D&D 5E Array v 4d6: Punishment? Or overlooked data

[Hussar]

The same reason nobody plays with a 5 point point-buy - sure, you can craft your PC's stats, but with that low a value, who wants to do so and then go adventuring? 4d6 drop lowest and arrange as desired produces the same general effect as a higher point buy - creating an adventurer-quality PC.

But why higher? That's my point. Why not use a generation method that doesn't swing so badly?

Except it doesn't really swing. It goes from maybe a hair below point buy to well above, to the point where a given character is effectively one level higher.

4d4 would give you a perfectly acceptable spread. I'd bet dollars to donuts that random generation people would hate it. You can't get an 18 that way. And that seems to be the point of random generation. Get those 35 point buy value characters on the table with a nice patina of legitimacy.

 

[Crothian]

If stats don't matter and you like random generation, how come nobody uses a stat gen system like 3d6 in order? After all, it's about the randomness right? Why the insistence on using systems that usually give higher results than point buy?

Because 4d6 is in the rulebook. When 3d6 was in the rulebook we used that.

Now, I don't think anyone is suggesting people be forced to roll dice for character generation if they don't want. Gamers have a choice to not participate in games that play that way.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Except it doesn't really swing. It goes from maybe a hair below point buy to well above, to the point where a given character is effectively one level higher. .

It's a necro'd thread, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt you didn't read or maybe forgot the very first post in this thread. The variation from point buy/array to 4d6 isn't significant at all, for total points. I'll repeat what I said there, because it's something people making your argument make all time in omitting. Yeah, you have a better chance of getting a 16 or higher. But you also have a better chance of getting below an 8 or more than one ability with a penalty--something you also can't get for array.

Another thing I can't literally fathom? This idea that you're (general you) being cheated or treated unfairly because someone else has better stats. We play random gen 90% of the time, and I can't count the times where another player had better stats. Not only did I not even really notice the difference in game play, I sure as heck wasn't jealous because having a better teammate meant having a better team. Which means better survivability.

Even after this whole tread, necro'd and all, I still haven't read a single argument why another player having a better stat is bad that doesn't come down to sour grapes or jealousy. An additional +1 or +2 isn't even noticeable during actual game play. I suppose someone with all 18s might be noticeable, but that has never happened, or anything really close to that. And maybe it's just me, but I find basing an argument on something that doesn't happen to be a pretty weak foundation for that argument. I'm sure someone will say, "I totally had a player who rolled all 18s and 17s in our game." Firstly, I find that highly dubious and more evident of a cheating player than the pitfalls of random chargen. Secondly, even if they did, it would be like someone winning the lottery. And if someone wins the lottery, I'm going to be glad for them and not sit and whine about how it's not fair to me.

 

[cavalier973]

I will reiterate that 2d6+6 is the optimal method for rolling scores. One can still roll as high as 18, but the lowest score that one Will see is 8.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I will reiterate that 2d6+6 is the optimal method for rolling scores. One can still roll as high as 18, but the lowest score that one Will see is 8.

Optimal with respect to what?

It seems to generate even higher scores than 4d6 drop 1. Higher by 0.75 points according to Rumkin's analyzer (http://rumkin.com/reference/dnd/diestats.php).

Besides, stats below 8 are fun when they come paired with high stats! (When they come with other trash stats, they are fun in a different way.) Why would you want to get rid of them?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Optimal with respect to what?

It seems to generate even higher scores than 4d6 drop 1. Higher by 0.75 points according to Rumkin's analyzer (http://rumkin.com/reference/dnd/diestats.php).

Besides, stats below 8 are fun when they come paired with high stats! (When they come with other trash stats, they are fun in a different way.) Why would you want to get rid of them?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I don't know Baldur's Gate well enough to love Minsc, but I do recognize what you're talking about.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Another thing I can't literally fathom? This idea that you're (general you) being cheated or treated unfairly because someone else has better stats. We play random gen 90% of the time, and I can't count the times where another player had better stats. Not only did I not even really notice the difference in game play, I sure as heck wasn't jealous because having a better teammate meant having a better team. Which means better survivability.

(Emphasis mine.)
So much this. Imagine members of a pro-sports team having sour grapes because they had Beckham, Derek Jeter, Peyton Manning, Michael Jordan or Wayne Gresky as a teammate.

I think that part of the problem lies in definitions & perceptions of "fair".

Point buy is fair because everyone has an equal amount of resources that yield results in a tight group. Randomized stat gen is fair because everyone has an equal chance of having great, average or godawful stats.

What you prefer depends a lot on your attitude towards risks & rewards.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Point buy is fair because everyone has an equal amount of resources that yield results in a tight group. Randomized stat gen is fair because everyone has an equal chance of having great, average or ... awful stats.

Even with point buy, there's the possibility of unequal outcomes. Players who are less math-savvy or less familiar with the 5E ruleset sometimes do things like spread their stats out equally, with 12s and 13s in all abilities. Such PCs will be less effective at their primary role than PCs who take a 15+ in their primary ability, in exactly the same way as if the differences had been rolled.

Not to mention all the other ways that powergamers will excel. Selecting good spells instead of Witch Bolt, utilizing cover and terrain effectively, threat assessment, resource management, choosing good feats like Alert instead of trash like Savage Attacks.

So someone who wanted a totally "fair" campaign either needs a group of identically savvy players, or has a lot of work ahead of them tweaking spells/terrain rules/fixing bad player choices/etc. Me, I'd rather just embrace heterogeneity.

 

[Parmandur]

Alternately, why did they set up point buy such that it gives worse results than the standard stat generation method? Point buy (PHB version) would be more attractive if it weren't deliberately gimped. It's almost as if random generation is supposed to be preferred.

Yes, it is. It is standard, point buy is an optional rule; not one that the books seem to encourage, as with feats or multi-classing.



Never done any other method than rolling; just wouldn't be my cup of tea without the dice deciding. And, it seems, WOTC found that to be a common feeling when surveys were done.