Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Your post hadn't showed up while I was writing. It was in response to jl8e. I'm stat agnostic. Whatever the DM/players want in terms of stat generation (from the "official" choices and a few variants) I'm ok with as long as everyone uses the same method.
My current players (duo) rolled stats (4d6 drop lowest) and both dumped INT. They think they are brothers. One is a gnome and the other is a dwarf.
Hilariously, they are also both valor bards and couldn't play those characters more differently. One melees with his spiked metal lute (reliving his glory days from Gloomhaven) and the other went all in with an animal companionship schtick at range.
This thread is 5 years old? Wow.
Rolls don't matter. Pick whatever method players find attractive. It's the GM's job to provide a challenge, so whether your stat is a 16 or a 20 doesn't make any difference - the challenge will meet the ability, because that's the GM's job. Higher stats mean more dangerous foes. Maybe, just maybe, if you have better stats, your first encounter is upgraded from rats to goblins.
As an aside, the point of the game as a whole is to have fun. If players have more fun with higher stats, then that's the game.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
as someone who prefers the 4d6 method:
i started out using the point buy system and it actually made me more of a power player. i tried optimizing the stats and i only had characters that were average to good in all stats. no weaknesses. it was boring and i hated it. do i love it if i get a high number with the 4d6 method? yes. do i love it when all my numbers are high? no, i actually hate it. and in that case if i can i will make at least one stat worse on purpose to balance it out. i like the 4d6 method because yes it can get my main stat higher than 15 but it can also get my dump stat lower than 8 and make my character have an actual weakness. i also like the randomness and i like rolling dice. for me personally it helps me create more interesting characters.
that being said, i have no problem using other methods if required and i get why some people don‘t want to use the 4d6 method at their tables. but not all people using the 4d6 method are power players and power players don‘t need the 4d6 method to power play.
With point buy, it's easier to min max than rolling, because you can dump some stats and push those points into others. It's one of the reasons why there's a cap to how high you buy stats. With rolling, it will push for more average values (although it does allow for a wider range - you can get 3-7 and 16-18 via rolling but with not point buy).
That said, as long as the table is happy, any method is fine. The are only issues that I see. The first is if one person gets very good stats (at least in what matters) while another gets poor stats, and do the first eclipses the second. Point buy reduces the likelihood of that, and also places the responsibility onto the player - if the stats are poor for your character, that's your own fault, not the dice. It's also pretty easy to adjust scores fairly afterwards if it's that much of an issue.
The second is if someone is suspected of cheating, you can verify that their stats are fair at any time. It takes a bit of work, but you can see and replicate how they got to where they are by allocating points, doing ASIs etc.
After some thought, for my next campaign, I'm going to offer three options. Point Buy, Standard Array (as a specific case of Point Buy), or get them all to roll 4d6k3 and form a matrix with the results. They then get to pick a line (up, down, left, right, diagonally) and use those as their array, they can't use the same line twice (so each character will generally have a unique array).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Have you used the point buy in DDB? It allows for the same point allocation as the standard array, and still has a max of 15 pre background bonuses. At most you can get 3 15s. By having 2 8s. You can't go above or below that in the creator. 15 15 15 8 8 8. So after bonus background bonuses 17 16 15 8 8 8 is the final. That's not extreme.
Most are going to do a 15 14 13 12 10 8 or a 15 14 13 10 10 8. So after background 17 14 14 12 10 8 or 17 14 14 12 10 10. There isn't that much difference between the 3 examples. Hardly game breaking.
4k3 averages higher than point buy. 4k3 if you allow people to reroll terrible stats (aka every version I've ever actually seen used in a game) averages much higher than point buy (at least, 27 point buy).
Yes, the average is marginally higher (13v12.5), but the average doesn't minmax. Maybe you will get minmaxxed. Maybe you'll get straight 13s - good luck minmaxxing that. Point Buy allows you to minmax every time.
And yes, if you employ house rules, then you can get much higher. Perhaps you should argue that Point Buy should also have a more points to spend, since we're in house rule territory. No such house rules at my table though.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
If we're talking minmaxing, point buy doesn't allow you to reach 20 in a stat until your second ASI. You can get there in one ASI with rolling if you hit a 16 or better out of the gate
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
This debate mostly comes down to which you think is worse: "minmax-ing" or simply the possibility of "min-ing" or "max-ing."
