I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
I also feel like rolling for stats is more common, but I think that standard array is more common with the kind of people who hang out on D&D forums or answer polls about standard array.
I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
Think about the picture you're painting here.
A group of people designs a game with the intention of making it as fun and popular as possible - after all, their livelihood is dependent on it.
So they spend years deisgning it, and then years playtesting it, and finally they are ready to release. But then, at the last minute, they decide to arbitrarily impose a set of limits on everyone except themselves... just because screw their customers, right?
It just doesn't make any sense. It is in their best interest to deliver the best game they can. Part of the fun of D&D is challenge. Part of the fun is growth. And part is making meaningful choices. Starting out with 18's in your primary and secondary stat means you are maxed out after 2 ASIs. No more growth. No more interesting choices. Remember, feats are optional so they had to consider games that wouldn't have them. And honestly, adding feats just makes your choices even more important.
And lastly, your approach just assumes that your speculation is right and the burden of truth is on us to prove you wrong. That's not how the world works. It's like me saying that Tom Hanks is an alien because you don't have any evidence to prove me wrong.
I find the feats to be far more interesting than just leveling up an ability score that caps at 20. So yes, I'd prefer starting stats of somewhere between 16 & 19 for, say, 2 primary stats, and lower for others (I'd go with an array looking something like: 17, 15, 13 (14?), 13, 10, and 8). You're still at a disadvantage overall from saving throws and the other low stats, especially considering that as with NO other edition prior, you only have 2 saving throws at base that automatically level up with you to some extent.
I've personally been considering house ruled feat changes where ALL feats grant a +1 ASI, and feats that already did such grant a spread of +1 & +1 (but without the ability to stack both on one ability score). I'm currently running with a house ruled 37 Point Buy (ability score cap of 17, min 8) but for future games, I'm debating keeping the one and going with the other, or finding a lower Point Buy starting allotment that's still higher than the dreary 25 and including the changes to the feats. I generally don't like how weak the system feels over all and the monsters don't seem like any kind of threat. You say the system was well designed with care put into it? So many of the monsters I've looked at seem like little more than a collection of hit point and attack scores with 1 or 2 special abilities and that's it. I was disgusted with the current editions presentation of the Demon Lords by example. 5e may be popular, but I credit much of that to a growing awareness of the system and the connections enabled through the internet and social media, not to mention the ability to play games with players across the country via Virtual Table Tops.
Edit, Note: Obviously attach "IMO" to some of the above. I'm playing D&D 5e currently and invested a fair bit into the system for now and future, but I am far from supremely happy with it. I actually felt 4th Edition was the superior game (certainly it's combat system was!) and am pretty sad it didn't have the online support that 5e does (a little botch by Wizards, corrected by coordinating with the folks running D&D Beyond who know how to do it right). BUT I am in 5th edition and working to find some balance that works well for both me and the players I game with.
I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
... And lastly, your approach just assumes that your speculation is right and the burden of truth is on us to prove you wrong. That's not how the world works. It's like me saying that Tom Hanks is an alien because you don't have any evidence to prove me wrong.
Snipped the last part, with apologies. I will say that I hope we can both agree there's an exaggeration on that point in regards to Tom Hanks as an alien. Proving my personal belief incorrect within this area is no harder than finding a video, a photo, an article, or forum post where this or that person talked about the games they've played with the standard array / point buy. I'm not personally comfortable with having myself on video running a game session so I wouldn't expect that every single game Jeremy Crawford or Mike Mearls or Christopher Perkins runs is caught and broadcast for public consumption. I'm comfortable with taking a person at their word in regards the games they run. I may be a little skeptical, I can't guarantee I wouldn't be, but I'd certainly be far less so than I am now.
Your recent post indicated to me what the real concern is you wish to address. You like feats. No problem here; I like them too. But it appears you don't wish to suffer any drawbacks from your base ASI numbers if you choose to select feats at the different levels.
I'm not sure I would enjoy a game where I had such a powerful character. The DM would be compelled to homebrew the encounters up to my new level or just let me ease my way through the adventure.
But at the end of the day, if it works for your table and you're having a good time with your friends, you can adjust the character creation to suit you.
Good luck and enjoy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
You could alternatively give a free feat every dish levels, while still having the normal asi bumps, would probably amount to the same or similar effect, especially if you like to give a free feat at character creation. Might be easier than what you had proposed previously. I guess it makes for the difference of hero characters vs superhero characters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Personally I don't feel the character options are all that heroic at base, so I'd say it makes the difference between the civilian joe averages and the real heroes.
