D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Oofta]

Let's take your previous example: the blacksmith wizard. You wanted him to be smart enough to fulfill the role of the party wizard, so gave him Int 16 (after racial), but wanted him to have enough strength to justify his smithing background, so Str 14. So far, so good.

Then you were trying to decide whether he is sociable, OR whether he is perceptive/agile/tough. You cannot have 'what you want' if 'what you want' is all three! That concept cannot be realised through point-buy.

Which is why it's misleading to claim that point-buy lets players realise the concept that they want. Point-buy only lets you realise the pre-conceived idea if that idea adds up to exactly 27 point; a fairly small proportion of all possible PCs with stats in the 3-18 range and the concepts that match them.

It is true that one of the advantages of point-buy is that it allows you to conceive a PC ahead of time and know that it will be legal in the game. Since rolling has you conceive your PC after rolling the stats, which is objectively no better or worse then concept first, then it's not an appropriate criticism that rolling doesn't let you do what you're not supposed to do with it!

If 'rolling mean I can't use my pre-conceived PC' were a valid, objective criticism of point-buy, then 'since the DM's character creation method means that I have to generate scores before I conceive my PC' is a valid criticism of pre-conceived PCs. If rolling for stats is part of the game, then conceiving your PC after rolling is not a bug, it's a feature. It's how the game is played and how it has always been played by me*.

Point-buy is a comparatively recent thing, compared to rolling your stats. It has its own advantages and disadvantages over rolling. It's advantage of pre-conception is opposed by its disadvantage of those concepts being limited to exactly 27 points, instead of a host of new concepts, impossible for point-buy to emulate, open up nearly every single time you roll up a PC!

Let's say that you can have any meal you want....as long as it adds up to exactly 1000 calories. Sure, there are many, many meals you can have, but think of all the meals you cannot have, that you could have if instead of a calorie total you could eat whatever was in the market that day.

* Please don't speak for everyone. I also don't see what rules written (or not written) twenty some odd years ago have to do with the current discussion. Not that it matters and I don't pretend to speak for anyone else but I've been using some variation of point buy since the 80s.

Back to the discussion. We both agree that I can't write up Superman.

But stronger or more charismatic than average is anything more than an 11. Or maybe I start (heaven forbid) with less than a 16 intelligence. Many of my characters don't have optimized stats. Yet again, you are the one getting hung up on numbers.

The rules give me a way of implementing the vision of my character. The rules are there as a means to facilitate that vision but also put boundaries on our characters. That's true with whatever system you use.

If I (and my group) want multiple high all-around stats all we have to do is discuss it with the DM and set the point buy higher. Maybe use the point buy options from a previous edition so I can buy an 18. Done.

 

[Lanefan]

You keep saying this like it means something. A "character concept" doesn't (or shouldn't) have specific numerical values assigned to it.

Perhaps, though one can certainly take a preconceived character idea and put theoretical numbers to it as part of determining ahead of time how it might function (or not) in play.

It is entirely possible to have a character concept in mind and then roll up some stats that support it. But it's a gamble.

And seeing that D&D is in large measure a game of luck - as is any game involving dice - this makes perfect sense. Bring it on!

These "new concepts" that are being limited seem to be concepts of characters that are superhuman in multiple areas.

If that is what you want, then yeah, go for rolled stats. It is entirely possible to get characters with multiple 16's, 17's, and 18's (or even 20's), especially with a lot of the more generous rolling methods mentioned in this thread.

You - and others, I think - seem to be assuming that us roll-for-it types are always looking to push the numbers higher. Not entirely true.

While high stats are nice to have just for the hell of it, sometimes I'm looking for a very low stat to make an idea work. Neither point-buy nor array will allow me to start with a 6, for example, but if I'm looking to play a happy-go-lucky character whose lack of wisdom constantly gets her (and maybe the party) into scrapes, or a character whose charisma is so bad they won't let him into most civilized towns, I mechanically can't. (8 is only slightly worse than average, the mirror of 13 on 3d6 and still pretty central in the bell curve; I'm looking for something more extreme).

