Let's examine, for a moment, the case of someone wanting to play an "off-class" race/class combination for reasons of story, roleplaying, or simple sheer boredom. The typically atypical half-orc wizard, for example. The Horc wizard has a base of 15 in its Intelligence ability score, and no meaningful number anywhere else in their stats because PB/SA allows for exactly one score of 15 or higher without disastrous penalty.
Every single prewritten adventure I have ever read seems to assume that the 'base' DC for any typical task is 15. 15 is the "you should be able to figure this out without any real issue" number. 12 is the common "c'mon, stupid - any idiot can pull this off" number, and 10 is not "average", it is "don't even make the party roll for this unless they're being idiots somehow." Nevertheless. 15 is the number the game assumes should be a basic default.
The half-orc wizard, who has presumably trained his whole life to do Wizard Things, when presented with a task any decent wizard is expected to be able to breeze through...fails utterly fifty percent of the time, if the subject is one he's spent his whole life training for. If it's one of the Intelligence abilities he did not gain proficiency in, he fails nearly two thirds of the time, instead. He fails two-thirds of the time or more on every single other ability check in the game because he dared to play an 'off' race for his class, and he will have to devote every single ASI he gets for the rest of the game to his Intelligence alone simply to continue mostly failing to keep up.
PB/SA effectively disallows feats and forces hyper-minmaxing during character creation because any character which is not playing the 'Perfect' class/race for their race/class and which dares to take anything but as much score boost as they can is effectively completely incompetent at their primary tasks. This is, as the Internet says, Boo Sheet. I understand that a character with an 8 in a score should be expected to fail every single roll they make with that score, and if the score is lower than 8 they fail increasingly hilariously. I do not understand why a character's strongest attribute should work only half the time or less on the most basic, mundane tasks required of an Adventurer.
Most alternative generation methods I've seen are designed to allow a character to have both strengths and weaknesses, instead of weaknesses and Even Worse Probably Debilitating weaknesses.
According to that poll, 40% of responses (the #1 choice) go for 27-point "point buy".
Rolling 4d6 drop lowest got 19 votes.
Standard array got 17 votes.
Player's choice of rolling or array got another 20 votes.
Player's choice of rolling or point-buy picked up 26 votes.
So, overwhelmingly, 54.1% of responses included point-buy. To answer your original question, it seems that people who roll stats are actually in the *minority* for 5e.
In the name of fun, I am happily a Ralphie Wiggum in the corner shouting "Me like rolling numbers!"
There were only 192 people that answered that poll. I don't think that I would use that data as an good assessment of the community as a whole.
I cannot give any numbers on percentages of users who use what form of stat generation, though I will pass along the request and see if that's something we can offer in a future Dev Update! I'm also not a developer, but I'll give my personal experience as a D&D Beyond staff member who runs and plays in games all the time and uses D&D Beyond almost exclusively for character creation.
As a DM I offer point buy or the array to my players. It takes away any questions about rolling stats being legit, makes sure all players have the opportunity to create a character with decent stats and that all players start at roughly the same power level. The Array is great for quick picks, giving you solid stats where you need them and a low stat or two for role playing. Point Buy offers more experienced players, or those that want to take the time, more flexibility in their character choices.
As a player I prefer point buy. Unless I am making a quick character or have been specifically asked to use one method, I default to point buy. Point buy helps me create characters using the official race and class bonuses but allows me to pair unusual combos without hampering too many stats. I can still get a really high number where I need it so my character is effective, and still have some fun low stats to play off of. Or I can make fun RP decisions because I have more control over the numbers. I have even used some of the extended point buy rules to have stats go as low as 6 so I can create the character I want. My goal is always something fun, with issues but that is still effective, and point buy offers me the options to do that!
Absolute apologies for the suspicious skeptic in me, but I know that I like both Feats as well as having reasonable ability scores, and have next to zero faith that you can get the two together with the 25 point buy as presented.
Are you a player or a DM?
If player: Ask your DM to modify what's written or create something entirely new so that you will be confident that you might have both feats and decent ability scores.
If DM: Modify what's written or create something entirely new so that you will be confident that your players might have both feats and decent ability scores.
