You primary stat should never be lower than 18

[Dragonbait]

Except you will always be behind the curve, because everyone else -- even the guys who started right, with an 18 in their primary attack stat -- will be doing the same exact thing.

You'll always be inferior to them, with no way to ever catch up.

Cheers, -- N

And this is different from 3ed.. How?

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Also, the point of the game isn't to win.

well yes and no. The point is to live. This can be done in many different ways.

 

[Regicide]

Doesn't actually matter.

Except it does. 3.5E Attacking 5x/round with the first 3 being "anything but a 1" hits, being 4 STR or DEX down doesn't have as big of an effect as attacking once per round with a 50% chance to hit, or 40% if you have 4 less STR. The difference is huge. In 4E you really really REALLY want to max out your prime stat.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I like the standard array, because I think a lot of the game is built on the assumption that characters will have a 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10. I'm sure the various point buy deviations don't make much of a difference. I'm tempted to say that I'd allow the option to retcon stats with a point buy after several sessions of play, but I'd have to see how things are going.

The problem of non-maximized characters behind the curve has struck me as well. The problem existed in 3rd edition, but with array/point buy as the recommended methods of stat generation, no stat-boosting magic items, and the lack of +attack bonus, I think the problem is more apparent this time around.

 

[Nifft]

And this is different from 3ed.. How?

In 3e, you could take feats like Weapon Finesse. 4e? Not so much.

In 4e, Power Attack is not optimal; in 3e, it was. In 3e, you could also Power Attack for one point less and still hit almost as hard. In 4e, you are best served by not using Power Attack and just hitting with your powers.

In 3e, there were a number of ways to be able to make a melee attack as a Touch attack. In 4e, not so much.

In 3e, there were many many MANY effects which could boost your attack bonus. In 4e, there are not so many, and most of the one you can control yourself won't stack.

So: 4e has fewer bonuses, fewer bonus types, smaller overall bonuses, and you as a player have less "granularity" in terms of spending bonuses.

Do you get it, or do you have more questions?

Cheers, -- N

 

[Aldarc]

I still think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill about "essential" starting with a max stat 18 is in 4E.

 

[Branduil]

I think, one of the main reasons to get your attacks as high as possible is daily powers. If you miss with an at-will, no big deal, but the nature of daily powers makes maximizing your primary stat of utmost importance. You don't want to waste a single daily attack power if at all possible, and the only reliable way to increase your odds of hitting with one is having a higher primary stat.

 

[Dragonbait]

In 3e, you could take feats like Weapon Finesse. 4e? Not so much.

True, it's in certain class powers, but I agree that it would have been nice to have WF as a feat.

In 4e, Power Attack is not optimal; in 3e, it was. In 3e, you could also Power Attack for one point less and still hit almost as hard. In 4e, you are best served by not using Power Attack and just hitting with your powers.

Okay

In 3e, there were a number of ways to be able to make a melee attack as a Touch attack. In 4e, not so much.

In the core? Because, really, if you are comparing 6 or 8 years of material of 3e to a single set of 4e books then 4e is hard pressed when it comes to versatility. BUT if you look at JUST the core PH of 3E and core PH of 4E, this is not the case.

In 3e, there were many many MANY effects which could boost your attack bonus. In 4e, there are not so many, and most of the one you can control yourself won't stack.

Is that so? Are you talking about situational bonuses from positioning and so on? Class powers? Magic bonuses?

 

[katahn]

What the guy who starts with a 16 instead of an 18 loses in "chance to hit" they most certainly can make up in other areas that are just as important. They might have better defenses in other areas, they might have better success with untrained skills, they might start with more hit points, they might successfully use social skills to avoid dire consequences.

Sure the 16 str fighter has 5% less chance to hit than the 18 str fighter on a str vs. <whatever> defense. But that 16 str fighter might have 10-15% better odds dealing with attacks against ref or will, might have a couple extra hit points at first level (which in turn boosts values for healing surges or even numbers of healing surges), is more likely to qualify for feats that boost their power in other areas, and so on.

Examining the effectiveness of a character purely from their primary attack ability score is myopic to say the least.

 

[phil500]

1) an 18 in your primary stat is costly

not if you choose the race with that in mind. i think thats what the OP wanted to say- you should buy a 16 and play a race that has a +2.