I dont mind the higher typical scores with rolling as you can adjust for that.
So no I do not think the combo of rolling/ floating ASI will be bad in terms of power of an individual PC.
My issue is that rolling produces (or can produce rather) a huge variation of scores which is much harder to deal with. What is a challenge for one PC might outright kill another.
I don’t think there’s anything inherently broken in here, you got lucky and rolled all your stats well, just as easily you could have ended up with something like this: 9 8 10 7 9 5
I do agree, as long as this is what happens. However, most I know who roll for stats have a get out clause if they roll badly, which basically turns out into a chance to get extremely high stats but no chance of low ones.
And that it not ok for me, in my opinion if you want to roll for your stats you take the full deal, you don’t get to cherry-pick the parts you like and don’t like. If I decide to roll for stats, I agree to accept whatever hand I was dealt, play with that and don’t complain or try to get out of the bad roll, if I want guaranteed stats I take point buy or standard array. The whole point of rolling for stats imo is that there is a possibility of a high reward (very good roll) but the risk of getting a poor roll is also high, a get-out-of-a-bad-roll clause is what unbalances the game for me, the only situation in which you should be able to re-roll is if you end up with something basically unplayable, say 5 4 5 3 3 6, this is where I would forgo fairness and balance in favour of player enjoyment but only in extreme cases, not if the stats are slightly to moderately below average.
For me it depends on the anticipated length of the campaign. It might be fun to play an extremely subpar character for a few levels but over a multi-tier epic style campaign it's probably going to get old for most players. As I said, in my campaign I use a custom roll method that helps keep each PC within the same bracket. It's more work than just saying everybody use point buy, but more interesting.
To be perfectly honest the difference between each players ability to number crunch is more unbalancing than any variation in their dice rolls.
I don’t think there’s anything inherently broken in here, you got lucky and rolled all your stats well, just as easily you could have ended up with something like this: 9 8 10 7 9 5
I do agree, as long as this is what happens. However, most I know who roll for stats have a get out clause if they roll badly, which basically turns out into a chance to get extremely high stats but no chance of low ones.
And that it not ok for me, in my opinion if you want to roll for your stats you take the full deal, you don’t get to cherry-pick the parts you like and don’t like. If I decide to roll for stats, I agree to accept whatever hand I was dealt, play with that and don’t complain or try to get out of the bad roll, if I want guaranteed stats I take point buy or standard array. The whole point of rolling for stats imo is that there is a possibility of a high reward (very good roll) but the risk of getting a poor roll is also high, a get-out-of-a-bad-roll clause is what unbalances the game for me, the only situation in which you should be able to re-roll is if you end up with something basically unplayable, say 5 4 5 3 3 6, this is where I would forgo fairness and balance in favour of player enjoyment but only in extreme cases, not if the stats are slightly to moderately below average.
For me it depends on the anticipated length of the campaign. It might be fun to play an extremely subpar character for a few levels but over a multi-tier epic style campaign it's probably going to get old for most players. As I said, in my campaign I use a custom roll method that helps keep each PC within the same bracket. It's more work than just saying everybody use point buy, but more interesting.
To be perfectly honest the difference between each players ability to number crunch is more unbalancing than any variation in their dice rolls.
Thats fair too...I would like to do a one shot with a weak character I think but a campaign...no way.
Rolling for ability scores is not broken, with or without Tasha's. You've just been trained to think it is.
DM here. I always make my player's roll their stats (with a custom method I designed). To me, standard array and point buy are both ... boring.
What rolling does is allow for more feats to be chosen. You hit 20 in your primary stat sooner, now you have options to choose from more feats, even some that that might not necessarily be "optimised" for your "build". It means you actually get to make some interesting choices as your character levels up.
I think the 3.5e/PF level of crunch was too much for a mixed group, maybe if everyone is a power gamer it's okay. Feats in 5e I think allow for a good level of crunch, but if you start from standard array you are probably spending your first two ASIs on getting your primary stat to 20. With Tasha's it's a little easier. But given that the majority of game play takes place in tiers I and II, there's not a lot of room for feats starting with a standard array.