Thanks OboeLauren, appreciate it! I honestly prefer point buy myself, though a higher point buy myself, and one that doesn't cap people at a starting stat of 15. The one thing I've found irritating in any group is the sensation of whether or not the game itself is somehow "Legit" based on what generation method is used.
I have only ever played with dice rolls, but it has broken a few of my games that I have played. I literally have each player roll the dice in front of me and I crap you not I had players that did not roll under a 16 for all of their stats. Although, I like the standard array, and I now implement a modified standard array that is 17, 15, 13, 12, 10, and 8. That way the person can feel a bit more powerful without being game breaking over-powered, but it also encourages feat taking, and multiclass options if they so choose.
Point buy gets you to the normal expected range for stats. It's normal that at level 1, your modifier bonus is +3 in a good stat, +2 in an OK one, lower in a bad one. That's what point buy or standard array gets you. You can get +3 in one or two stats but can't get +4 in any until your ASI, and can't get +5 until your second ASI.
That's what the game is designed for and that's what you get with those methods of character generation.
He fails two-thirds of the time or more on every single other ability check in the game because he dared to play an 'off' race for his class, and he will have to devote every single ASI he gets for the rest of the game to his Intelligence alone simply to continue mostly failing to keep up.
Try comparing apples to apples, and don't try to use the wrong stats to make a misleading argument. Your "2/3s" number is correct in so much as it is the absolute chance of success, but you are then making a relative comparison between hypothetical characters, so let's compare that relative difference: a "perfect" race/class combo only has +1 higher modifier, which is what you are trying to "get back" on an non-perfect-mix by rolling. So you need to roll a 13+, while they need a 12+. Your theoretical HOrc succeeds only 7.7% less often. Even rolling and getting an 18 (and this is an off-mix so no racial bonus) it's only 15.4% difference...
A 15 is a Medium Difficulty task... which is a task that is not easy forsomeone who is reasonably competent and trained to perform the task... not "medium difficulty for avg Joe Commoner who has no idea what to do."
PB/SA effectively disallows feats and forces hyper-minmaxing during character creation because any character which is not playing the 'Perfect' class/race for their race/class and which dares to take anything but as much score boost as they can is effectively completely incompetent at their primary tasks.
Neither of this is true. Besides, if you allow rolling and a player rolls higher - the whole reason you're arguing for it - that doesn't discourage hyper-minmaxing, it just gives gives them bigger numbers to do it with... encouraging even more hyper min-maxing.
This is, as the Internet says, Boo Sheet. I understand that a character with an 8 in a score should be expected to fail every single roll they make with that score, and if the score is lower than 8 they fail increasingly hilariously. I do not understand why a character's strongest attribute should work only half the time or less on the most basic, mundane tasks required of an Adventurer.
Most alternative generation methods I've seen are designed to allow a character to have both strengths and weaknesses, instead of weaknesses and Even Worse Probably Debilitating weaknesses.
Again, Medium Difficult is not "most basic, mundane". That would be an easy task - DC 5.
Ultimately the game is balanced around lower numbers than you expect. The difference between a 15 and an 18 is most +2 (ignoring racial bonus because either could be increased). But the game doesn't need that +2 for you to be effective at what you do. Unless you expect to succeed nearly all the time, then it helps a little bit.
Point buy tends to be deeply unsatisfying, as the game assumes characters will have scores higher than either point buy or standard array allow for. A character with perfect racial scores for their class/build can hit the bottom edge of what the game wants, but that's about it. The unpleasant pressure on one's numbers from being so weak they can't make even the most basic checks without and undue degree of luck means the Feat system in the game often goes unused. Especially since the character-defining feats everybody likes are best taken very early in progression, so they can actually define a character.
I don't care for simply starting with a natively Heroic stat spread though, either. My current game (on the DM side) has rolled arrays that ended up, through mostly luck and a little chicanery, averaging around 80. It's obnoxious, and players have told me they honestly don't know what to do with ASIs anymore.