I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
I also feel like rolling for stats is more common, but I think that standard array is more common with the kind of people who hang out on D&D forums or answer polls about standard array.
I don't know. Most of the PbPs I've seen use rolled stats. Oftentimes with rerolls.
About every game I see one person who assumes that he can reroll if the total is under a certain number, too. ;)'
Anecdotal evidence seems to be that many people like rolled stats not for the randomness or to have a 'weak stat' to roleplay, but for the general increase in power level.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Another medical problem. Indefinite hiatus. Sorry, all.
I'd suggest array or point buy for a new DM as well. Most encounters and hardcovers are based around a certain power level and having rolled stats higher can make things too easy. You have so much to account for while a player only has his character they are tweaking and optimizing, worrying about an OP character from freakish rolls is the last thing you need to worry about starting out.
I prefer point/buy and array. I can roll 6s like the luckiest person in the world until someone else is watching. Then, it's mostly 1s like a chump.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
I also feel like rolling for stats is more common, but I think that standard array is more common with the kind of people who hang out on D&D forums or answer polls about standard array.
I don't know. Most of the PbPs I've seen use rolled stats. Oftentimes with rerolls.
About every game I see one person who assumes that he can reroll if the total is under a certain number, too. ;)'
Anecdotal evidence seems to be that many people like rolled stats not for the randomness or to have a 'weak stat' to roleplay, but for the general increase in power level.
Yeah, my current campaign is pretty generous for that reason... we roll 4 d6's for each stat then drop the lowest, and also roll an extra set as a safety net, so pretty much nobody in the group has a stat below 10 and everyone started with a 17 or 18 in their primary stat. We also use a rule for leveling up if you roll below the average for hit dice at a level up you can just take the average instead.
lol I remember the last time I played a one-shot where did do the classic rolls (roll 3d6 for each stat, in order, then build a character from there) I ended up below 10 on every stat, and died fairly early in the game due to failing multiple attempts to cross an unsteady bridge. Although it was also really fast to roll up a new character, so I can sort of understand those older games where its generally assumed that everyone is going to die multiple times and just make a new guy.
I let them roll their stats, and if they don’t like them they can use the standard array. I also treat the “average” HP they might roll (5 on a 1d8 for example) as their guaranteed minimum. The more HP they have, the more crap I can throw at them.
lol I remember the last time I played a one-shot where did do the classic rolls (roll 3d6 for each stat, in order, then build a character from there) I ended up below 10 on every stat, and died fairly early in the game due to failing multiple attempts to cross an unsteady bridge. Although it was also really fast to roll up a new character, so I can sort of understand those older games where its generally assumed that everyone is going to die multiple times and just make a new guy.
As a side note, this is one of those areas where I consider community input to be slightly negative. The judgement on another persons game style, when from everything I can tell 5th edition is little more than an exercise in eyeballing stats and making a best guess on what works, is enough to make me reconsider the method of character generation every 15 minutes. I generally feel that the heroes as created are *not* heroes of any heroic fantasy caliber, let alone the other "genre's" D&D touches. So, I prefer a higher array and/or point buy, because the point buy as presented does not satisfy my need for character's able to compete in heroic tasks. I don't want Superman, but I might very well prefer a character that could at some point reach a level like Guts from the manga Berserk (I fully grant Guts where he's currently at is basically Epic with possibly Epic level Artifacts on hand).
I remember a lot of my formative experienced with D&D was with 2nd Ed, but I have to admit that I seemed to have more time spent under that rule set while playing the Baldur'sGate series (which, BTW, ended perfectly with Baldur'sGateII: ThroneofBhaal) than I ever got to at the table, sadly.
Interesting info provided with the D&D Beyond Data Update, scroll down to see preferred methods of ability score generation. https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/news-announcements/59795-dev-update-3-12-2020 Effectively it can be argued that point buy edges out the competition just barely, as there's a near even split on Point Buy & the standard array (which is just one variation of a point bought set). Simultaneously, it's maybe 51 % vs Manual's 48+ % where I'd guess the majority of users are using a rolling method (I believe 4d6, drop the lowest, and repeat 6 times would be the standard). My suspicion based on other polls is that people like myself who prefer a non-standard point buy pool are very much in the minority. Definitely something for me to sit and think on. I imagine I might be asking the greater community it's thoughts on Feats allotted as bonuses per campaign (via Training / Alternate Quest Rewards, straight level bonuses, etc.) as well as how many feats folks feel a PC should have within their career. Obviously that would be another thread.
