I had a weird idea for how to build characters for a campaign: it's called "We are the 1%", and the idea is to roll up 100 characters per PC (on 3d6, keeping stats in order). That's obviously a task for a computer, but I'm curious how you'd actually decide who the 1% are. For example, here's what I figure are the top 5 of a set of 100:
Str Dex Con Int Wis Cha Sum Pts 7 18 12 8 16 9 70 89 10 17 9 17 18 11 82 113 12 18 8 15 13 10 76 93 9 18 14 16 7 9 73 94 13 14 13 17 10 12 79 90
My rating system considers the second character the best, which is certainly defensible, but on the other hand, con 9 is scary and there's not a lot of point to both int and wis being elevated. So I'm curious: which stats would you actually pick?
That's very much of a 'how long is a bit of string' question. I'd obviously discard rows 1 and 4, but after that - what Race / Origin / Class? The choices here can overcome one sub-par roll
Since this is before racials, any of the 17s and 18s could become 18s and 20s, which is insane for lvl 1. And the CON 9 on #2 could be boosted to a 10 or 11 with the same. I’d say it’s not the detriment it seems to be, especially if paired with a +2 WIS race and something like a Druid class where wild shaping would alleviate the low HP
In order: 1. - I'd make it a Monk and have a ton of fun 2. - Cleric/Wizard multiclass, with strong enough core stat to support both. Limited spell level, but ability to upcast anything 3. Make an interesting Wizard, maybe? I'd play it 4. Rogue/Wizard Multiclass, IMO. Enough Rogue to get the early perks, then flip to Wizard. 5. Very balanced spread there, again I see a Wizard.
Interesting way to grind the stats. not my cup of tea, but another option for those looking for ideas.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Weird how much those rolls love dex. I'm sure its an anomaly that wouldn't hold up over the full 100 rolls, but just all of the top 5 being dex heavy seems strange. If they were my rolls, I think I'd be happy playing any of them. That first one with three sub-10 scores might be rough, but I bet it would be a fun character.
That's very much of a 'how long is a bit of string' question. I'd obviously discard rows 1 and 4
Why is that obvious? Yes, they're relatively low stat totals, but well focused in useful stats.
Because the question was 'which one would you pick' so I'd pick the stats that don't have sub 10 scores, certainly not three of them. Depends what you call useful stats, but as I said, depends on what class / race you want to play. I have a Tabaxi Warlock who has a low CON score, but his Noble backstory is that he was a sickly kit, bookish rather than sporty / hunter due to a weakness in his lungs.
I had a weird idea for how to build characters for a campaign: it's called "We are the 1%", and the idea is to roll up 100 characters per PC (on 3d6, keeping stats in order). That's obviously a task for a computer, but I'm curious how you'd actually decide who the 1% are. For example, here's what I figure are the top 5 of a set of 100:
Str Dex Con Int Wis Cha Sum Pts 7 18 12 8 16 9 70 89 10 17 9 17 18 11 82 113 12 18 8 15 13 10 76 93 9 18 14 16 7 9 73 94 13 14 13 17 10 12 79 90
My rating system considers the second character the best, which is certainly defensible, but on the other hand, con 9 is scary and there's not a lot of point to both int and wis being elevated. So I'm curious: which stats would you actually pick?
First thing to do is convert those to bonuses - odd scores are generally useless, outside of multiclassing and using odd Strength scores for carrying capacity and possibly long jumps.
That fixes the sums of the rows to 4, 9, 7, 5, 8 in that order. From that perspective, the second row is best - perhaps a Bladesinger/Monk/Moon Druid - and the fifth row is second best (probably a battlesmith).
The second thing to realize is that some stat combinations are more valuable than others, because 5E forces you into the class system on top of using different stats for different things, and your algorithm refuses to re-order the rolls. INT 18 CHA 18 STR 18 DEX 8 CON 8 WIS 8 is a sum of 9 - allegedly tied with your best row - but absolute garbage as a build. Rather than summing all of the stats, we don't even want a sum - high CON low attack stat is awful. If we instead sort by best non-CON, breaking ties by CON, we get the fourth row as best, presumably for a Rogue or Fighter. D&D simply lacks the flexibility to make any good sum work - some sums are better than others. Thing is, you'd need to work out a lot more complexity than this to account for every class and subclass (especially corner cases like Moon Druids). That's really hard.
Much easier is deciding the character you want to play, and then tuning the algorithm to that character. If what you want to play is a straight artificer battlesmith, you want INT, CON, and DEX, but DEX above 14 is meaningless to you. Use logic like that to pick the best statline available for you.