What I'd like to do, honestly, is say that every four levels a character gets a feat regardless of whatever else they're doing in their level progression and otherwise say ASIs have to be ASIs (unless they're the bonus ASIs from rogue or fighter), but even that feels a little weird and doesn't play well with multiclass progression. Nevertheless, losing what amounts to the only way to actually customize and build your character after third level to "Man, I just don't have the breathing space to do anything but make my numbers bigger!" is enormously dismaying and why my play group has never complated more than a few games with point buy or standard array.
This isn't actually true, the average result of 4d6kh1 is only 1.44 higher summed across all stats than standard array/point buy. The average on a dice roll for stats is 12.24, which totals to 73.44. The total of standard array/point buy is 72.
Also, the game assumes standard array as the default, with rolling an 'advanced' option and point buy a variant
Interesting, I must have a different version of PHB then ;-)
Point buy tends to be deeply unsatisfying, as the game assumes characters will have scores higher than either point buy or standard array allow for. A character with perfect racial scores for their class/build can hit the bottom edge of what the game wants, but that's about it. The unpleasant pressure on one's numbers from being so weak they can't make even the most basic checks without and undue degree of luck means the Feat system in the game often goes unused. Especially since the character-defining feats everybody likes are best taken very early in progression, so they can actually define a character.
I don't care for simply starting with a natively Heroic stat spread though, either. My current game (on the DM side) has rolled arrays that ended up, through mostly luck and a little chicanery, averaging around 80. It's obnoxious, and players have told me they honestly don't know what to do with ASIs anymore.
What I'd like to do, honestly, is say that every four levels a character gets a feat regardless of whatever else they're doing in their level progression and otherwise say ASIs have to be ASIs (unless they're the bonus ASIs from rogue or fighter), but even that feels a little weird and doesn't play well with multiclass progression. Nevertheless, losing what amounts to the only way to actually customize and build your character after third level to "Man, I just don't have the breathing space to do anything but make my numbers bigger!" is enormously dismaying and why my play group has never complated more than a few games with point buy or standard array.
This isn't actually true, the average result of 4d6kh1 is only 1.44 higher summed across all stats than standard array/point buy. The average on a dice roll for stats is 12.24, which totals to 73.44. The total of standard array/point buy is 72.
Also, the game assumes standard array as the default, with rolling an 'advanced' option and point buy a variant
Interesting, I must have a different version of PHB then ;-)
Ah, I am incorrect, the PHB provides standard array as a time saver/easier method:
If you want to save time or don’t like the idea of randomly determining ability scores, you can use the following scores instead: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
Point buy however is still provided as a variant method, so I was at least correct about something.
I would make an argument for swapping racial ability score modifiers for class based. Still have the racial benefits but no ability score mod. Have the class give +2 to primary and +1 to secondary that way any race would be fine for any class. I find myself picking a race based on how well they would be for the class I want to play and that has kept me from playing certain races that I may otherwise choose.
To be clear, I don't care for rolling, either. In point of fact I would take standard array over rolling if I was forced to use methods given in the PHB. The problem is that the game seems to set every DC in every published adventure two to three points higher than it tells rookie DMs they should, and that filters out to other games. I get that a lot of that is simply The D&D Problem, i.e. the breathtaking incompetence of anyone who can just flat-out bum****le trip over their own ass roughly a quarter of the time no matter how rigorously they train, but Wizards' own published material amplifies and magnifies that pretty extensively. Especially at lower levels, where it's apparent that nobody is ever supposed to pass a check pretty much ever.
As both a DM and a player, I will always go with point buy or standard array. As a DM, the one thing I don't have control over is how well the PCs are balanced against each other. I can certainly tailor situations to highlight a given character's strengths (which is usually enough to counteract any power discrepancies between the best and worst sub-classes), but there is little I can do to make a player with a bad stat spread feel relevant next to the guy that rolled a god-tier character.
And speaking of that, let's be honest here. When people say "rolling," they mean "better stats than point buy." If you roll terribly, you appeal to the DM and they let you reroll because a character weak at everything just isn't fun. I've never seen a table that allowed rolling that didn't end up in somebody fudging something. It just starts off a game with this weird "let's see what I can get away with" kind of dynamic that is not the kind of relationship I want to have with my players.