I've been running the numbers and I'm astonished with the results ...
The first column is a result of rolling four dice and taking the best three dice. The first row is a result of 3, which can only be obtained by rolling four 1s, and is only going to happen 0.08% of the time. The second column is the chance of getting that specific result. The third column is the chance of getting that specific result or lower. Remember this is a table of results for one throw of 4-d6 and adding up the best three dice.
I'm still waiting for some report of Devs (oh, pardon me, designers) making use of Point Buy. Another thread I follow suggests most groups use the method preferred by Critical Role which generates some absurdly high stats in comparison with the supposed "standard" array. I'd say that the idea most groups use the standard point buy or array is fast feeling like a myth.
I also feel like rolling for stats is more common, but I think that standard array is more common with the kind of people who hang out on D&D forums or answer polls about standard array.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Think about the picture you're painting here.
A group of people designs a game with the intention of making it as fun and popular as possible - after all, their livelihood is dependent on it.
So they spend years deisgning it, and then years playtesting it, and finally they are ready to release. But then, at the last minute, they decide to arbitrarily impose a set of limits on everyone except themselves... just because screw their customers, right?
It just doesn't make any sense. It is in their best interest to deliver the best game they can. Part of the fun of D&D is challenge. Part of the fun is growth. And part is making meaningful choices. Starting out with 18's in your primary and secondary stat means you are maxed out after 2 ASIs. No more growth. No more interesting choices. Remember, feats are optional so they had to consider games that wouldn't have them. And honestly, adding feats just makes your choices even more important.
And lastly, your approach just assumes that your speculation is right and the burden of truth is on us to prove you wrong. That's not how the world works. It's like me saying that Tom Hanks is an alien because you don't have any evidence to prove me wrong.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I find the feats to be far more interesting than just leveling up an ability score that caps at 20. So yes, I'd prefer starting stats of somewhere between 16 & 19 for, say, 2 primary stats, and lower for others (I'd go with an array looking something like: 17, 15, 13 (14?), 13, 10, and 8). You're still at a disadvantage overall from saving throws and the other low stats, especially considering that as with NO other edition prior, you only have 2 saving throws at base that automatically level up with you to some extent.
I've personally been considering house ruled feat changes where ALL feats grant a +1 ASI, and feats that already did such grant a spread of +1 & +1 (but without the ability to stack both on one ability score). I'm currently running with a house ruled 37 Point Buy (ability score cap of 17, min 8) but for future games, I'm debating keeping the one and going with the other, or finding a lower Point Buy starting allotment that's still higher than the dreary 25 and including the changes to the feats. I generally don't like how weak the system feels over all and the monsters don't seem like any kind of threat. You say the system was well designed with care put into it? So many of the monsters I've looked at seem like little more than a collection of hit point and attack scores with 1 or 2 special abilities and that's it. I was disgusted with the current editions presentation of the Demon Lords by example. 5e may be popular, but I credit much of that to a growing awareness of the system and the connections enabled through the internet and social media, not to mention the ability to play games with players across the country via Virtual Table Tops.
Edit, Note: Obviously attach "IMO" to some of the above. I'm playing D&D 5e currently and invested a fair bit into the system for now and future, but I am far from supremely happy with it. I actually felt 4th Edition was the superior game (certainly it's combat system was!) and am pretty sad it didn't have the online support that 5e does (a little botch by Wizards, corrected by coordinating with the folks running D&D Beyond who know how to do it right). BUT I am in 5th edition and working to find some balance that works well for both me and the players I game with.
Snipped the last part, with apologies. I will say that I hope we can both agree there's an exaggeration on that point in regards to Tom Hanks as an alien. Proving my personal belief incorrect within this area is no harder than finding a video, a photo, an article, or forum post where this or that person talked about the games they've played with the standard array / point buy. I'm not personally comfortable with having myself on video running a game session so I wouldn't expect that every single game Jeremy Crawford or Mike Mearls or Christopher Perkins runs is caught and broadcast for public consumption. I'm comfortable with taking a person at their word in regards the games they run. I may be a little skeptical, I can't guarantee I wouldn't be, but I'd certainly be far less so than I am now.
Serge,
Your recent post indicated to me what the real concern is you wish to address. You like feats. No problem here; I like them too. But it appears you don't wish to suffer any drawbacks from your base ASI numbers if you choose to select feats at the different levels.
I'm not sure I would enjoy a game where I had such a powerful character. The DM would be compelled to homebrew the encounters up to my new level or just let me ease my way through the adventure.
