A caster will do just fine with 15 15 10 10 8 8. Compared to the standard array the difference will be small and in non-essential qualities.
I don't know about that ... Using my current Half-Elf Bard, and applying racial modifiers according to the PHB I would get ...
Str 8 - Dex 16 - Con 10 - Wis 11 - Int 8 - Chr 17
I'd be a spell caster that has to hope to dodge every attack. I'd even have difficulty serving as the face of the party because of the unusually low Int and Wis scores. one of my class features, Jack of all Trades, would not be very impressive adding 1/2 proficiency to such low initial modifiers. Fortunately Dex and Chr are phat abilities that apply to allot of skills.
I was once preparing a probability analysis of rolling a set of stats in 4d6 drop 1. I wonder how low the probability of this set of skills would score? For example, only 46% of all characters using these rules will not roll at least one 16 or better in the 6 abilities. The probability of rolling two 8s or lower in the six rolls is 24.7%. You can't simply multiply both of these together to narrow down how tight this set of abilities is, but it does begin to give one an idea of how unlikely this would be.
You're not describing a caster. Your bard is a skill monkey buffer who happens to be a half caster as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I actually rolled a 16, a 17, and four 15s once, so 4d6kh does have problems, but almost all Ability Score Generation methods do.
That is patently untrue. The 27 point Buy system does not allow crazy stats. The Standard Array I guess is moot in this case, since stats are not really generated in that case. But that is why the 27 point buy or SA are the only methods that are balanced and ALWAYS fair.
Could you define Fair in this context for me?
I heard of a great method of using 4d6 drop lowest where each player rolled the 4d6 in turn. Then after the process occurred six times, each player was allowed to arrange their abilities using those six scores. That seems totally fair and avoids the problem that one player scores unusually high or one player scores unusually low.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
... what the hell was the point in rolling in the first place.
Honestly, looking at the importance some players apparently attribute to simple +1 to a modifier I'd expect them to create pretty much the exact stat array for each and every character of a given class if using a non-random method. I kinda like a bit more diversity and not necessarily getting everything exactly the way you want it.
A caster will do just fine with 15 15 10 10 8 8. Compared to the standard array the difference will be small and in non-essential qualities.
Not really.... They will have to dump CON or DEX and that will be very bad.
Right. Dex mod will be 1 lower than in the standard array (10 vs 13). Very bad indeed.
yes it is....AC -1 will be an issue.
The fact nobody wants to admit that a +1 is even a big difference in a bound accuracy system is odd to me....
AC 13 vs 12 (using light armor) or 14 vs 13 (using mage armor) is not a game changing difference.
Actually it is very much....+1 is a big difference in a bound accuracy system. If it wasn't then we wouldn't only go from a +2 to a +6 in proficiency over 20 levels.
Its the difference between the proficiency of a level 1 and level 5 player.
As Yueri stated....you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player but you would be perfectly fine letting them be on average +2 points behind their peers on stats?
+1 AC is worth a Feat/ASI in several ways and to diminish this is to completely misunderstand the math behind the system.
Honestly, looking at the importance some players apparently attribute to simple +1 to a modifier I'd expect them to create pretty much the exact stat array for each and every character of a given class if using a non-random method. I kinda like a bit more diversity and not necessarily getting everything exactly the way you want it.
Usually you're choosing between +1 to a stat you really care about and +2 to to a stat you care less about, which occasionally creates variance, but it's true that, for example, a wizard will probably have (after racial adjustments) 16 int/14 con/14 dex with the other three stats in the 8-12 range. Much sharper cost curves would boost variance.
... you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
I find it interesting that those of us who are saying we prefer rolling are being called optimizers (and only optimizers who could have no other possible reason for rolling); yet, we're also the ones saying that a point or two on stat arrays doesn't matter too much. Seems like we can't both optimize and not worry about squeezing out every bonus.
I find it interesting that those of us who are saying we prefer rolling are being called optimizers (and only optimizers who could have no other possible reason for rolling); yet, we're also the ones saying that a point or two on stat arrays doesn't matter too much. Seems like we can't both optimize and not worry about squeezing out every bonus.
I think the "optimizer" part comes when you have a method for negating poor rolls (reroll under a total of X). If you roll straight and just go with that I do not think you are optimizing as much as its much more of a gamble....but the math does favor you but its at least an honest way of doing it.