Now, if you are playing a game without feats, then sure. Start from a standard array. But with feats there's no harm in having a boost to start with, because the stat cap of 20 is there. And once a player has chosen a subclass, there's precious little left for them to choose from as they level up.
I will admit, in the style of game I run I'm not pulling any punches. If the dice say your PC dies, then they die, I ain't gonna fudge them. So I don't mind having PCs that are a little above the curve so their survivability is increased.
YMMV.
Bingo. At least you admitted the obvious: "What rolling does is allow for more feats to be chosen. You hit 20 in your primary stat sooner".
As the original poster said, rolling 4d6 and the book that shall not be named char mechanics leads to over-powered chars, when compared to a 27 Point Buy char. It has been done to death that mathematically, 4d6 provides higher stats, and the book that shall not be named uber-easy mechanics to move the additional points around exacerbates that problem. If players want to take Feats with their first two ASI's with a baseline of a 27 Point Buy, there is nothing stopping that at all. But most won't, for the very reason you stated.
You say you run a tough game. So do I. But I also don't want to deal with:
a. Potential wild variations in player strengths, thanks to 4d6.
b. In general, higher overall stats, due to 4d6 and these ridiculous new game mechanics.
Wait. So what's the issue? Am I missing something because there really doesn't seem to be one. You get to set the rules at your table so you don't have to deal with anything you don't want to.
And as a game cafe DM you would have to be open about your rules before players sit down with you. I mean, all DMs should be open about their rules, but you're especially used to it in your situation. What is so hard about adding one more line of text barring some of the ToCE material if you find it broken and not conducive to your world? It's called adapting. It isn't going to be nearly as hard as you make it out to be.
I personally don't like rolled stats because of all the sideways eyes I've seen when one person comes in with golden fingers. It isn't the end of the world, not even close, but since there is another system I actively enjoy with point buy I just avoid it. If I want people to be a little more powerful then I give a free feat or design a boon of some sort with the player.
Lukewarm Take: I just don't think there is anything broken about stats in 5e. They cap at 20. ASI's are a scarce resource. What is there to break? I'm pretty sure the number of actually broken things in the game could be counted on one or two hands. Rest based shenanigans, Find Familiar (yeah I'm one of those) and Peace Cleric are a few off the top of the ol' noggin. The shit that's actually broken is stuff that circumvents entire portions of the game or looks to exploit resources.
I personally don't like rolled stats because of all the sideways eyes I've seen when one person comes in with golden fingers. It isn't the end of the world, not even close, but since there is another system I actively enjoy with point buy I just avoid it. If I want people to be a little more powerful then I give a free feat or design a boon of some sort with the players.
Yeah, for organised or game cafe play I agree you want point buy.
I'm running for real life friends, so that makes rolling for stats possible because of the increased level of trust.
1) I dont mind the higher typical scores with rolling as you can adjust for that.
2) So no I do not think the combo of rolling/ floating ASI will be bad in terms of power of an individual PC.
3) My issue is that rolling produces (or can produce rather) a huge variation of scores which is much harder to deal with. What is a challenge for one PC might outright kill another.
1) I know this is not an argument you're making, but I want to address the related issue: the "adjust for higher stats" thing is a bit of a red herring. Any DM can make any encounter very easy or very challenging without changing anything mechanical (same monsters, same stats, same circumstances), just by choice of tactics and how they roleplay any interactions. I know Vince runs low-magic campaigns and is considered a hard DM. Others may toss around epic items like a Vegas jackpot and still have a rep for being killer DMs. ELs and CRs are estimates, not reliable parameters. Point is, scores are a tiny little bit of what makes an adventure challenging or not, and everybody is doing things their way regardless - if every table around the world used the standard array exclusively, DMs would still be adjusting their individual campaigns anyway.
