regarding belts of giant strength:

Your Strength score increases to that granted by the belt.

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you.



There is nothing in that that says that your strength can't be increases further with magic items (like ioun stones).  It only says that when you put it on, it replaces the strength you already have it it's lower.

Thus the order of operations does seem to matter.

-Polaris




its a friggin if statement right there:

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you. 

This statement makes the whole thing a boolean operator.

literally applying addition or any other mathematical function within the frame of this bonus is not properly evaluating the words describing its effect.  The magical effect is a boolean operator operating on an if then else basis.  Any other interpretation is flawed because it includes an incorrect mathematical function.

It doesn't matter that it says what the thing does given the passing of the boolean function first then lists the boolean function.  Isolating the scentences as you have to come to your conclusion is not how reading a paragraph, and comprehending the meaning of said paragraph, works.

Did you guys never learn how to properly evaluate a word problem or something?  



If you would be a little less insulting, perhaps I can explain why it isn't as cut-and-dried as you think.  Let's say that that PC has a strnegth of 10.  Let's say that the PC uses an ioun stone.  That will increase the strength to 11.  Now if that same PC puts on say Gauntlets of Ogre Power, as you say the Guanlets (which are worded the same way as the Belts) override the 11 Strength and give the PC a 19 Strength.

However, let's do the order of operations differently.  Suppose the PC starts with a 10 strength and puts on the Gauntlets.  I think we'd all agree that the PC would immediately get a 19 Strength because the Guantlets override.  Now let's assume the PC uses a +1 str Ioun stone.  I think a very good case could be made that the PC now has a Strength of 20 because nothing in the listed description prohibits future enhancements of this stat.

Thus the interaction is ambigious and needs to be clarified.

-Polaris 
Sleeps,

I think you are wrong here.  Here is the PRECISE wording from the packet regarding belts of giant strength:

Your Strength score increases to that granted by the belt.

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you.



There is nothing in that that says that your strength can't be increases further with magic items (like ioun stones).  It only says that when you put it on, it replaces the strength you already have it it's lower.

Thus the order of operations does seem to matter.

-Polaris




its a friggin if statement right there:

If your Strength is already equal to the belt’s score or higher,
this item does not benefit you. 

This statement makes the whole thing a boolean operator.

literally applying addition or any other mathematical function within the frame of this bonus is not properly evaluating the words describing its effect.  The magical effect is a boolean operator operating on an if then else basis.  Any other interpretation is flawed because it includes an incorrect mathematical function.

It doesn't matter that it says what the thing does given the passing of the boolean function first then lists the boolean function.  Isolating the scentences as you have to come to your conclusion is not how reading a paragraph, and comprehending the meaning of said paragraph, works.

Did you guys never learn how to properly evaluate a word problem or something?  



If you would be a little less insulting, perhaps I can explain why it isn't as cut-and-dried as you think.  Let's say that that PC has a strnegth of 10.  Let's say that the PC uses an ioun stone.  That will increase the strength to 11.  Now if that same PC puts on say Gauntlets of Ogre Power, as you say the Guanlets (which are worded the same way as the Belts) override the 11 Strength and give the PC a 19 Strength.

However, let's do the order of operations differently.  Suppose the PC starts with a 10 strength and puts on the Gauntlets.  I think we'd all agree that the PC would immediately get a 19 Strength because the Guantlets override.  Now let's assume the PC uses a +1 str Ioun stone.  I think a very good case could be made that the PC now has a Strength of 20 because nothing in the listed description prohibits future enhancements of this stat.

Thus the interaction is ambigious and needs to be clarified.

-Polaris 




there is no order of operations. the gauntlets are an if statement if x < y x=y literally the gauntlets cannot be a party to increasing a stat beyond that number.  there is no case to be made it is a boolean operator.
I agree that the order of operations needs to be clarified. Just for future reference the Ioun Stone Entry says:

"Pale Blue Rhomboid (Very Rare): Your Strength score increases by 1."

The Ioun Stone doesn't have any restrictive text like the Belt does, so an entry about only applying to your base score, or your modified score would clear up this confusion.  Fortunately, the Gauntlets of Ogre Power are a non issue since they work like the Belt but only raise your score to 19. Which now that I think about it seems rather wimpy, considering how easy it is to get a score to 20. 




Actually it's a big deal.  If you can be sure of getting a Guantlets of Ogre power (let along Belts of Giant Strength) at sometime in your career, then any stat increase or feat that you use to boost your strength before then is completely wasted.  It's another way to say that fighters can't get nice things.

-Polaris
there is no order of operations. the gauntlets are an if statement if x < y x=y literally the gauntlets cannot be a party to increasing a stat beyond that number.  there is no case to be made it is a boolean operator.



Yes there is.  I've explained why as have many others.  Read the description of Ioun stone.  There is NOTHING in that description that prohits it increases a stat already given by the Gauntlets or Belt.  Thus it IS ambigious.

-Polaris
  
If you would be a little less insulting, perhaps I can explain why it isn't as cut-and-dried as you think.  Let's say that that PC has a strnegth of 10.  Let's say that the PC uses an ioun stone.  That will increase the strength to 11.  Now if that same PC puts on say Gauntlets of Ogre Power, as you say the Guanlets (which are worded the same way as the Belts) override the 11 Strength and give the PC a 19 Strength.

However, let's do the order of operations differently.  Suppose the PC starts with a 10 strength and puts on the Gauntlets.  I think we'd all agree that the PC would immediately get a 19 Strength because the Guantlets override.  Now let's assume the PC uses a +1 str Ioun stone.  I think a very good case could be made that the PC now has a Strength of 20 because nothing in the listed description prohibits future enhancements of this stat.

Thus the interaction is ambigious and needs to be clarified.

-Polaris 



I am sorry, I think you are one of the better play testers and very good at finding fault, but I do not see it.


V1 player has 10 str gers stone goes to 11, gets orger power and oger power says if less then 19 then make it 19.


v2 player has 10 str, gets oger power, it say if less then 19 become 19. gets stone adds +1 so str becomes 11 but oger power makes 19.  If the stone made it 20, the oger power would stop functioning (becuse the item says it has no effect on people with 20+ str) thus making it 10+1 so 11, but then it would kick back in and become 19...


ende result is always 19.          

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Sign In to post comments