My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I think the reason why you don't get races that focus on Wisdom is that Wisdom really isn't a stat that you can usually harness offensively. It is great for Perception checks and one of the most common stats call upon to make saving throws, but when it comes to dealing damage? Unless I am forgetting something, it doesn't come up all that often. Even if one is a Cleric, do you really get all that much extra mileage out of having your Wisdom pumped up really high?
So-- I think-- as a result, there aren't many races that are specialized in Wisdom. I suppose it is also a bit more difficult to imagine the character of a race whose unique specialty over humans would be their wisdom. Seems like such a race would have too much common sense to go off adventuring. It doesn't really fit any of the traditional fantasy races particularly well, good guy or bad guy ones.
There are some clerics that hit with a weapon and rarely use spells that rely on wisdom but it is far from universal. My light cleric stays away from the bad guys and atacks using wisdom based spells (fireball, banish, spiritual weapon, toll the dead, sacred flame etc).
As a rough guide clerics that get potent spellcasting need high wisdom or they will become very weak at higher levels. Clerics that get divine strike will have weapon attacks more powerful than cantrips though their spell choice (and how many combats they have per day) might still make wisdom an important stat, possibly more important that thand strength / dex.
Unless I am forgetting something, it doesn't come up all that often. Even if one is a Cleric, do you really get all that much extra mileage out of having your Wisdom pumped up really high?
For a cleric the higher Wis will:
Increase Spell Save DC
Increase Attack Bonus for spells
Increase damage for weapon attacks (Divine Strike) or cantrips (Potent Spellcasting)
Allow more spells to be prepared.
Increase healing from most healing spells
More use of certain subclass abilities (e.g. Eyes of the Grave for Grave Domain)
... This means Clerics benefit more from high wis than Wizards do from high int or bards/sorcs do from high charisma. Although most spellcasters work similarly and all benefit from focusing on the spellcasting ability.
Outside of Warlock Invocation boosts the Cleric has the best damage-dealing (in terms of pure damage totals) cantrip: Toll the Dead. Which can do 4d12 damage, higher than any other cantrip, and with Potent Spellcasting they add their wisdom mod to it. The only comparable cantrip is Eldritch Blast but you really need Warlock invocations to make that shine better.
No matter the build type, Clerics benefit greatly by focusing on Wisdom.
Agreed, in fact I think Clerics with heavy armor / divine strike are quite MAD, needind strength for wearing heavy armor (unless dwarf), and weapon attacks (as their cantrips are quite weak), as melee combatents often holding concentration spells they need high con and they need high Wis as outlined above. DEx is also a stat you don't really want to dump and dumping int means religion checks are very poor which seems wrong.
Outside of Clerics Druids (at least if thet are not circle of the moon) need wis as their primary stat.
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Because those are the risks you take when rolling stats. The player might not have gotten anything above a 14, but they might also have gotten nothing below a 12. There is no 'if your total is below n, reroll stats' or 'also drop ones' or 'reroll if your stats aren't super duper great.' You roll 4d6, drop the lowest, and repeat that 6 times and live with what you get. I'd assume that if rerolling was allowed, the OP wouldn't have posted this question in the first place.
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Silly question, but if they are rolling, what if they only rolled 10's? Should races have +6 wisdom bonuses to compensate for that? Are you sure we are the ones being obtuse here?
I'm not saying racial bonuses should make up for poor rolls...I'm asking why on earth you'd make a player play with such poor rolls?
Someone rolls straight 10s and another player ends up with nothing under 15s, as a DM you're not going to intervene there? Seems daft
Because those are the risks you take when rolling stats. The player might not have gotten anything above a 14, but they might also have gotten nothing below a 12. There is no 'if your total is below n, reroll stats' or 'also drop ones' or 'reroll if your stats aren't super duper great.' You roll 4d6, drop the lowest, and repeat that 6 times and live with what you get. I'd assume that if rerolling was allowed, the OP wouldn't have posted this question in the first place.
That's fair enough, seems like a system asking for trouble tbh and I tend to go with at least two scores of 15 or above to have a validated set of scores
It appears I'm in the minority on that however so I'll stop going on about it, I don't mean to derail and the OP seems to have got some good advice so it's all academic really ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Because those are the risks you take when rolling stats. The player might not have gotten anything above a 14, but they might also have gotten nothing below a 12. There is no 'if your total is below n, reroll stats' or 'also drop ones' or 'reroll if your stats aren't super duper great.' You roll 4d6, drop the lowest, and repeat that 6 times and live with what you get. I'd assume that if rerolling was allowed, the OP wouldn't have posted this question in the first place.
Except let's be honest here - that's not why most people roll stats. They roll to get better than standard values and feel that high of rolling well. If it comes out worse, there's usually an excuse or allowance to reroll.