Game design involves a LOT of playtesting, and I guarantee this game was designed around the standard array. That's why it's there at all, and why its called standard. You are supposed to have tough choices between ASIs and feats because touch choices are meaningful choices. 4e gave you both things - more often - and this was clearly an intentional choice to scale things back.
And the idea that SA/PB hamstrings your character versus intended difficulty settings is ridiculous. In the game I'm running right now every player used PB and they are absolutely destroying encounters. I've had to pump up average encounter exp by at least 1.5x what the DMG recommends to begin to pose a challenge to them, in addition to giving my monsters tactical and terrain advantages. I suppose things could be tough if no one worked together or you had some edgelord chaotic evil shadow monk actively working against the party, but I would probably work to fix those things before messing with stat spreads.
To be clear, I don't care for rolling, either. In point of fact I would take standard array over rolling if I was forced to use methods given in the PHB. The problem is that the game seems to set every DC in every published adventure two to three points higher than it tells rookie DMs they should, and that filters out to other games. I get that a lot of that is simply The D&D Problem, i.e. the breathtaking incompetence of anyone who can just flat-out bum****le trip over their own ass roughly a quarter of the time no matter how rigorously they train, but Wizards' own published material amplifies and magnifies that pretty extensively. Especially at lower levels, where it's apparent that nobody is ever supposed to pass a check pretty much ever.
Glrrrrgh.
The problem is D&D’s flat probability distribution. Something like 3d6 instead 1d20 would favor the mean and give much more weight to the character’s bonus (I’m playing in an Expanse game that uses this), but I don’t think we’re ever going to get rid of WotC’s d20 fetish.
Scatterbrained makes a very good point. We have discussions like this and list what the math will produce and then draw conclusions from that. But in reality, how bad would the stats be before the DM just said, "Yea, why don't you reroll your Charisma and Strength since you want to play a Paladin."
When I started playing, you rolled 3d6 - six times and wrote the best result down for Strength. Then you did this again for Intelligence, and then Wisdom, and then … After you rolled stats you picked a class and a race. If you wanted to play a paladin, you better hope you rolled a paladin's requisite stats, or you played something else.
With standard array and point buy everyone gets to play whatever race-class combo they want (subject to DM approval). Looks like we're gonna have some fun.
I also agree most tables are going to come to some agreement on how they want to handle character creation, and standard array or point buy are going to be the understood lower limit. In my current game the DM said we're going to go with point buy. He also said there were certain races and classes that he wouldn't allow. It kept us from having any arguments leading up to session 0. We have seven players and he is extremely keen on playing the rules pretty straight so that one player doesn't get to enjoy a feature enjoyed by another player's class, even if it would be fun. He doesn't want any player to feel short changed by not getting to enjoy one of their special features. I am finding that as a Bard I have only a little edge over the rogue in acting like a bard outside combat. He took performance as a background and at the start our character stats are very close.
I don't know what the OP expects a starting character to have stat wise to be considered viable. Admittedly, I did choose a matched race class combo as a Half-Elf Bard. With the +2 Chr racial bonus I started with 16 Chr (+3), 14 Dex & Wis (+2), 12 Int & Con (+1) and 10 Str (+0) [avg 13]. Now, this character is nowhere near the first character I rolled 30 years ago, but we were not allowed to improve stats without something like a Wish spell. So that character had: 15 Str, 16 Int, 18 Wis, 12 Dex, 10 Con and 12 Chr [avg 13.8]. When I reach 4th level my Bard will have 10 Str, 12 Int, 14 Wis, 14 Dex, 12 Con and 18 Chr [avg 13.3]. And I expect to have plenty of fun playing that Bard for a while.
Good luck and Enjoy the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
As both a DM and a player, I will always go with point buy or standard array. As a DM, the one thing I don't have control over is how well the PCs are balanced against each other. I can certainly tailor situations to highlight a given character's strengths (which is usually enough to counteract any power discrepancies between the best and worst sub-classes), but there is little I can do to make a player with a bad stat spread feel relevant next to the guy that rolled a god-tier character.