2) Floating ability mods do absolutely nothing in terms of power. More than enough races to find one that'll give approximately 'optimal' stat bonuses for any class you want to play and any definition of 'optimal' you may have.
3) I think, no offense, that's a bit of an exaggeration. A high Con wizard still has to be careful about taking raw damage, and Barbarian is still not going to look forward to Cha or Int saves even with relatively high stats in them. It's also not hard to even out discrepancies, if you really want to. Items, homebrew abilities, blessings and curses - options a-plenty. Moreover, it's not like we haven't had close to 5 decades of roll-for-stats character creation anyway. If it was that big a deal, it wouldn't still be around (as default option, no less).
1) I dont mind the higher typical scores with rolling as you can adjust for that.
2) So no I do not think the combo of rolling/ floating ASI will be bad in terms of power of an individual PC.
3) My issue is that rolling produces (or can produce rather) a huge variation of scores which is much harder to deal with. What is a challenge for one PC might outright kill another.
1) I know this is not an argument you're making, but I want to address the related issue: the "adjust for higher stats" thing is a bit of a red herring. Any DM can make any encounter very easy or very challenging without changing anything mechanical (same monsters, same stats, same circumstances), just by choice of tactics and how they roleplay any interactions. I know Vince runs low-magic campaigns and is considered a hard DM. Others may toss around epic items like a Vegas jackpot and still have a rep for being killer DMs. ELs and CRs are estimates, not reliable parameters. Point is, scores are a tiny little bit of what makes an adventure challenging or not, and everybody is doing things their way regardless - if every table around the world used the standard array exclusively, DMs would still be adjusting their individual campaigns anyway.
2) Floating ability mods do absolutely nothing in terms of power. More than enough races to find one that'll give apprimately 'optimal' stat bonuses for any class you want to play and any definition of 'optimal' you may have.
3) I think, no offense, that's a bit of an exaggeration. A high Con wizard still has to be careful about taking raw damage, and Barbarian is still not going to look forward to Cha or Int saves even with relatively high stats in them. It's also not hard to even out discrepancies, if you really want to. Items, homebrew abilities, blessings and curses - aptions a-plenty.
Agree with 1 and 2....I do not think it takes as much to adjust encounters for higher scored players and I also agree that floating stats are pretty much meaningless to me as everyone in my games starts with their primary stat as the highest and I do not care how that looks...I do not mind 16 Dex Dwarfs.
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
Do you need to have a caster, and do they need to cast Fireball? I mean, to me this isn't meaningfully different from having an encounter with Intellect Devourers where that same Barbarian is potentially in a world of trouble while that same wizard is likely a lot less worried.
As for leveling out stats, I'm just saying it's possible. It shouldn't be a given, and the extent to which it might happen shouldn't be guaranteed either. And it should certainly remain the DM's purview.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
Do you need to have a caster, and do they need to cast Fireball? I mean, to me this isn't meaningfully different from having an encounter with Intellect Devourers where that same Barbarian is potentially in a world of trouble while that same wizard is likely a lot less worried.
As for leveling out stats, I'm just saying it's possible. It shouldn't be a given, and the extent to which it might happen shouldn't be guaranteed either. And it should certainly remain the DM's purview.
I see your point but an Intellect Devourer is something a bit more easy to write out of a campaign than any damaging AoE spells at all...
Fireball is just the example but at the level I was referring to (10th level) the Wizard has an HP pool that would easily put them down with a 3rd or 4th level spell or any creature of an appropriate CR.
If they hit the wizard with all three attacks the average damage is very near their entire HP pool....and with a crit its basically over before the third attack or if they use one of their smite spells at range.
Its just there are so many more varaibles when it comes to weak stats comparatively . Its easy to adjust for a whole party that is fairly close in scores but if you have a 10 point difference you have to adjust entire encounters or pull punches to make it equal.