Goal post moving. If someone is making house rules that's their game to decide how it goes. Point buy as in the creator isn't really min maxing. You are really stretching the definition of it.
Honestly could care less about what system people use, and no one else should either. Its their game. Their preference, their choice. Anyone's opinion here to the contrary is irrelevant.
No, it mostly comes down to which you think is worse: characters with fairly same-y attributes, or dramatic power differences between PCs.
No. Discussions on the forum assume RAW unless declared otherwise because house rules can be anything. You can have house rules that you can Point Buy with a limit of 50 points if you want. It's pointless talking about the rules if you're talking about undeclared house rules because there's no common frame of reference. RAW is one roll for each ability, no rerolls. The people changing goalposts are those trying to claim it's about house rules.
Sure, you're free to do whatever you like at your table. Changing the rules and then complaining that it breaks your game is quite frankly silly (not that Pantagruel was doing that - nor was I saying it was bad that they changed the rules, this is some weird spin you've put on the conversation).
I never said it was. Read the posts. I said it was easier to minmax with Point Buy - that's semantically very different to saying it is minmaxxing and vital to the discussion.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
That's not minmaxxing. Minmaxxing is minimising one stat to maximise another stat. What you're describing is the power ceiling, which is a different point (it's probably worth raising, but it's not the minmaxxing point). I was being rather sloppy in my use in that sentence - you can't really minmax with rolling. I should have been saying that you can get high scores in that particular sentence.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
If you're meaning minmaxing to mean something other than optimizing then yeah, we're talking about different things
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
If the player is never a team player, then his stat generation is not relevant. The non team player will continue to ""...want the spotlight, they want to get the max body count, they want all the loot, ..."
That type of player will hound the DM for better and higher magic items etc. The balance via lower ability rolls will never happen. That non team player will find other ways to "unbalance".
I’ve been playing for more than 40 years and I’ve never seen this happen. Now, my friends and I did have a lot of rolling stats back in 1e, looking at the stat line and deciding it was an unplayable character so re-rolling. (We were 12, it was what was fun for us.) Though that was the old 3d6 in order and see what you get, so unplayable was common. Actually with class and race minimums, an unplayable set of rolls (by RAW at the time) was actually possible.
(Side note: 1 e had rules like, if your dex was below an 6 or 8 or something, you had to play a cleric. But then maybe you rolled a 10 for your wisdom score, you would be unable to cast any cleric spells (casting required a score of 10+spell level in the score to be able to cast) so you’d be unable to be a cleric, for example. When that happened, we’d decide he’s going to go be a farmer and do new rolls.)
But back to the point, this basically, temper tantrum of suicide by goblin so you can re-roll. Never seen it. And like I said, I used to play with 12-year-olds.
Rolling 4d6 for character creation is a win some lose some chance. The safe way is the point buy. People always get mad when the dice aren’t your friend in the rolling option (because they were hoping for multiple scores above 15, then throw a hissy fit afterwards. You live by the sword and die by it.
Besides being the safe route scores can be validated easily by the DM. I don’t trust nobody and would have to witness the rolling.
I liked in AD&D another option of rolling 3d6 (12x) and choosing your best 6. They should revive that option as well.
I know that this post will most likely be locked soon however I am going to share my two cents on the matter as a DM who runs with the 4d6 stat set up.
Now, I will say that 4d6 is very much a powerful system and can cause players to have widely good stats. However, I have found that players who get some low stats don't often ask to be killed off. They often make it a flaw of their character, for example we have a barbarian in my group who got some awful stats (Like two 7s) so they put them in their mental stats and is playing the fake wizard subclass for barbarian. I've also had players roll really good stats and after a session or two of playing that character decided they want to kill them off as they just don't find them fun to run.
I will say that it is not as bad as the original post made it out to be nor is it perfect, but it definitely does it's job and can make some very fun characters.
Note: I do have a home rule in which they do get 1 extra reroll but that is all they get.
The problem isn't some low stats. The problem is when it's things like "your best stat is a 13".
So why not let them have a reroll or just bump two of their stats up to 15+?
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.