And speaking of that, let's be honest here. When people say "rolling," they mean "better stats than point buy." If you roll terribly, you appeal to the DM and they let you reroll because a character weak at everything just isn't fun. I've never seen a table that allowed rolling that didn't end up in somebody fudging something. It just starts off a game with this weird "let's see what I can get away with" kind of dynamic that is not the kind of relationship I want to have with my players.
Stat-envy between players is a far bigger issue than the math.
Which is exactly the reason I wanted to ditch rolling... but my group likes rolling. I used to do "roll 3 sets and pick your favorite", but invariably someone rolls a ridiculous high set and someone rolls three bad sets. E.g, my wife almost always rolls ridiculous stats - her Level 3 Tabaxi Monk from a campaign we just resumed is 14/17/15/14/17/15 ... her dump stats of Str and Int are 14s...
The compromise I use is that everyone rolls 1 set, these become a set of arrays that anyone can pick from. I give bonus Feats for picking lower value sets. Then I can just increase the difficulty of encounters if need be, but outside of that it doesn't *really* matter, as for most PCs the primary and secondary stats are the ones that matter most. Lacking Proficiency is a big penalty too, and the diff between +0 and +2 on an off-proficiency Saving Throw isn't enough for me to sweat. For skills, usually the best PC will make the attempt (I don't allow players to chain tests or keep trying - a single roll means they will either succeed immediately, eventually, or at cost, or failure has consequences and drives the story forward).
I’ll run a game for awhile. I have everyone roll stats for 2 chars essentially.
you can then pick one of the sets rolled for your char... of anyone else. You cannot pick the ones you roll yourself.
I’ve done games where you declare your race before the rolling. Because your stats are your predetermined at birth god given gifts. But your race is determined before you are even born.
I’ve done standard array.
Done point buy.
Done some hardcore ones where you just roll 3d6 period. 6 times. And you get what you get.
ultimately. If you and your players have fun. It’s a win.
I have three different games. Two where I’m a player, one where I’m a DM. For brevity’s sake, let’s categorize the games by the class I play. Game 1: Wizard game
Game 2: Cleric game
In Wizard game, the DM said we could do point but or standard array. For our first campaign, where I played as a rogue, I took standard array. In the second, I took point buy. In Cleric game, the DM said that he would take any method. However, he’d modify stats if we rolled so that no one is overpowered. I rolled my stats, and except for my 3 in Charisma, I got pretty good stats. In the game I DM, I allow all three options. Except I do rolling a little differently. Re-roll 1s, and if the total of all the stats is below 70, you can re-roll. If you get overpowered stats, the dice favored you. The rogue has like, two 18s.
As both a DM and a player, I will always go with point buy or standard array. As a DM, the one thing I don't have control over is how well the PCs are balanced against each other.
Stat-envy between players is a far bigger issue than the math.
Agreed. I always recommend (as a player) or enforce (as a DM) the point buy option. I want players to work as a group, not compete against each other.
I will say I have had players get ridiculously good rolls for their stats and I asked them if they would willing lower a couple to be closer to the other players. Both times they agreed, but really how bad is it for your lowest stat to be an 11.
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."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Let's examine, for a moment, the case of someone wanting to play an "off-class" race/class combination for reasons of story, roleplaying, or simple sheer boredom. The typically atypical half-orc wizard, for example. The Horc wizard has a base of 15 in its Intelligence ability score, and no meaningful number anywhere else in their stats because PB/SA allows for exactly one score of 15 or higher without disastrous penalty.
Every single prewritten adventure I have ever read seems to assume that the 'base' DC for any typical task is 15. 15 is the "you should be able to figure this out without any real issue" number. 12 is the common "c'mon, stupid - any idiot can pull this off" number, and 10 is not "average", it is "don't even make the party roll for this unless they're being idiots somehow." Nevertheless. 15 is the number the game assumes should be a basic default.
The half-orc wizard, who has presumably trained his whole life to do Wizard Things, when presented with a task any decent wizard is expected to be able to breeze through...fails utterly fifty percent of the time, if the subject is one he's spent his whole life training for. If it's one of the Intelligence abilities he did not gain proficiency in, he fails nearly two thirds of the time, instead. He fails two-thirds of the time or more on every single other ability check in the game because he dared to play an 'off' race for his class, and he will have to devote every single ASI he gets for the rest of the game to his Intelligence alone simply to continue mostly failing to keep up.