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Haven't you read the thread or are you trying to troll us by your inane comments? As anyone who has ever played an RPG where you roll your ability scores would know, getting crappy rolls is the risk you take by rolling for scores instead of using point buy or standard point array. Basically what you are asking is "why is this person's ability scores low just because they rolled low on the dice they used to generate the ability scores?"
Again, it's not a problem, it's how the system is supposed to be used. Just like how you don't get to re-roll your attack rolls just because you happen to roll three 1s in a row. If you want to change the rules, by all means. But repeatedly asking the same question even though it has been answered just as many times just seems like a waste of time.
For the group I'm in we use: 7 scores keeping highest 6, each score 4d6 drop lowest one rerolling 1s once. Player can then either accept the result, re try the whole set once if nothing is higher than 13, after that if unhappy with result they can use point buy / standard array instead.
-
Personally, regarding the actual topic, I'd be happy to let players just have "3 points to spend" on any Ability Scores they want but cannot spend more than than 2 in the same one. This is instead of the racial ASI, of course. This way they don't have to suffer from less optimal stats in favour of a race they find more interesting. Being able to spread as +1 to 3 stats isn't unbalanced and helps with the MAD of some interesting builds.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Haven't you read the thread or are you trying to troll us by your inane comments? As anyone who has ever played an RPG where you roll your ability scores would know, getting crappy rolls is the risk you take by rolling for scores instead of using point buy or standard point array. Basically what you are asking is "why is this person's ability scores low just because they rolled low on the dice they used to generate the ability scores?"
Again, it's not a problem, it's how the system is supposed to be used. Just like how you don't get to re-roll your attack rolls just because you happen to roll three 1s in a row. If you want to change the rules, by all means. But repeatedly asking the same question even though it has been answered just as many times just seems like a waste of time.
No trolling, I suppose having never used that system I was just confused given the issue it has created seemed to be easily solved by being a bit malleable, which character creation rules are. It's not about making the game easier like you seem to be implying I'm taking the position of, just that I feel that characters would want to be at least good at something where starting with 14 as a highest stat seems quite restricting (at least in a mechanical sense)
Edit - it's been so long since I checked that part of the PHB that admittedly on re-reading I can see where you might be getting annoyed at me - I'd assumed there was at least some form of protection for the free rolling of attributes. Let's just get back on topic, and apologies if I was giving the impression I was looking to wind anyone up
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Haven't you read the thread or are you trying to troll us by your inane comments? As anyone who has ever played an RPG where you roll your ability scores would know, getting crappy rolls is the risk you take by rolling for scores instead of using point buy or standard point array. Basically what you are asking is "why is this person's ability scores low just because they rolled low on the dice they used to generate the ability scores?"
Again, it's not a problem, it's how the system is supposed to be used. Just like how you don't get to re-roll your attack rolls just because you happen to roll three 1s in a row. If you want to change the rules, by all means. But repeatedly asking the same question even though it has been answered just as many times just seems like a waste of time.
No trolling, I suppose having never used that system I was just confused given the issue it has created seemed to be easily solved by being a bit malleable, which character creation rules are. It's not about making the game easier like you seem to be implying I'm taking the position of, just that I feel that characters would want to be at least good at something where starting with 14 as a highest stat seems quite restricting (at least in a mechanical sense)
I haven't implied anything, Iillutrated my point with an example. The rules for rolling for abilities is on page 13 in the PHB. And, once again, the risk of having your character "restricted" (it's not really, though, the PHB even has a point buy example with every stat below 14) is the risk you take by randomly generating your scores. Are those rules really that confusing?
My brother is making a cleric and really needs good wisdom. We like to roll for our stats, but the highest roll he got was a 14. With the current 5e races, the largest bonus you can get to wisdom is +1. Does that really mean that he can only 15 in wisdom? Any advice would be really appreciated
I've only just realised this. You like to roll for your stats but don't have an agreed upon minimum quality of stats?
When I've had players roll stats they need at least 2 ability scores of 15+ therefore we don't arrive at this situation
Check out Eberron. A couple of the Marks (Finding, Detection and Handling) result in race variants with +2 Wis. Also Kalashtar
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Haven't you read the thread or are you trying to troll us by your inane comments? As anyone who has ever played an RPG where you roll your ability scores would know, getting crappy rolls is the risk you take by rolling for scores instead of using point buy or standard point array. Basically what you are asking is "why is this person's ability scores low just because they rolled low on the dice they used to generate the ability scores?"
Again, it's not a problem, it's how the system is supposed to be used. Just like how you don't get to re-roll your attack rolls just because you happen to roll three 1s in a row. If you want to change the rules, by all means. But repeatedly asking the same question even though it has been answered just as many times just seems like a waste of time.