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
Do you need to have a caster, and do they need to cast Fireball? I mean, to me this isn't meaningfully different from having an encounter with Intellect Devourers where that same Barbarian is potentially in a world of trouble while that same wizard is likely a lot less worried.
As for leveling out stats, I'm just saying it's possible. It shouldn't be a given, and the extent to which it might happen shouldn't be guaranteed either. And it should certainly remain the DM's purview.
I see your point but an Intellect Devourer is something a bit more easy to write out of a campaign than any damaging AoE spells at all...
Fireball is just the example but at the level I was referring to (10th level) the Wizard has an HP pool that would easily put them down with a 3rd or 4th level spell or any creature of an appropriate CR.
If they hit the wizard with all three attacks the average damage is very near their entire HP pool....and with a crit its basically over before the third attack or if they use one of their smite spells at range.
Its just there are so many more varaibles when it comes to weak stats comparatively . Its easy to adjust for a whole party that is fairly close in scores but if you have a 10 point difference you have to adjust entire encounters or pull punches to make it equal.
At lvl 10 a Con 10 Wizard has 38 hp on average. A lvl 10 wizard also has 2 ASIs under his or her belt and in a regular campaign at least one rare magical item. A 32 hp 10th level wizard isn't extraordinary, but I think it's fair to say that even with an uncharitable roll of the dice at character creation (it's not like wizards don't routinely put their 2nd highest stat in Con either) there's normally plenty of opportunity over those 10 levels to put a bit of flesh on those bones. Wizards have a number of potential ways of shoring up saves and AC as well, and 5E is pretty forgiving in terms of allowing PCs to walk off the battlefield on their own two feet.
I understand it's one concern you'd rather not have on your plate. That's totally fine. It's just still not a big one in my book. For me - let me stress that: for me - managing discrepancies in stat lines is not something I have to go out of my way to do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
Do you need to have a caster, and do they need to cast Fireball? I mean, to me this isn't meaningfully different from having an encounter with Intellect Devourers where that same Barbarian is potentially in a world of trouble while that same wizard is likely a lot less worried.
As for leveling out stats, I'm just saying it's possible. It shouldn't be a given, and the extent to which it might happen shouldn't be guaranteed either. And it should certainly remain the DM's purview.
I see your point but an Intellect Devourer is something a bit more easy to write out of a campaign than any damaging AoE spells at all...
Fireball is just the example but at the level I was referring to (10th level) the Wizard has an HP pool that would easily put them down with a 3rd or 4th level spell or any creature of an appropriate CR.
If they hit the wizard with all three attacks the average damage is very near their entire HP pool....and with a crit its basically over before the third attack or if they use one of their smite spells at range.
Its just there are so many more varaibles when it comes to weak stats comparatively . Its easy to adjust for a whole party that is fairly close in scores but if you have a 10 point difference you have to adjust entire encounters or pull punches to make it equal.
At lvl 10 a Con 10 Wizard has 38 hp on average. A lvl 10 wizard also has 2 ASIs under his or her belt and in a regular campaign at least one rare magical item. A 32 hp 10th level wizard isn't extraordinary, but I think it's fair to say that even with an uncharitable roll of the dice at character creation (it's not like wizards don't routinely put their 2nd highest stat in Con either) there's normally plenty of opportunity over those 10 levels to put a bit of flesh on those bones. Wizards have a number of potential ways of shoring up saves and AC as well, and 5E is pretty forgiving in terms of allowing PCs to walk off the battlefield on their own two feet.
I understand it's one concern you'd rather not have on your plate. That's totally fine. It's just still not a big one in my book. For me - let me stress that: for me - managing discrepancies in stat lines is not something I have to go out of my way to do.
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
Do you need to have a caster, and do they need to cast Fireball? I mean, to me this isn't meaningfully different from having an encounter with Intellect Devourers where that same Barbarian is potentially in a world of trouble while that same wizard is likely a lot less worried.
As for leveling out stats, I'm just saying it's possible. It shouldn't be a given, and the extent to which it might happen shouldn't be guaranteed either. And it should certainly remain the DM's purview.