PB/SA effectively disallows feats and forces hyper-minmaxing during character creation because any character which is not playing the 'Perfect' class/race for their race/class and which dares to take anything but as much score boost as they can is effectively completely incompetent at their primary tasks. This is, as the Internet says, Boo Sheet. I understand that a character with an 8 in a score should be expected to fail every single roll they make with that score, and if the score is lower than 8 they fail increasingly hilariously. I do not understand why a character's strongest attribute should work only half the time or less on the most basic, mundane tasks required of an Adventurer.
Most alternative generation methods I've seen are designed to allow a character to have both strengths and weaknesses, instead of weaknesses and Even Worse Probably Debilitating weaknesses.
Please do not contact or message me.
There were only 192 people that answered that poll. I don't think that I would use that data as an good assessment of the community as a whole.
*edited for grammar
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderI cannot give any numbers on percentages of users who use what form of stat generation, though I will pass along the request and see if that's something we can offer in a future Dev Update! I'm also not a developer, but I'll give my personal experience as a D&D Beyond staff member who runs and plays in games all the time and uses D&D Beyond almost exclusively for character creation.
As a DM I offer point buy or the array to my players. It takes away any questions about rolling stats being legit, makes sure all players have the opportunity to create a character with decent stats and that all players start at roughly the same power level. The Array is great for quick picks, giving you solid stats where you need them and a low stat or two for role playing. Point Buy offers more experienced players, or those that want to take the time, more flexibility in their character choices.
As a player I prefer point buy. Unless I am making a quick character or have been specifically asked to use one method, I default to point buy. Point buy helps me create characters using the official race and class bonuses but allows me to pair unusual combos without hampering too many stats. I can still get a really high number where I need it so my character is effective, and still have some fun low stats to play off of. Or I can make fun RP decisions because I have more control over the numbers. I have even used some of the extended point buy rules to have stats go as low as 6 so I can create the character I want. My goal is always something fun, with issues but that is still effective, and point buy offers me the options to do that!
Find me on Twitter: @OboeLauren
Are you a player or a DM?
If player: Ask your DM to modify what's written or create something entirely new so that you will be confident that you might have both feats and decent ability scores.
If DM: Modify what's written or create something entirely new so that you will be confident that your players might have both feats and decent ability scores.
I'm a bit confused about the skepticism.
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
Thanks OboeLauren, appreciate it! I honestly prefer point buy myself, though a higher point buy myself, and one that doesn't cap people at a starting stat of 15. The one thing I've found irritating in any group is the sensation of whether or not the game itself is somehow "Legit" based on what generation method is used.
I have only ever played with dice rolls, but it has broken a few of my games that I have played. I literally have each player roll the dice in front of me and I crap you not I had players that did not roll under a 16 for all of their stats. Although, I like the standard array, and I now implement a modified standard array that is 17, 15, 13, 12, 10, and 8. That way the person can feel a bit more powerful without being game breaking over-powered, but it also encourages feat taking, and multiclass options if they so choose.
Vettatori
Point buy gets you to the normal expected range for stats. It's normal that at level 1, your modifier bonus is +3 in a good stat, +2 in an OK one, lower in a bad one. That's what point buy or standard array gets you. You can get +3 in one or two stats but can't get +4 in any until your ASI, and can't get +5 until your second ASI.
That's what the game is designed for and that's what you get with those methods of character generation.
Try comparing apples to apples, and don't try to use the wrong stats to make a misleading argument. Your "2/3s" number is correct in so much as it is the absolute chance of success, but you are then making a relative comparison between hypothetical characters, so let's compare that relative difference: a "perfect" race/class combo only has +1 higher modifier, which is what you are trying to "get back" on an non-perfect-mix by rolling. So you need to roll a 13+, while they need a 12+. Your theoretical HOrc succeeds only 7.7% less often. Even rolling and getting an 18 (and this is an off-mix so no racial bonus) it's only 15.4% difference...Neither of this is true. Besides, if you allow rolling and a player rolls higher - the whole reason you're arguing for it - that doesn't discourage hyper-minmaxing, it just gives gives them bigger numbers to do it with... encouraging even more hyper min-maxing.