A 17-6 stat range within a single character is far more playable and has far more potential than 15-8. However, unless a DM does some rules tinkering I can only ever (maybe) achieve that 17-6 split by rolling for it. And if I don't hit it this time, there's always plan B now and other chances down the road to put plan A into effect.

Which brings up another point: maybe instead of coming to session 0 with a single fully-fleshed-out character concept in mind, maybe instead come to session 0 with three or four concepts in mind and see which one(s) the dice steer you toward. In other words, instead of showing up at session 0 bound and determined to be playing this...

I wanted a half orc who's strong, clumsy, fairly intelligent but doesn't always think things through (low wisdom) and is friendly and sociable.

...by night's end, have a few more in mind as well such as:

- - a human - could be fighter, barbarian, even heavy ranger - who always tries to do the right thing but isn't ever quite sure what the right thing is, a likeable gentle-giant type whose main claim to fame is that he's as tough as nails (mechanically: high con, low int and wis, decent cha and str, dex whatever - something like 14-7-8-11-17-13 for stats) [similar but different to plan A]
- - a part-elf wizard or sorcerer type whose main theme is inventing new spells. No spell in existence is good enough for her - they're all flawed and just begging for improvement and by gum, she's gonna do it whatever it takes. She's only adventuring at all because she needs the wealth and resources to further her research...and it also gives her an opportunity to see just how inadequate these traditional spells really are. Very single-minded (may the goddess have mercy on your soul should you ever interrupt her in mid-casting!) and goal-oriented, only her goals are far longer-term than just those of any one adventure. (mechanically: high [or very high if I'm lucky] int and wis, low cha, other stats whatever - something like 9-17-16-11-12-7 would rock this out really nicely)
- - a dwarf rogue who matches or exceeds every possible stereotype out there to do with dwarven greed...except that behind the scenes and unknown to the party he's in fact giving most of these funds to some other worthy cause e.g. rebuilding a dwarven town destroyed by an earthquake. He's a one-dwarf fundraising team. The only downside is that after every major treasury division he takes off for a month or so, to distribute his wealth and ensure it's at least somewhat well-spent. (mechanically: high dex, everything else reasonable, a very low stat kills this concept - 13-12-12-16-14-11 would be a 'go' here)

Note that I do stats in S-I-W-D-Co-Ch order - there is no other acceptable way.

And note that I do put a set of suggested or speculative numbers to each concept, mostly so I can figure out what I'm looking for and tell at a glance whether what I've rolled can work or not for any given one.

TL-DR - why bind yourself to only one character concept before-during session 0 when having several makes more sense?

Lan-"the problem I have is not lack of character ideas, it's that there's far too many ideas and nowhere near enough nights in the week to play them all"-efan

 

[Caliban]

TL-DR - why bind yourself to only one character concept before-during session 0 when having several makes more sense?

*shrug* your judgement of my preferred playstyle has been noted and will be given all due deference.

Just as much as you have given everyone else.

 

[Caliban]

You - and others, I think - seem to be assuming that us roll-for-it types are always looking to push the numbers higher. Not entirely true.

While high stats are nice to have just for the hell of it, sometimes I'm looking for a very low stat to make an idea work. Neither point-buy nor array will allow me to start with a 6, for example, but if I'm looking to play a happy-go-lucky character whose lack of wisdom constantly gets her (and maybe the party) into scrapes, or a character whose charisma is so bad they won't let him into most civilized towns, I mechanically can't. (8 is only slightly worse than average, the mirror of 13 on 3d6 and still pretty central in the bell curve; I'm looking for something more extreme).

On another note - I really don't buy this arguement. You don't like point buy - great, I get it. No problem.

But: "I just can't accept point buy because it only goes down to 8, and I really need a 6 to make this character work."

The difference between a 6 and an 8 is negligible. "I have to have a -2 stat modifier instead of a -1 or my entire character concept won't work" isn't a reason. It's a failure of your RP ability.

 

[Oofta]

TL-DR - why bind yourself to only one character concept before-during session 0 when having several makes more sense?