I'm probably biased since I've been brainstorming a character concept for a half orc druid lately, but line two seems pretty good for that. Even with racial bonuses the strength (12) and constitution (10) aren't that great, but Circle of the Moon boosting wildshape can make up a big difference there, and even otherwise combining the 17 dexterity with hide armor and a shield gives an AC of 17 when not wildshaped and that's pretty decent. The benefit of the high wisdom for a druid is obvious and the 17 intelligence wouldn't be wasted with the right skills, particularly Nature and possibly Investigation to compliment Survival and Perception as a tracker and hunter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I had a weird idea for how to build characters for a campaign: it's called "We are the 1%", and the idea is to roll up 100 characters per PC (on 3d6, keeping stats in order). That's obviously a task for a computer, but I'm curious how you'd actually decide who the 1% are. For example, here's what I figure are the top 5 of a set of 100:
My rating system considers the second character the best, which is certainly defensible, but on the other hand, con 9 is scary and there's not a lot of point to both int and wis being elevated. So I'm curious: which stats would you actually pick?
That's very much of a 'how long is a bit of string' question. I'd obviously discard rows 1 and 4, but after that - what Race / Origin / Class? The choices here can overcome one sub-par roll
Since this is before racials, any of the 17s and 18s could become 18s and 20s, which is insane for lvl 1. And the CON 9 on #2 could be boosted to a 10 or 11 with the same. I’d say it’s not the detriment it seems to be, especially if paired with a +2 WIS race and something like a Druid class where wild shaping would alleviate the low HP
In order:
1. - I'd make it a Monk and have a ton of fun
2. - Cleric/Wizard multiclass, with strong enough core stat to support both. Limited spell level, but ability to upcast anything
3. Make an interesting Wizard, maybe? I'd play it
4. Rogue/Wizard Multiclass, IMO. Enough Rogue to get the early perks, then flip to Wizard.
5. Very balanced spread there, again I see a Wizard.
Interesting way to grind the stats. not my cup of tea, but another option for those looking for ideas.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Why is that obvious? Yes, they're relatively low stat totals, but well focused in useful stats.
Weird how much those rolls love dex. I'm sure its an anomaly that wouldn't hold up over the full 100 rolls, but just all of the top 5 being dex heavy seems strange. If they were my rolls, I think I'd be happy playing any of them. That first one with three sub-10 scores might be rough, but I bet it would be a fun character.
Because the question was 'which one would you pick' so I'd pick the stats that don't have sub 10 scores, certainly not three of them. Depends what you call useful stats, but as I said, depends on what class / race you want to play. I have a Tabaxi Warlock who has a low CON score, but his Noble backstory is that he was a sickly kit, bookish rather than sporty / hunter due to a weakness in his lungs.
First thing to do is convert those to bonuses - odd scores are generally useless, outside of multiclassing and using odd Strength scores for carrying capacity and possibly long jumps.
That fixes the sums of the rows to 4, 9, 7, 5, 8 in that order. From that perspective, the second row is best - perhaps a Bladesinger/Monk/Moon Druid - and the fifth row is second best (probably a battlesmith).
The second thing to realize is that some stat combinations are more valuable than others, because 5E forces you into the class system on top of using different stats for different things, and your algorithm refuses to re-order the rolls. INT 18 CHA 18 STR 18 DEX 8 CON 8 WIS 8 is a sum of 9 - allegedly tied with your best row - but absolute garbage as a build. Rather than summing all of the stats, we don't even want a sum - high CON low attack stat is awful. If we instead sort by best non-CON, breaking ties by CON, we get the fourth row as best, presumably for a Rogue or Fighter. D&D simply lacks the flexibility to make any good sum work - some sums are better than others. Thing is, you'd need to work out a lot more complexity than this to account for every class and subclass (especially corner cases like Moon Druids). That's really hard.
Much easier is deciding the character you want to play, and then tuning the algorithm to that character. If what you want to play is a straight artificer battlesmith, you want INT, CON, and DEX, but DEX above 14 is meaningless to you. Use logic like that to pick the best statline available for you.
I'm probably biased since I've been brainstorming a character concept for a half orc druid lately, but line two seems pretty good for that. Even with racial bonuses the strength (12) and constitution (10) aren't that great, but Circle of the Moon boosting wildshape can make up a big difference there, and even otherwise combining the 17 dexterity with hide armor and a shield gives an AC of 17 when not wildshaped and that's pretty decent. The benefit of the high wisdom for a druid is obvious and the 17 intelligence wouldn't be wasted with the right skills, particularly Nature and possibly Investigation to compliment Survival and Perception as a tracker and hunter.