D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Oofta]

That assumption is a flaw in your process. Lots of people aren't going to wait that long to take feats. Feats are quite often better than pure stat bumps and come with a +1 to a stat as well. People will be taking them at 4th level.

How does the rifleman's creed go? "This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine."

"This is my scenario. There are many like it, but this one is mine."

In other words, the fact that there are other possible options does not invalidate my results. If Lowe and Max took shield master at 4th level, that would just mean that they have a lower chance to hit or fewer hit points because they didn't increase ability scores.

Don't like my scenario and results? There's nothing I can say or do. If you have a better way of doing a comparison other than restating your opinion feel free to do so.

 

[Maxperson]

And you're humble,too. ;P.

After playing with those players for the last 10 years, it's an accurate assessment.

Specifically he related an anecdote in which the two players in question both found the disparity wrecked their enjoyment and didn't stay with the campaign long.

As an example of how stats that are unequal affect the player that rolls low. The disparity between players is what the argument is based on.

If dice somehow rolled lower for system masters, and consistently bestowed wild beginners luck, and magic items were repelled by high stats, that might even matter.

Stats don't really matter. Even for system masters, it's primarily about the items, feats, tier, class abilities, etc.

 

[Maxperson]

How does the rifleman's creed go? "This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine."

"This is my scenario. There are many like it, but this one is mine."

In other words, the fact that there are other possible options does not invalidate my results. If Lowe and Max took shield master at 4th level, that would just mean that they have a lower chance to hit or fewer hit points because they didn't increase ability scores.

Don't like my scenario and results? There's nothing I can say or do. If you have a better way of doing a comparison other than restating your opinion feel free to do so.

What about the more likely scenario where Lowe took shield master and Max took great weapon master? Sure, it's your scenario, but unless you're comparing all the various combinations of classes, races, feats, stats, etc., you are not going to be simulating what happens in a game outside of a few rare corner cases.

 

[Hussar]

But, since stats apparently don't matter, then why doesn't every die roller group use 3d6 (either straight down the line or arrange to taste)? After all, if stats don't matter, why does virtually every die rolled character that's played for any significant length of time wind up having significantly higher base stats?

Why is 4d6 drop the lowest the standard for die rolled characters if stats have such little impact?

 

[Oofta]

What about the more likely scenario where Lowe took shield master and Max took great weapon master? Sure, it's your scenario, but unless you're comparing all the various combinations of classes, races, feats, stats, etc., you are not going to be simulating what happens in a game outside of a few rare corner cases.

When you write the app, let me know.

In the meantime, it still boils down to proving that in at least one very common build there's a 20-30% difference in effectiveness. Feel free to ignore the facts.

 

[FrogReaver]

But, since stats apparently don't matter, then why doesn't every die roller group use 3d6 (either straight down the line or arrange to taste)? After all, if stats don't matter, why does virtually every die rolled character that's played for any significant length of time wind up having significantly higher base stats?

Why is 4d6 drop the lowest the standard for die rolled characters if stats have such little impact?

Probably because it always has been 4d6 drop lowest. Stat's may not matter but precedent and nostalgia do

Otherwise good point

 

[Maxperson]

But, since stats apparently don't matter, then why doesn't every die roller group use 3d6 (either straight down the line or arrange to taste)? After all, if stats don't matter, why does virtually every die rolled character that's played for any significant length of time wind up having significantly higher base stats?

Why is 4d6 drop the lowest the standard for die rolled characters if stats have such little impact?

Number porn. People like higher numbers. It's why you do millions of points of damage in WoW and still have as hard of a time at like level as you did at level 1. All that massive damage and it really doesn't mean squat, but people like it anyway.

 

[Hussar]

So, after all this, basically you're saying that die rollers are die rolling just for number porn? They like high numbers, so, they are die rolling characters?

See, where I'm differing here, is that I think that high numbers do have a number (heh, no pun intended) of knock on effects. A high stat character doesn't have to worry about ASI's, so, will go for feats because, well, an stat bump just isn't really a choice. And that rolls into characters having a fair bit of greater power at lower levels, which rolls into encounter design being that much more difficult.

It is problematic from a design perspective too. If I'm making a 5th level module (for example) should I automatically presume that the PC's have all pluses and at least one feat each by this time? Should I be pulling from the deep end of the pool for every encounter just to make the encounters interesting?

I just think that die rolling causes far more problems than it solves.

 

[Sadras]

I just think that die rolling causes far more problems than it solves.

IMO for the majority of the player base this statement is more than likely true, exceptions do exist however such as Lanefan's table and others with a similar playstyle.

My biggest issue with the point-buy has always been that the ability tables, especially in 5e, are worthless at the odd numbers which means that the gaming table is filled with characters sitting with 10's, 12's, 14's and so forth.
Not enough diversity exists.
I'm working on a house rule to change that and make the odd numbers count too.

 

[Maxperson]

So, after all this, basically you're saying that die rollers are die rolling just for number porn? They like high numbers, so, they are die rolling characters?

No. You're twisting things again you naughty boy. They are not rolling because they like high numbers. They are rolling because realism, gambling, etc. It's 4d6 over 3d6 because they like higher numbers than 3d6 gives.

See, where I'm differing here, is that I think that high numbers do have a number (heh, no pun intended) of knock on effects. A high stat character doesn't have to worry about ASI's, so, will go for feats because, well, an stat bump just isn't really a choice. And that rolls into characters having a fair bit of greater power at lower levels, which rolls into encounter design being that much more difficult.

Stat bumps only really matter with primary stats, not the secondary ones which are the subject of this discussion. Even then, it doesn't matter a great deal. Feats are generally going to be better than a stat bump, even in your primary stats.

It is problematic from a design perspective too. If I'm making a 5th level module (for example) should I automatically presume that the PC's have all pluses and at least one feat each by this time? Should I be pulling from the deep end of the pool for every encounter just to make the encounters interesting?

You should assume that it doesn't matter. It's not possible to design something based on all possibilities.

Let's say you are creating a module for an 8th level group. You should assume 2-3 stat bumps OR 2-3 feats OR any combination of the two, regardless of point buy or rolling. It's your job to make the base module. It's the DMs job to tweak things if necessary based on his group and how they create characters.