House Rule: Fixing 'High' Attributes?

[Ashtagon]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

That's avoiding the problem rather than fixing it.
Kind of like suggesting setting a campaign in the desert to avoid broken swimming rules.

No really. "Can't buy characteristic X" is a campaign setting feature. In a reasonably realistic setting, you wouldn't let a PC have the option of buying up magic or psionics skills; buying up core attributes above whatever level you specify should be no different.

I suppose you could say a character must have at least $number skills that are keyed off an attribute to raise it above a certain level. That kind of gets a little rules-lawyery for my tastes though.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

No really. "Can't buy characteristic X" is a campaign setting feature. In a reasonably realistic setting, you wouldn't let a PC have the option of buying up magic or psionics skills; buying up core attributes above whatever level you specify should be no different.

I suppose you could say a character must have at least $number skills that are keyed off an attribute to raise it above a certain level. That kind of gets a little rules-lawyery for my tastes though.

There is even an optional rule with buckets of points (I think it is a Pyramid article, but I'm not sure - I don't have it - and I neither remember if "buckets" is the correct term)...

It allows to decide how many points the player can spend on attributes, how many he can spend on skills, and so on. Brief, it allows to create more realistic characters with higher starting point total without having to dictate: "You must not have basic attributes above 16!"

Now, as said by Ashtagon, every GM is free to dictate that Magic, Psionic or Super-powers are not allowed in his campaign (even if Magic, Psionic and Super-powers are in the rules). So, dictating that attribute scores above 16 are not realistic in a game world is just exactly the same thing.