I have more of a problem with rolling simply due to the swing it produces between characters. That has always been my problem with it. One person has a max mod of +2 vs. someone with a 20 to start is a big deal....and it is fairly likely to happen that there is at least a +2 mod difference on average.
... you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
Let's discuss this. Say I give one of my PCs a +2 longsword at character creation. Or I give every single PC a magical item, some something Uncommon, others something Rare. What's the worst that could happen? How is this going to throw my campaign in disarray? I don't see anything that couldn't be perfectly appropriate with some really simple adjustments to the campaign, or not even that depending on how the characters turned out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
... you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
Let's discuss this. Say I give one of my PCs a +2 longsword at character creation. Or I give every single PC a magical item, some something Uncommon, others something Rare. What's the worst that could happen? How is this going to throw my campaign in disarray? I don't see anything that couldn't be perfectly appropriate with some really simple adjustments to the campaign, or not even that depending on how the characters turned out.
I mean sure if you want to ignore the fact you are basically making a level 1 player as good as level 9 player in terms of what they can hit and damage....
CR and leveling systems make assumptions about what the players at various levels can do and make CR roughly equivalent so that you can reasonable assume a group of 4 level 1 PCs will have a medium challenge with a CR 1 creature.
Now normally PCs generally have the advantage anyway as they have generally have more opportunities to use their full action economy per round (Action, BA, Reaction) vs a creature which do not routinely have as many options. So players will typically have an advantage with action economy.
If you give a +2 you now are moving the parameters and this CR 1 creature is now much less threatening. Now if everyone is on the same power level (i.e. you gave them ALL +2 weapons) then this would not really be an issue because you have a consistent power base throughout the group. Now you just toss CR 2 at them and the world feels fine.
Where this +2 becomes an issue is....if you give it to one player and say "Nah" to the rest.
Now this one player has no struggle with the CR1...but the rest are struggling against it. Now you have to make fights with:
1. Threats more appropriate to the character punching above their level
2. BUT not threatening enough to wipe the rest of the party
Now imagine doing this for every encounter having to also factor in does this monster fit the aesthetic I am going for? Is it relevant to the story? Should I add HP or subtract?
You just add a needless variable to the pile of things you think of when making encounters.
OR you just do a point buy and let them pick but they are all on the realitively same power curve and you do not have to worry about it.
I find it interesting that those of us who are saying we prefer rolling are being called optimizers (and only optimizers who could have no other possible reason for rolling); yet, we're also the ones saying that a point or two on stat arrays doesn't matter too much. Seems like we can't both optimize and not worry about squeezing out every bonus.
I think what people are saying is that an optimizer would rather risk getting a +1 modifier in hopes of getting a +4 modifier rather then settle for a +2 modifier without the gamble. In particular if when they gamble and get a +1 modifier they can complain to their GM that the system is unfair (after the fact) and get them to give him the +2 modifier anyway. Because that is pretty much what this entire OP's post illustrates.. aka.. optimizers are ok with gambling because if they win they win, if they lose they whine until the GM gives them what they want anyway.
Yeah that was the original sentiment of the thread too....people talking about purposefully killing characters with poor stats as a way to roll a better character.
... you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
Let's discuss this. Say I give one of my PCs a +2 longsword at character creation. Or I give every single PC a magical item, some something Uncommon, others something Rare. What's the worst that could happen? How is this going to throw my campaign in disarray? I don't see anything that couldn't be perfectly appropriate with some really simple adjustments to the campaign, or not even that depending on how the characters turned out.
I mean sure if you want to ignore the fact you are basically making a level 1 player as good as level 9 player in terms of what they can hit and damage....
CR and leveling systems make assumptions about what the players at various levels can do and make CR roughly equivalent so that you can reasonable assume a group of 4 level 1 PCs will have a medium challenge with a CR 1 creature.
Now normally PCs generally have the advantage anyway as they have generally have more opportunities to use their full action economy per round (Action, BA, Reaction) vs a creature which do not routinely have as many options. So players will typically have an advantage with action economy.
If you give a +2 you now are moving the parameters and this CR 1 creature is now much less threatening. Now if everyone is on the same power level (i.e. you gave them ALL +2 weapons) then this would not really be an issue because you have a consistent power base throughout the group. Now you just toss CR 2 at them and the world feels fine.