I see your point but an Intellect Devourer is something a bit more easy to write out of a campaign than any damaging AoE spells at all...
Fireball is just the example but at the level I was referring to (10th level) the Wizard has an HP pool that would easily put them down with a 3rd or 4th level spell or any creature of an appropriate CR.
If they hit the wizard with all three attacks the average damage is very near their entire HP pool....and with a crit its basically over before the third attack or if they use one of their smite spells at range.
Its just there are so many more varaibles when it comes to weak stats comparatively . Its easy to adjust for a whole party that is fairly close in scores but if you have a 10 point difference you have to adjust entire encounters or pull punches to make it equal.
At lvl 10 a Con 10 Wizard has 38 hp on average. A lvl 10 wizard also has 2 ASIs under his or her belt and in a regular campaign at least one rare magical item. A 32 hp 10th level wizard isn't extraordinary, but I think it's fair to say that even with an uncharitable roll of the dice at character creation (it's not like wizards don't routinely put their 2nd highest stat in Con either) there's normally plenty of opportunity over those 10 levels to put a bit of flesh on those bones. Wizards have a number of potential ways of shoring up saves and AC as well, and 5E is pretty forgiving in terms of allowing PCs to walk off the battlefield on their own two feet.
I understand it's one concern you'd rather not have on your plate. That's totally fine. It's just still not a big one in my book. For me - let me stress that: for me - managing discrepancies in stat lines is not something I have to go out of my way to do.
Fair enough...I do tend to do 1-2 more deadly battles a day on average so I have never had a player have a CON less than 12 in my groups but good points all around.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I dont mind the higher typical scores with rolling as you can adjust for that.
So no I do not think the combo of rolling/ floating ASI will be bad in terms of power of an individual PC.
My issue is that rolling produces (or can produce rather) a huge variation of scores which is much harder to deal with. What is a challenge for one PC might outright kill another.
For me it depends on the anticipated length of the campaign. It might be fun to play an extremely subpar character for a few levels but over a multi-tier epic style campaign it's probably going to get old for most players. As I said, in my campaign I use a custom roll method that helps keep each PC within the same bracket. It's more work than just saying everybody use point buy, but more interesting.
To be perfectly honest the difference between each players ability to number crunch is more unbalancing than any variation in their dice rolls.
Thats fair too...I would like to do a one shot with a weak character I think but a campaign...no way.
Wait. So what's the issue? Am I missing something because there really doesn't seem to be one. You get to set the rules at your table so you don't have to deal with anything you don't want to.
And as a game cafe DM you would have to be open about your rules before players sit down with you. I mean, all DMs should be open about their rules, but you're especially used to it in your situation. What is so hard about adding one more line of text barring some of the ToCE material if you find it broken and not conducive to your world? It's called adapting. It isn't going to be nearly as hard as you make it out to be.
I personally don't like rolled stats because of all the sideways eyes I've seen when one person comes in with golden fingers. It isn't the end of the world, not even close, but since there is another system I actively enjoy with point buy I just avoid it. If I want people to be a little more powerful then I give a free feat or design a boon of some sort with the player.
Lukewarm Take: I just don't think there is anything broken about stats in 5e. They cap at 20. ASI's are a scarce resource. What is there to break? I'm pretty sure the number of actually broken things in the game could be counted on one or two hands. Rest based shenanigans, Find Familiar (yeah I'm one of those) and Peace Cleric are a few off the top of the ol' noggin. The shit that's actually broken is stuff that circumvents entire portions of the game or looks to exploit resources.
Yeah, for organised or game cafe play I agree you want point buy.
I'm running for real life friends, so that makes rolling for stats possible because of the increased level of trust.
