D&D 5E (2014) Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Yardiff]

A1 didn't find anything in a quick scan.

A2 has stated NPCs through out the module.

 

[Oofta]

You can't point to a single instance of my saying you have to do things my way or that my way is the only way, yet I can point to multiple instances of my saying point buy and arrays are okay. Not as realistic as rolling, but okay. Engaging in accusations that you know to be false does little to improve my opinion of you.

Stating things like "It's much better than point buy" as fact instead of opinion reeks of one-true-wayism in my opinion. If you can't see that there's not much I can say.

 

[Yardiff]

You are aware that most things posted on any forum is opinion? Especially on threads of this kind.

 

[Lanefan]

I am just waiting for this thread to finally sputter off and die so that I can post a new thread on this exact same subject in a couple of weeks, once this thread falls far enough that somebody too lazy to scroll a little or do a search won't see it immediately.

;-)

Alignment audit on [MENTION=6871450]Wulffolk[/MENTION] - - - this action brings you one step closer to Evil.

Lan-"and I ain't no angel myself"-efan

 

[Arial Black]

Many, many things have changed over the decades and D&D has evolved.

True, but one of the many things that has not changed is the 3d6 bell curve model of the general population.

The proof that 3d6 is a good method to get average person ability scores is that people have decided that 3d6 is a good way of generating ability scores. Seems quite circular to me.

It's not the players that decided that 3d6 is a good way to generate the ability scores of the general population, it was the creator of the game, Gary Gygax, that thought so, and made it part of the rules of D&D.

It also ignores common sense that 1 in 216 people would be as strong as humanly possible (barring special training). If that makes sense for your campaign, more power to you. It's obviously not true in the real world and would be ludicrous in most campaigns.

That's because you're mixing up the initial part of stat generation with the end result! You start with 3d6 (which has a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 18) and then these scores may be modified by race, later training, magic, experience, etc. which has no actual maximum at all! Str 18 is most definitely not 'as strong as humanly possible', and the fact that the stat generation process begins with an 18 max does not mean that it results in an 18 max.

 

[Arial Black]

3d6 was never a good model for distribution of ability scores for the general population

True, but it is a much, much better model than point-buy!

 

[Arial Black]

Stating things like "It's much better than point buy" as fact instead of opinion reeks of one-true-wayism

In isolation, such a quote is indeed nothing more than opinion. You might say that 'Motorbikes are better than cars' and this is just an opinion, not an objective fact. 'Rolling is better than point-buy' (or vice versa) is just such an opinion.

However, you may factually state that one thing is better than another at a specific thing. 'Motorbikes are better than cars at squeezing through narrow gaps' is such a statement. So is 'Rolling 3d6 in order is better at modelling the general population than point-buy' another factual statement.

 

[Maxperson]

Stating things like "It's much better than point buy" as fact instead of opinion reeks of one-true-wayism in my opinion. If you can't see that there's not much I can say.

All it reeks with is bias on your part. So let me get this through your head. I am not one true way, I have never been one true way, I never will be one true way. Now that you know, if you ever call me one true way or even imply it again, you will be a liar.

 

[Oofta]

True, but one of the many things that has not changed is the 3d6 bell curve model of the general population.

Is there anything other than your statement to back this up? Repeatedly stating something as fact does not make it so.

Page 89 of the DMG gives guidelines:

ABILITIES
You don't need to roll ability scores for the NPC, but note abilities that are above or below average - great strength or monumental stupidity, for example - and use them to inform the NPC's qualities.​

Which directly contradicts what you are saying. The assumption is no hard numbers, no rolling 3d6 nor any other generation method for ability scores for NPCs. You can of course create a character for the NPC which may mean generating their ability scores using your favored method (or using a generic NPC as a starting point) as stated on page 92 of the DMG.

I don't care what previous editions said or did not say, they are no more relevant to the current edition than the tradition of paladins only being lawful good or there only being alignments of Law and Chaos. If you want to use rules from previous editions, great. But there is no "holy text", there were no sacred stone tablets inscribed with the 15 10 commandments of The Great Gygax.

They pulled certain aspects of previous editions into the current edition where it made sense. Rolling for ability scores for every NPC didn't make the cut.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Repeatedly stating something as fact does not make it so.

Not in the context of a debate, of course, but in the realm of propaganda, repetition is a powerful tool.

Is there anything other than your statement to back this up?

That the 3d6 bell curve still represents the general population? There are some facts consistent with it. Quite apart from it being the case in the classic game, and it never being replaced by anything else.
For instance the structure of stat bonuses, with 0 at the 3d6 average of 10-11.

I don't care what previous editions said or did not say, they are no more relevant to the current edition than the tradition of paladins only being lawful good or there only being alignments of Law and Chaos.

Each of those things is relevant. And, again, focusing on the 'only' is missing the point. Law & Chaos are back as an independent axis in 5e. The Paladin in the SRD is the LG Paladin.

The editions of the fad years, the red box and 1e AD&D, are probably most relevant, though.

. But there is no "holy text", there were no sacred stone tablets inscribed with the 15 10 commandments of The Great Gygax.

There may well be, in that metaphorical sense.

They pulled certain aspects of previous editions into the current edition where it made sense

Where it made sense for their goals, which included fast combat and classic feel - and really, a number of other things that all boiled down to classic feel, as well...

. Rolling for ability scores for every NPC didn't make the cut.

Except it did, it just remains an option, rather than a default.