No trolling, I suppose having never used that system I was just confused given the issue it has created seemed to be easily solved by being a bit malleable, which character creation rules are. It's not about making the game easier like you seem to be implying I'm taking the position of, just that I feel that characters would want to be at least good at something where starting with 14 as a highest stat seems quite restricting (at least in a mechanical sense)
I haven't implied anything, Iillutrated my point with an example. The rules for rolling for abilities is on page 13 in the PHB. And, once again, the risk of having your character "restricted" (it's not really, though, the PHB even has a point buy example with every stat below 14) is the risk you take by randomly generating your scores. Are those rules really that confusing?
No, I just don't use them and use either standard array or a modified version where if rolling at least two of the sets of 4d6 (minus lowest roll) must be 15 or over. Like I said it's been an age since I read that section and I tend to break apart a lot of the systems due to dissatisfaction with how they turn out anyway (encounter building for one)
Again, apologies that didn't come to mind when I originally commented on it way back. I can see my error now
In a way it doesn't matter what your starting stats are because the DM can adjust monster difficulty accordingly. However it sucks if you rolled realy badly and other members of the party rolled really well. Your best stat is a +2 in charisma and become a bard only to find the paladin with 18 strength and 16 con and 18 charisma insists he is better as the party face.
That is the way is does with rolled stats, so lots of people homebrew rules to prevent low stats (but rarely/never high stats) to reduce the impact. I did notice the post rthat one person homebrews a re-roll if you dont have at least 2 scores of 15 or more, even though standard array only has one. This makes parties more powerful the expected for a given level which the GM needs to take account of when balancing encounters and even then if one person rolled 18/17/16/14/10/10 they arte going to be far more power ful than the rest of the party even with rerolls for poor dice. In reallity some members of a party can be better than others but to roll stats the players need ot be aware that can be the case and they might be the weaker party member. standard array and point buy, along with some other home brew methods where everyone has equivalent stats.
In a way it doesn't matter what your starting stats are because the DM can adjust monster difficulty accordingly. However it sucks if you rolled realy badly and other members of the party rolled really well. Your best stat is a +2 in charisma and become a bard only to find the paladin with 18 strength and 16 con and 18 charisma insists he is better as the party face.
That is the way is does with rolled stats, so lots of people homebrew rules to prevent low stats (but rarely/never high stats) to reduce the impact. I did notice the post rthat one person homebrews a re-roll if you dont have at least 2 scores of 15 or more, even though standard array only has one. This makes parties more powerful the expected for a given level which the GM needs to take account of when balancing encounters and even then if one person rolled 18/17/16/14/10/10 they arte going to be far more power ful than the rest of the party even with rerolls for poor dice. In reallity some members of a party can be better than others but to roll stats the players need ot be aware that can be the case and they might be the weaker party member. standard array and point buy, along with some other home brew methods where everyone has equivalent stats.
That was me and you're not wrong. Fortunately this time it's worked out really well. I tend to build encounters in a different way anyway. My other group I did standard array but detached racial ability bonuses and made them class bonuses I stead and again that's worked well.
But I've been plenty off topic and posted far more than necessary in here already as shown above so I'll just give the thread some room to breathe haha
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think you might mean to be replying to the thread starter
I'm confused as to the process where one of the DMs players ended up with 14 being their highest score
Rolling for stats. That was stated in the very first post.
There are some clerics that hit with a weapon and rarely use spells that rely on wisdom but it is far from universal. My light cleric stays away from the bad guys and atacks using wisdom based spells (fireball, banish, spiritual weapon, toll the dead, sacred flame etc).
As a rough guide clerics that get potent spellcasting need high wisdom or they will become very weak at higher levels. Clerics that get divine strike will have weapon attacks more powerful than cantrips though their spell choice (and how many combats they have per day) might still make wisdom an important stat, possibly more important that thand strength / dex.
Agreed, in fact I think Clerics with heavy armor / divine strike are quite MAD, needind strength for wearing heavy armor (unless dwarf), and weapon attacks (as their cantrips are quite weak), as melee combatents often holding concentration spells they need high con and they need high Wis as outlined above. DEx is also a stat you don't really want to dump and dumping int means religion checks are very poor which seems wrong.
Outside of Clerics Druids (at least if thet are not circle of the moon) need wis as their primary stat.
I'm saying if one is rolling for stats, why is someone ending up with 14 being the highest stat they rolled? They're going to have a pretty poor time of it aren't they
Yes? That was appearantly what happened, so what of it?
Are you being purposefully obtuse?
The problem that needs fixing probably shouldn't have been a problem in the first place and I was confused as to why there wasn't some sort of safety net regarding rolled stats.