Where this +2 becomes an issue is....if you give it to one player and say "Nah" to the rest.
Now this one player has no struggle with the CR1...but the rest are struggling against it. Now you have to make fights with:
1. Threats more appropriate to the character punching above their level
2. BUT not threatening enough to wipe the rest of the party
Now imagine doing this for every encounter having to also factor in does this monster fit the aesthetic I am going for? Is it relevant to the story? Should I add HP or subtract?
You just add a needless variable to the pile of things you think of when making encounters.
OR you just do a point buy and let them pick but they are all on the realitively same power curve and you do not have to worry about it.
Suppose I give this +2 longsword to the one player who rolled a poor statline while everyone else rolled good to great stats, and now that one player's character is in line with the other, "regular" characters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
... you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
Let's discuss this. Say I give one of my PCs a +2 longsword at character creation. Or I give every single PC a magical item, some something Uncommon, others something Rare. What's the worst that could happen? How is this going to throw my campaign in disarray? I don't see anything that couldn't be perfectly appropriate with some really simple adjustments to the campaign, or not even that depending on how the characters turned out.
I mean sure if you want to ignore the fact you are basically making a level 1 player as good as level 9 player in terms of what they can hit and damage....
CR and leveling systems make assumptions about what the players at various levels can do and make CR roughly equivalent so that you can reasonable assume a group of 4 level 1 PCs will have a medium challenge with a CR 1 creature.
Now normally PCs generally have the advantage anyway as they have generally have more opportunities to use their full action economy per round (Action, BA, Reaction) vs a creature which do not routinely have as many options. So players will typically have an advantage with action economy.
If you give a +2 you now are moving the parameters and this CR 1 creature is now much less threatening. Now if everyone is on the same power level (i.e. you gave them ALL +2 weapons) then this would not really be an issue because you have a consistent power base throughout the group. Now you just toss CR 2 at them and the world feels fine.
Where this +2 becomes an issue is....if you give it to one player and say "Nah" to the rest.
Now this one player has no struggle with the CR1...but the rest are struggling against it. Now you have to make fights with:
1. Threats more appropriate to the character punching above their level
2. BUT not threatening enough to wipe the rest of the party
Now imagine doing this for every encounter having to also factor in does this monster fit the aesthetic I am going for? Is it relevant to the story? Should I add HP or subtract?
You just add a needless variable to the pile of things you think of when making encounters.
OR you just do a point buy and let them pick but they are all on the realitively same power curve and you do not have to worry about it.
Suppose I give this +2 longsword to the one player who rolled a poor statline while everyone else rolled good to great stats, and now that one player's character is in line with the other, "regular" characters.
....I guess? Why even have them roll then if you are just going to re-align the characters anyway with items? Just do point buy and avoid it in the first place.
If the solution involves "I need to give them a Rare weapon to make this work at level 1" you should probably reassess.
For the record I made that mistake though they were 2nd level, but in my defence if I hadn't it might have been a tpk because I wasn't as familiar with were rats as I thought I was!
So I've said it before, I'll say it again. It doesn't seem like there's much discussion anymore. We did manage to get some 4d6 test arrays going which was fun, but that was quickly derailed into finger pointing again with the proverbial "your fun is wrong".
Perhaps the best we can do is to stop replying to this thread and feeding trolls. The way you choose to have fun with the game is as valid as anyone else's way of having fun with the game. This statement can not be disputed.
I'll also state the following:
If I were ever to try the 4d6 stat rolling method then I would be hoping to get a stronger array than what I could get from standard array or point buy. However, I have never ever played or made a character with rolled stats, it has always been point buy.
I don't begrudge anyone doing what is fun for their table and I support it if all parties involved are well informed about the different methods and what the pros/cons of each are.
What I don't like is being disingenuous about the CONs of the 4d6 method and how it can affect game balance. Its fine to do anything you want but having at least a healthy respect for the math behind the balance gives you an idea of the caveats of each system.
To say a +1 or +2 is not a big deal is just not understanding how it applies to the system. The weapon example is actually not the greatest as that only affects damage and attack rolls....vs an ability score is much more generally applicable to a wider array of skills and features.