Again, Medium Difficult is not "most basic, mundane". That would be an easy task - DC 5.
Ultimately the game is balanced around lower numbers than you expect. The difference between a 15 and an 18 is most +2 (ignoring racial bonus because either could be increased). But the game doesn't need that +2 for you to be effective at what you do. Unless you expect to succeed nearly all the time, then it helps a little bit.
Interesting, I must have a different version of PHB then ;-)
Ah, I am incorrect, the PHB provides standard array as a time saver/easier method:
Point buy however is still provided as a variant method, so I was at least correct about something.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I would make an argument for swapping racial ability score modifiers for class based. Still have the racial benefits but no ability score mod. Have the class give +2 to primary and +1 to secondary that way any race would be fine for any class. I find myself picking a race based on how well they would be for the class I want to play and that has kept me from playing certain races that I may otherwise choose.
To be clear, I don't care for rolling, either. In point of fact I would take standard array over rolling if I was forced to use methods given in the PHB. The problem is that the game seems to set every DC in every published adventure two to three points higher than it tells rookie DMs they should, and that filters out to other games. I get that a lot of that is simply The D&D Problem, i.e. the breathtaking incompetence of anyone who can just flat-out bum****le trip over their own ass roughly a quarter of the time no matter how rigorously they train, but Wizards' own published material amplifies and magnifies that pretty extensively. Especially at lower levels, where it's apparent that nobody is ever supposed to pass a check pretty much ever.
Glrrrrgh.
Please do not contact or message me.
As both a DM and a player, I will always go with point buy or standard array. As a DM, the one thing I don't have control over is how well the PCs are balanced against each other. I can certainly tailor situations to highlight a given character's strengths (which is usually enough to counteract any power discrepancies between the best and worst sub-classes), but there is little I can do to make a player with a bad stat spread feel relevant next to the guy that rolled a god-tier character.
And speaking of that, let's be honest here. When people say "rolling," they mean "better stats than point buy." If you roll terribly, you appeal to the DM and they let you reroll because a character weak at everything just isn't fun. I've never seen a table that allowed rolling that didn't end up in somebody fudging something. It just starts off a game with this weird "let's see what I can get away with" kind of dynamic that is not the kind of relationship I want to have with my players.
Game design involves a LOT of playtesting, and I guarantee this game was designed around the standard array. That's why it's there at all, and why its called standard. You are supposed to have tough choices between ASIs and feats because touch choices are meaningful choices. 4e gave you both things - more often - and this was clearly an intentional choice to scale things back.
And the idea that SA/PB hamstrings your character versus intended difficulty settings is ridiculous. In the game I'm running right now every player used PB and they are absolutely destroying encounters. I've had to pump up average encounter exp by at least 1.5x what the DMG recommends to begin to pose a challenge to them, in addition to giving my monsters tactical and terrain advantages. I suppose things could be tough if no one worked together or you had some edgelord chaotic evil shadow monk actively working against the party, but I would probably work to fix those things before messing with stat spreads.
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
The problem is D&D’s flat probability distribution. Something like 3d6 instead 1d20 would favor the mean and give much more weight to the character’s bonus (I’m playing in an Expanse game that uses this), but I don’t think we’re ever going to get rid of WotC’s d20 fetish.
Scatterbrained makes a very good point. We have discussions like this and list what the math will produce and then draw conclusions from that. But in reality, how bad would the stats be before the DM just said, "Yea, why don't you reroll your Charisma and Strength since you want to play a Paladin."
When I started playing, you rolled 3d6 - six times and wrote the best result down for Strength. Then you did this again for Intelligence, and then Wisdom, and then … After you rolled stats you picked a class and a race. If you wanted to play a paladin, you better hope you rolled a paladin's requisite stats, or you played something else.
With standard array and point buy everyone gets to play whatever race-class combo they want (subject to DM approval). Looks like we're gonna have some fun.