Because I don't want to? Is there any other justification needed? Random rolls for attacks/saves/skills average out over time. A one time roll can make or break a character concept for the life of a campaign. No thanks.

Why is it so important that we accept your one-true-way-ism?

 

[Lanefan]

On another note - I really don't buy this arguement. You don't like point buy - great, I get it. No problem.

But: "I just can't accept point buy because it only goes down to 8, and I really need a 6 to make this character work."

The difference between a 6 and an 8 is negligible. "I have to have a -2 stat modifier instead of a -1 or my entire character concept won't work" isn't a reason. It's a failure of your RP ability.

Flip it over on the bell curve (which centers on 10.5) and you're looking at the difference between a 13 and a 15. 13 is fairly ordinary. 15 is getting significant.

And it's my "RP ability" that in fact wants the lower stat, in order to reflect what I want to RP. Why? Because role-playing an 8 - below average but not extremely so - will or should give somewhat different results in play than RP-ing a 6 which is noticeably below average; enough so that it might cause issues during the character's career. Wisdom 8, for example, can probably be talked into thinking about consequences. Wisdom 6, not so much.

Also, I prefer to role-play to the stat itself rather than the modifier; thus to me a 6 is different from a 7 even though they have the same -2 modifier when it comes to mechanics. If all I wanted was the -2 I'd go with a 7.

Lanefan

 

[Caliban]

Flip it over on the bell curve (which centers on 10.5) and you're looking at the difference between a 13 and a 15. 13 is fairly ordinary. 15 is getting significant.

And it's my "RP ability" that in fact wants the lower stat, in order to reflect what I want to RP. Why? Because role-playing an 8 - below average but not extremely so - will or should give somewhat different results in play than RP-ing a 6 which is noticeably below average; enough so that it might cause issues during the character's career. Wisdom 8, for example, can probably be talked into thinking about consequences. Wisdom 6, not so much.

Also, I prefer to role-play to the stat itself rather than the modifier; thus to me a 6 is different from a 7 even though they have the same -2 modifier when it comes to mechanics. If all I wanted was the -2 I'd go with a 7.

Lanefan

If you want your 8 wisdom character to be gullible, play them as gullible. A 6 or an 8 really doesn't matter.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Then you were trying to decide whether he is sociable, OR whether he is perceptive/agile/tough. You cannot have 'what you want' if 'what you want' is all three! That concept cannot be realised

Sure it can, you can afford a 12 or 13 in each of 3 tertiary stats, and you're a cut above the norm, and certainly not oblivious/clumsy/delicate. You'd have to roll pretty bad on 4d6 to be unable to do likewise, but it could happen.

"My character is a strong fighter" is a concept. You then make them as strong as possible within the limits of your character creation process.

Its a very basic concept, but, sure, it could be a critical part of a concept.

And, random generation, iif you have the privelege of arranging as you like , does let you do that - maybe not too well if you roll a lot of mediocre nimbers, maybe wildly better if you get lucky - but you can put whatever you get as your high roll in STR, and off you go.

Obviously, that's not the case with roll-in-order, which is arguably a more 'pure' form of random generation that more strongly expresses the desirable aspects of realism, variation/imbalance-without-unfairness, and inspiring a concept when you don't already have one.

.

 

[Oofta]

...that more strongly expresses the desirable aspects of realism, variation/imbalance-without-unfairness...

.

Just to be clear, it's only more desirable to you and what you think is "realistic". I think it's realistic that people wouldn't be adventurers if they weren't reasonably well suited to their goal and that it takes a lot of training and experience to get to peak performance.

On the other hand I think random results are about as unfair as you can get. If some people having significantly better or worse stats than other people on your team is what you want, more power to you.

Nobody is stating that point buy is "better". I'm saying it's "better suited to my preferences and what I want out of the game".

 

[Baron Von Mandrick]

I have used roll your own in every game of every edition until now. With 5e, I've only used standard array. This edition is so well balanced, it is set up for the non-rolling it seems. Another reason could be that before I used almost exclusively home-brew campaigns and with 5e, it's been all published material

Sent from my SM-G920V using EN World mobile app