... you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
Let's discuss this. Say I give one of my PCs a +2 longsword at character creation. Or I give every single PC a magical item, some something Uncommon, others something Rare. What's the worst that could happen? How is this going to throw my campaign in disarray? I don't see anything that couldn't be perfectly appropriate with some really simple adjustments to the campaign, or not even that depending on how the characters turned out.
I mean sure if you want to ignore the fact you are basically making a level 1 player as good as level 9 player in terms of what they can hit and damage....
CR and leveling systems make assumptions about what the players at various levels can do and make CR roughly equivalent so that you can reasonable assume a group of 4 level 1 PCs will have a medium challenge with a CR 1 creature.
Now normally PCs generally have the advantage anyway as they have generally have more opportunities to use their full action economy per round (Action, BA, Reaction) vs a creature which do not routinely have as many options. So players will typically have an advantage with action economy.
If you give a +2 you now are moving the parameters and this CR 1 creature is now much less threatening. Now if everyone is on the same power level (i.e. you gave them ALL +2 weapons) then this would not really be an issue because you have a consistent power base throughout the group. Now you just toss CR 2 at them and the world feels fine.
Where this +2 becomes an issue is....if you give it to one player and say "Nah" to the rest.
Now this one player has no struggle with the CR1...but the rest are struggling against it. Now you have to make fights with:
1. Threats more appropriate to the character punching above their level
2. BUT not threatening enough to wipe the rest of the party
Now imagine doing this for every encounter having to also factor in does this monster fit the aesthetic I am going for? Is it relevant to the story? Should I add HP or subtract?
You just add a needless variable to the pile of things you think of when making encounters.
OR you just do a point buy and let them pick but they are all on the realitively same power curve and you do not have to worry about it.
Suppose I give this +2 longsword to the one player who rolled a poor statline while everyone else rolled good to great stats, and now that one player's character is in line with the other, "regular" characters.
....I guess? Why even have them roll then if you are just going to re-align the characters anyway with items? Just do point buy and avoid it in the first place.
If the solution involves "I need to give them a Rare weapon to make this work at level 1" you should probably reassess.
Because we like rolling? Because oddities make for easy character hooks? Because it might take players out of their comfort zone a bit? Why not?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
But Pangurjan, this game is not about your enjoyment, it is about the enjoyment of people not even playing at the same table as you. That is why they are so hard pressed to make sure the way you play is the way they like it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You're not describing a caster. Your bard is a skill monkey buffer who happens to be a half caster as well.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Could you define Fair in this context for me?
I heard of a great method of using 4d6 drop lowest where each player rolled the 4d6 in turn. Then after the process occurred six times, each player was allowed to arrange their abilities using those six scores. That seems totally fair and avoids the problem that one player scores unusually high or one player scores unusually low.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
AC 13 vs 12 (using light armor) or 14 vs 13 (using mage armor) is not a game changing difference.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Honestly, looking at the importance some players apparently attribute to simple +1 to a modifier I'd expect them to create pretty much the exact stat array for each and every character of a given class if using a non-random method. I kinda like a bit more diversity and not necessarily getting everything exactly the way you want it.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Actually it is very much....+1 is a big difference in a bound accuracy system. If it wasn't then we wouldn't only go from a +2 to a +6 in proficiency over 20 levels.
Its the difference between the proficiency of a level 1 and level 5 player.
As Yueri stated....you would never hand a +2 weapon to a level 1 player but you would be perfectly fine letting them be on average +2 points behind their peers on stats?
+1 AC is worth a Feat/ASI in several ways and to diminish this is to completely misunderstand the math behind the system.
I don't think you have any earthly idea what I would or wouldn't do. :p
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Usually you're choosing between +1 to a stat you really care about and +2 to to a stat you care less about, which occasionally creates variance, but it's true that, for example, a wizard will probably have (after racial adjustments) 16 int/14 con/14 dex with the other three stats in the 8-12 range. Much sharper cost curves would boost variance.
And you can do that but I would suggest you understand the impact that has on the intended balance around the system. To ignore it completely is a very bad idea.
I find it interesting that those of us who are saying we prefer rolling are being called optimizers (and only optimizers who could have no other possible reason for rolling); yet, we're also the ones saying that a point or two on stat arrays doesn't matter too much. Seems like we can't both optimize and not worry about squeezing out every bonus.