1) I know this is not an argument you're making, but I want to address the related issue: the "adjust for higher stats" thing is a bit of a red herring. Any DM can make any encounter very easy or very challenging without changing anything mechanical (same monsters, same stats, same circumstances), just by choice of tactics and how they roleplay any interactions. I know Vince runs low-magic campaigns and is considered a hard DM. Others may toss around epic items like a Vegas jackpot and still have a rep for being killer DMs. ELs and CRs are estimates, not reliable parameters. Point is, scores are a tiny little bit of what makes an adventure challenging or not, and everybody is doing things their way regardless - if every table around the world used the standard array exclusively, DMs would still be adjusting their individual campaigns anyway.
2) Floating ability mods do absolutely nothing in terms of power. More than enough races to find one that'll give approximately 'optimal' stat bonuses for any class you want to play and any definition of 'optimal' you may have.
3) I think, no offense, that's a bit of an exaggeration. A high Con wizard still has to be careful about taking raw damage, and Barbarian is still not going to look forward to Cha or Int saves even with relatively high stats in them. It's also not hard to even out discrepancies, if you really want to. Items, homebrew abilities, blessings and curses - options a-plenty. Moreover, it's not like we haven't had close to 5 decades of roll-for-stats character creation anyway. If it was that big a deal, it wouldn't still be around (as default option, no less).
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Agree with 1 and 2....I do not think it takes as much to adjust encounters for higher scored players and I also agree that floating stats are pretty much meaningless to me as everyone in my games starts with their primary stat as the highest and I do not care how that looks...I do not mind 16 Dex Dwarfs.
3. The fact you would need to add blessings/curses to get players to a level set is not something I personally want to have to do...especially when the option to just level set at the get go is there and allows for full customization of stats. I personally find the idea of using an item to balance a party as problematic as it just allows for you to dump something with little consequence. I have DM'd for 8 CON wizards and unless you pull punches you will kill them very very fast....at least in my experience. At least if EVERYONE is low HP I can deal with that....but if I have a barbarian with 105 HP and a wizard with 32 HP....if I get a caster with fireball that wizard has a very real chance of going down while the barbarian will hardly notice it.
Do you need to have a caster, and do they need to cast Fireball? I mean, to me this isn't meaningfully different from having an encounter with Intellect Devourers where that same Barbarian is potentially in a world of trouble while that same wizard is likely a lot less worried.
As for leveling out stats, I'm just saying it's possible. It shouldn't be a given, and the extent to which it might happen shouldn't be guaranteed either. And it should certainly remain the DM's purview.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I see your point but an Intellect Devourer is something a bit more easy to write out of a campaign than any damaging AoE spells at all...
Fireball is just the example but at the level I was referring to (10th level) the Wizard has an HP pool that would easily put them down with a 3rd or 4th level spell or any creature of an appropriate CR.
even a CR 8 humanoid: https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/blackguard
If they hit the wizard with all three attacks the average damage is very near their entire HP pool....and with a crit its basically over before the third attack or if they use one of their smite spells at range.
Its just there are so many more varaibles when it comes to weak stats comparatively . Its easy to adjust for a whole party that is fairly close in scores but if you have a 10 point difference you have to adjust entire encounters or pull punches to make it equal.
At lvl 10 a Con 10 Wizard has 38 hp on average. A lvl 10 wizard also has 2 ASIs under his or her belt and in a regular campaign at least one rare magical item. A 32 hp 10th level wizard isn't extraordinary, but I think it's fair to say that even with an uncharitable roll of the dice at character creation (it's not like wizards don't routinely put their 2nd highest stat in Con either) there's normally plenty of opportunity over those 10 levels to put a bit of flesh on those bones. Wizards have a number of potential ways of shoring up saves and AC as well, and 5E is pretty forgiving in terms of allowing PCs to walk off the battlefield on their own two feet.
I understand it's one concern you'd rather not have on your plate. That's totally fine. It's just still not a big one in my book. For me - let me stress that: for me - managing discrepancies in stat lines is not something I have to go out of my way to do.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Fair enough...I do tend to do 1-2 more deadly battles a day on average so I have never had a player have a CON less than 12 in my groups but good points all around.