Perhaps the issue could be sorted by allowing the player to re-roll? It obviously depends on how everyone else's rolls have been as to whether that specific player is going to seem neutered in comparison
Because those are the risks you take when rolling stats. The player might not have gotten anything above a 14, but they might also have gotten nothing below a 12. There is no 'if your total is below n, reroll stats' or 'also drop ones' or 'reroll if your stats aren't super duper great.' You roll 4d6, drop the lowest, and repeat that 6 times and live with what you get. I'd assume that if rerolling was allowed, the OP wouldn't have posted this question in the first place.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
I'm not saying racial bonuses should make up for poor rolls...I'm asking why on earth you'd make a player play with such poor rolls?
Someone rolls straight 10s and another player ends up with nothing under 15s, as a DM you're not going to intervene there? Seems daft
That's fair enough, seems like a system asking for trouble tbh and I tend to go with at least two scores of 15 or above to have a validated set of scores
It appears I'm in the minority on that however so I'll stop going on about it, I don't mean to derail and the OP seems to have got some good advice so it's all academic really ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Except let's be honest here - that's not why most people roll stats. They roll to get better than standard values and feel that high of rolling well. If it comes out worse, there's usually an excuse or allowance to reroll.
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
Haven't you read the thread or are you trying to troll us by your inane comments? As anyone who has ever played an RPG where you roll your ability scores would know, getting crappy rolls is the risk you take by rolling for scores instead of using point buy or standard point array. Basically what you are asking is "why is this person's ability scores low just because they rolled low on the dice they used to generate the ability scores?"
Again, it's not a problem, it's how the system is supposed to be used. Just like how you don't get to re-roll your attack rolls just because you happen to roll three 1s in a row. If you want to change the rules, by all means. But repeatedly asking the same question even though it has been answered just as many times just seems like a waste of time.
For the group I'm in we use: 7 scores keeping highest 6, each score 4d6 drop lowest one rerolling 1s once. Player can then either accept the result, re try the whole set once if nothing is higher than 13, after that if unhappy with result they can use point buy / standard array instead.
-
Personally, regarding the actual topic, I'd be happy to let players just have "3 points to spend" on any Ability Scores they want but cannot spend more than than 2 in the same one. This is instead of the racial ASI, of course. This way they don't have to suffer from less optimal stats in favour of a race they find more interesting. Being able to spread as +1 to 3 stats isn't unbalanced and helps with the MAD of some interesting builds.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
No trolling, I suppose having never used that system I was just confused given the issue it has created seemed to be easily solved by being a bit malleable, which character creation rules are. It's not about making the game easier like you seem to be implying I'm taking the position of, just that I feel that characters would want to be at least good at something where starting with 14 as a highest stat seems quite restricting (at least in a mechanical sense)
Edit - it's been so long since I checked that part of the PHB that admittedly on re-reading I can see where you might be getting annoyed at me - I'd assumed there was at least some form of protection for the free rolling of attributes. Let's just get back on topic, and apologies if I was giving the impression I was looking to wind anyone up
I haven't implied anything, Iillutrated my point with an example. The rules for rolling for abilities is on page 13 in the PHB. And, once again, the risk of having your character "restricted" (it's not really, though, the PHB even has a point buy example with every stat below 14) is the risk you take by randomly generating your scores. Are those rules really that confusing?
No, I just don't use them and use either standard array or a modified version where if rolling at least two of the sets of 4d6 (minus lowest roll) must be 15 or over. Like I said it's been an age since I read that section and I tend to break apart a lot of the systems due to dissatisfaction with how they turn out anyway (encounter building for one)
Again, apologies that didn't come to mind when I originally commented on it way back. I can see my error now
In a way it doesn't matter what your starting stats are because the DM can adjust monster difficulty accordingly. However it sucks if you rolled realy badly and other members of the party rolled really well. Your best stat is a +2 in charisma and become a bard only to find the paladin with 18 strength and 16 con and 18 charisma insists he is better as the party face.
That is the way is does with rolled stats, so lots of people homebrew rules to prevent low stats (but rarely/never high stats) to reduce the impact. I did notice the post rthat one person homebrews a re-roll if you dont have at least 2 scores of 15 or more, even though standard array only has one. This makes parties more powerful the expected for a given level which the GM needs to take account of when balancing encounters and even then if one person rolled 18/17/16/14/10/10 they arte going to be far more power ful than the rest of the party even with rerolls for poor dice. In reallity some members of a party can be better than others but to roll stats the players need ot be aware that can be the case and they might be the weaker party member. standard array and point buy, along with some other home brew methods where everyone has equivalent stats.
That was me and you're not wrong. Fortunately this time it's worked out really well. I tend to build encounters in a different way anyway. My other group I did standard array but detached racial ability bonuses and made them class bonuses I stead and again that's worked well.
But I've been plenty off topic and posted far more than necessary in here already as shown above so I'll just give the thread some room to breathe haha