I also agree most tables are going to come to some agreement on how they want to handle character creation, and standard array or point buy are going to be the understood lower limit. In my current game the DM said we're going to go with point buy. He also said there were certain races and classes that he wouldn't allow. It kept us from having any arguments leading up to session 0. We have seven players and he is extremely keen on playing the rules pretty straight so that one player doesn't get to enjoy a feature enjoyed by another player's class, even if it would be fun. He doesn't want any player to feel short changed by not getting to enjoy one of their special features. I am finding that as a Bard I have only a little edge over the rogue in acting like a bard outside combat. He took performance as a background and at the start our character stats are very close.
I don't know what the OP expects a starting character to have stat wise to be considered viable. Admittedly, I did choose a matched race class combo as a Half-Elf Bard. With the +2 Chr racial bonus I started with 16 Chr (+3), 14 Dex & Wis (+2), 12 Int & Con (+1) and 10 Str (+0) [avg 13]. Now, this character is nowhere near the first character I rolled 30 years ago, but we were not allowed to improve stats without something like a Wish spell. So that character had: 15 Str, 16 Int, 18 Wis, 12 Dex, 10 Con and 12 Chr [avg 13.8]. When I reach 4th level my Bard will have 10 Str, 12 Int, 14 Wis, 14 Dex, 12 Con and 18 Chr [avg 13.3]. And I expect to have plenty of fun playing that Bard for a while.
Good luck and Enjoy the game.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Stat-envy between players is a far bigger issue than the math.
Which is exactly the reason I wanted to ditch rolling... but my group likes rolling. I used to do "roll 3 sets and pick your favorite", but invariably someone rolls a ridiculous high set and someone rolls three bad sets. E.g, my wife almost always rolls ridiculous stats - her Level 3 Tabaxi Monk from a campaign we just resumed is 14/17/15/14/17/15 ... her dump stats of Str and Int are 14s...
The compromise I use is that everyone rolls 1 set, these become a set of arrays that anyone can pick from. I give bonus Feats for picking lower value sets. Then I can just increase the difficulty of encounters if need be, but outside of that it doesn't *really* matter, as for most PCs the primary and secondary stats are the ones that matter most. Lacking Proficiency is a big penalty too, and the diff between +0 and +2 on an off-proficiency Saving Throw isn't enough for me to sweat. For skills, usually the best PC will make the attempt (I don't allow players to chain tests or keep trying - a single roll means they will either succeed immediately, eventually, or at cost, or failure has consequences and drives the story forward).
Every now and then.
I’ll run a game for awhile. I have everyone roll stats for 2 chars essentially.
you can then pick one of the sets rolled for your char... of anyone else. You cannot pick the ones you roll yourself.
I’ve done games where you declare your race before the rolling. Because your stats are your predetermined at birth god given gifts. But your race is determined before you are even born.
I’ve done standard array.
Done point buy.
Done some hardcore ones where you just roll 3d6 period. 6 times. And you get what you get.
ultimately. If you and your players have fun. It’s a win.
Blank
I have three different games. Two where I’m a player, one where I’m a DM. For brevity’s sake, let’s categorize the games by the class I play.
Game 1: Wizard game
Game 2: Cleric game
In Wizard game, the DM said we could do point but or standard array. For our first campaign, where I played as a rogue, I took standard array. In the second, I took point buy. In Cleric game, the DM said that he would take any method. However, he’d modify stats if we rolled so that no one is overpowered. I rolled my stats, and except for my 3 in Charisma, I got pretty good stats.
In the game I DM, I allow all three options. Except I do rolling a little differently. Re-roll 1s, and if the total of all the stats is below 70, you can re-roll. If you get overpowered stats, the dice favored you. The rogue has like, two 18s.
Dominick Finch
Agreed. I always recommend (as a player) or enforce (as a DM) the point buy option. I want players to work as a group, not compete against each other.
I will say I have had players get ridiculously good rolls for their stats and I asked them if they would willing lower a couple to be closer to the other players. Both times they agreed, but really how bad is it for your lowest stat to be an 11.
"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."