I think the "optimizer" part comes when you have a method for negating poor rolls (reroll under a total of X). If you roll straight and just go with that I do not think you are optimizing as much as its much more of a gamble....but the math does favor you but its at least an honest way of doing it.
I have more of a problem with rolling simply due to the swing it produces between characters. That has always been my problem with it. One person has a max mod of +2 vs. someone with a 20 to start is a big deal....and it is fairly likely to happen that there is at least a +2 mod difference on average.
Let's discuss this. Say I give one of my PCs a +2 longsword at character creation. Or I give every single PC a magical item, some something Uncommon, others something Rare. What's the worst that could happen? How is this going to throw my campaign in disarray? I don't see anything that couldn't be perfectly appropriate with some really simple adjustments to the campaign, or not even that depending on how the characters turned out.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I mean sure if you want to ignore the fact you are basically making a level 1 player as good as level 9 player in terms of what they can hit and damage....
CR and leveling systems make assumptions about what the players at various levels can do and make CR roughly equivalent so that you can reasonable assume a group of 4 level 1 PCs will have a medium challenge with a CR 1 creature.
Now normally PCs generally have the advantage anyway as they have generally have more opportunities to use their full action economy per round (Action, BA, Reaction) vs a creature which do not routinely have as many options. So players will typically have an advantage with action economy.
If you give a +2 you now are moving the parameters and this CR 1 creature is now much less threatening. Now if everyone is on the same power level (i.e. you gave them ALL +2 weapons) then this would not really be an issue because you have a consistent power base throughout the group. Now you just toss CR 2 at them and the world feels fine.
Where this +2 becomes an issue is....if you give it to one player and say "Nah" to the rest.
Now this one player has no struggle with the CR1...but the rest are struggling against it. Now you have to make fights with:
1. Threats more appropriate to the character punching above their level
2. BUT not threatening enough to wipe the rest of the party
Now imagine doing this for every encounter having to also factor in does this monster fit the aesthetic I am going for? Is it relevant to the story? Should I add HP or subtract?
You just add a needless variable to the pile of things you think of when making encounters.
OR you just do a point buy and let them pick but they are all on the realitively same power curve and you do not have to worry about it.
Yeah that was the original sentiment of the thread too....people talking about purposefully killing characters with poor stats as a way to roll a better character.
Suppose I give this +2 longsword to the one player who rolled a poor statline while everyone else rolled good to great stats, and now that one player's character is in line with the other, "regular" characters.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
....I guess? Why even have them roll then if you are just going to re-align the characters anyway with items? Just do point buy and avoid it in the first place.
If the solution involves "I need to give them a Rare weapon to make this work at level 1" you should probably reassess.
For the record I made that mistake though they were 2nd level, but in my defence if I hadn't it might have been a tpk because I wasn't as familiar with were rats as I thought I was!
So I've said it before, I'll say it again. It doesn't seem like there's much discussion anymore. We did manage to get some 4d6 test arrays going which was fun, but that was quickly derailed into finger pointing again with the proverbial "your fun is wrong".
Perhaps the best we can do is to stop replying to this thread and feeding trolls. The way you choose to have fun with the game is as valid as anyone else's way of having fun with the game. This statement can not be disputed.
I'll also state the following:
If I were ever to try the 4d6 stat rolling method then I would be hoping to get a stronger array than what I could get from standard array or point buy. However, I have never ever played or made a character with rolled stats, it has always been point buy.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
I don't begrudge anyone doing what is fun for their table and I support it if all parties involved are well informed about the different methods and what the pros/cons of each are.
What I don't like is being disingenuous about the CONs of the 4d6 method and how it can affect game balance. Its fine to do anything you want but having at least a healthy respect for the math behind the balance gives you an idea of the caveats of each system.
To say a +1 or +2 is not a big deal is just not understanding how it applies to the system. The weapon example is actually not the greatest as that only affects damage and attack rolls....vs an ability score is much more generally applicable to a wider array of skills and features.
Because we like rolling? Because oddities make for easy character hooks? Because it might take players out of their comfort zone a bit? Why not?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
But Pangurjan, this game is not about your enjoyment, it is about the enjoyment of people not even playing at the same table as you. That is why they are so hard pressed to make sure the way you play is the way they like it.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master