But at the end of the day, if it works for your table and you're having a good time with your friends, you can adjust the character creation to suit you.
Good luck and enjoy.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Any adventure of worth is always customized to the group at the table, so I don't see the issue.
You could alternatively give a free feat every dish levels, while still having the normal asi bumps, would probably amount to the same or similar effect, especially if you like to give a free feat at character creation. Might be easier than what you had proposed previously. I guess it makes for the difference of hero characters vs superhero characters.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Personally I don't feel the character options are all that heroic at base, so I'd say it makes the difference between the civilian joe averages and the real heroes.
BTW, the standard array is just one of the combinations you can make with the point buy system.
I don't know. Most of the PbPs I've seen use rolled stats. Oftentimes with rerolls.
About every game I see one person who assumes that he can reroll if the total is under a certain number, too. ;)'
Anecdotal evidence seems to be that many people like rolled stats not for the randomness or to have a 'weak stat' to roleplay, but for the general increase in power level.
Another medical problem. Indefinite hiatus. Sorry, all.
I'd suggest array or point buy for a new DM as well. Most encounters and hardcovers are based around a certain power level and having rolled stats higher can make things too easy. You have so much to account for while a player only has his character they are tweaking and optimizing, worrying about an OP character from freakish rolls is the last thing you need to worry about starting out.
I prefer point/buy and array. I can roll 6s like the luckiest person in the world until someone else is watching. Then, it's mostly 1s like a chump.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Yeah, my current campaign is pretty generous for that reason... we roll 4 d6's for each stat then drop the lowest, and also roll an extra set as a safety net, so pretty much nobody in the group has a stat below 10 and everyone started with a 17 or 18 in their primary stat. We also use a rule for leveling up if you roll below the average for hit dice at a level up you can just take the average instead.
lol I remember the last time I played a one-shot where did do the classic rolls (roll 3d6 for each stat, in order, then build a character from there) I ended up below 10 on every stat, and died fairly early in the game due to failing multiple attempts to cross an unsteady bridge. Although it was also really fast to roll up a new character, so I can sort of understand those older games where its generally assumed that everyone is going to die multiple times and just make a new guy.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I let them roll their stats, and if they don’t like them they can use the standard array. I also treat the “average” HP they might roll (5 on a 1d8 for example) as their guaranteed minimum. The more HP they have, the more crap I can throw at them.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Ah, good old 2e.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
As a side note, this is one of those areas where I consider community input to be slightly negative. The judgement on another persons game style, when from everything I can tell 5th edition is little more than an exercise in eyeballing stats and making a best guess on what works, is enough to make me reconsider the method of character generation every 15 minutes. I generally feel that the heroes as created are *not* heroes of any heroic fantasy caliber, let alone the other "genre's" D&D touches. So, I prefer a higher array and/or point buy, because the point buy as presented does not satisfy my need for character's able to compete in heroic tasks. I don't want Superman, but I might very well prefer a character that could at some point reach a level like Guts from the manga Berserk (I fully grant Guts where he's currently at is basically Epic with possibly Epic level Artifacts on hand).
I remember a lot of my formative experienced with D&D was with 2nd Ed, but I have to admit that I seemed to have more time spent under that rule set while playing the Baldur's Gate series (which, BTW, ended perfectly with Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal) than I ever got to at the table, sadly.
Interesting info provided with the D&D Beyond Data Update, scroll down to see preferred methods of ability score generation. https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/news-announcements/59795-dev-update-3-12-2020
Effectively it can be argued that point buy edges out the competition just barely, as there's a near even split on Point Buy & the standard array (which is just one variation of a point bought set). Simultaneously, it's maybe 51 % vs Manual's 48+ % where I'd guess the majority of users are using a rolling method (I believe 4d6, drop the lowest, and repeat 6 times would be the standard). My suspicion based on other polls is that people like myself who prefer a non-standard point buy pool are very much in the minority. Definitely something for me to sit and think on. I imagine I might be asking the greater community it's thoughts on Feats allotted as bonuses per campaign (via Training / Alternate Quest Rewards, straight level bonuses, etc.) as well as how many feats folks feel a PC should have within their career. Obviously that would be another thread.
I've been running the numbers and I'm astonished with the results ...
The first column is a result of rolling four dice and taking the best three dice. The first row is a result of 3, which can only be obtained by rolling four 1s, and is only going to happen 0.08% of the time. The second column is the chance of getting that specific result. The third column is the chance of getting that specific result or lower. Remember this is a table of results for one throw of 4-d6 and adding up the best three dice.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt