-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Is an 18/19/20 an absolute must?
- Thread starter TerraDave
- Start date
Dice4Hire
First Post
Define "ok"
If "ok" means pretty well to very optimized, then no. If "ok" means playable then yes.
A 14 is only a -2 to hit and damage of an 18 after all.
Obryn
Hero
A 16 can work very well as long as you have some synergistic racial abilities for your class, and as long as you have a +2 in an important secondary stat.
The primary examples of this are, of course, dwarves. Even without a +2 to Strength, they make excellent Fighters and Wardens. That +2 to Constitution is important (as is a +2 to Wisdom, particularly for fighters), and their resistance to knockdown, resistance to forced movement, and minor action second wind are all pretty outstanding. Plus, they have their own top-tier feats for both of these classes, like Dwarven Weapon Training.
Anything lower than a 16 is, IMO, sorely lacking. And also IMO, a 20 is overkill.
-O
The primary examples of this are, of course, dwarves. Even without a +2 to Strength, they make excellent Fighters and Wardens. That +2 to Constitution is important (as is a +2 to Wisdom, particularly for fighters), and their resistance to knockdown, resistance to forced movement, and minor action second wind are all pretty outstanding. Plus, they have their own top-tier feats for both of these classes, like Dwarven Weapon Training.
Anything lower than a 16 is, IMO, sorely lacking. And also IMO, a 20 is overkill.
-O
AntiStateQuixote
Enemy of the State
It depends. 
The difference to hit and damage is not huge, as D4H pointed out, but that to hit can make the game frustrating if you regularly face creatures higher in level and/or lotsa soldiers.
It's never a "must" but it can be very important to the fun level in certain types of games. I think a 16 is totally acceptable in most cases and even a 14 is workable in certain types of games.
The difference to hit and damage is not huge, as D4H pointed out, but that to hit can make the game frustrating if you regularly face creatures higher in level and/or lotsa soldiers.
It's never a "must" but it can be very important to the fun level in certain types of games. I think a 16 is totally acceptable in most cases and even a 14 is workable in certain types of games.
Infiniti2000
First Post
Is that a 16 with or with the the racial modifier? 16 without the racial modifier is fine. A 16 with the racial modifier (i.e. 14 base) is not fine, IMO. In practice, I prefer a 17 base stat because it gives you a significant boost at 4th level.
A PC with a 16 for their primary stat (after racial modifiers) will be OK. An 18 for a primary stat is what I would call top notch. Anything higher could pose problems if the campaign uses the point buy system (other stats may become a hindrance YMMV).
Another question to consider deals with how the _other_ party members decide to create their characters. If everyone aims for the primary stat of 16 then scenarios will (should) be built around that stat modifier (IMO). However groups seldom are built as mentioned above therefore an 18 in the primary stat will be your goal.
In the "crappy town [campaign] where I am the hero" my character started with a primary stat of 16. As sessions progressed it became clear to me even with implement expertise and a magic item enhancement bonus appropriate of my level, my character was behind other characters in terms of being able "to hit." I have since compensated by picking power/feats that still do something cool even on a miss.
Regardless of the build, I still have fun and being the Leader of this group, have yet for a character to die on my watch.
Happy adventuring.
Another question to consider deals with how the _other_ party members decide to create their characters. If everyone aims for the primary stat of 16 then scenarios will (should) be built around that stat modifier (IMO). However groups seldom are built as mentioned above therefore an 18 in the primary stat will be your goal.
In the "crappy town [campaign] where I am the hero" my character started with a primary stat of 16. As sessions progressed it became clear to me even with implement expertise and a magic item enhancement bonus appropriate of my level, my character was behind other characters in terms of being able "to hit." I have since compensated by picking power/feats that still do something cool even on a miss.
Regardless of the build, I still have fun and being the Leader of this group, have yet for a character to die on my watch.
Happy adventuring.
In combat you basically have to hit to actually do anything. (Maybe with the exception of the tactical warlord who can have other characters do the attack).
If you take a basic attack doing 1d8+mod damage with a longsword vs an AC 17 opponent you have the following average damage after accounting for to-hit chance:
Stat 16 - to hit-chance = 17-3-3 = 50% and 4.5+3 = 7.5 dmg = 3.75 dmg
Stat 18 - to hit-chance = 17-4-3 = 55% and 4.5+4 = 8.5 dmg = 4.67 dmg
Stat 20 - to hit-chance = 17-5-3 = 60% and 4.5+5 = 9.5 dmg = 5.70 dmg
Stat 20 vs Stat 16 = 52% more damage
Stat 18 vs Stat 16 = 24% more damage
That is A LOT at lower levels! The difference is going to be lower at higher levels. If you can get powers that do something on a miss, it matters even less.
(AND a Stat 20 vs Stat 18 = 22% more damage, still a lot if you ask me)
I would NOT play a character starting with a 16. Those extra misses and the low damage would be a huge turn-off. Missing with my encounter/dailies would be frustrating.
Playing characters with an 18 is quite acceptable, maybe even a 17 starting if it's at level 4 or higher. A tactical warlord might be an exception to this general rule, but I think I would get annoyed even then.
If you take a basic attack doing 1d8+mod damage with a longsword vs an AC 17 opponent you have the following average damage after accounting for to-hit chance:
Stat 16 - to hit-chance = 17-3-3 = 50% and 4.5+3 = 7.5 dmg = 3.75 dmg
Stat 18 - to hit-chance = 17-4-3 = 55% and 4.5+4 = 8.5 dmg = 4.67 dmg
Stat 20 - to hit-chance = 17-5-3 = 60% and 4.5+5 = 9.5 dmg = 5.70 dmg
Stat 20 vs Stat 16 = 52% more damage
Stat 18 vs Stat 16 = 24% more damage
That is A LOT at lower levels! The difference is going to be lower at higher levels. If you can get powers that do something on a miss, it matters even less.
(AND a Stat 20 vs Stat 18 = 22% more damage, still a lot if you ask me)
I would NOT play a character starting with a 16. Those extra misses and the low damage would be a huge turn-off. Missing with my encounter/dailies would be frustrating.
Playing characters with an 18 is quite acceptable, maybe even a 17 starting if it's at level 4 or higher. A tactical warlord might be an exception to this general rule, but I think I would get annoyed even then.
Last edited:
I would say a 16 primary attribute better have powers that only target will and reflex...those two defenses (reflex especially) seem consistently low on nearly all creatures and as such losing out on the attack rolls won't be the end of the world.
Though personally, I would still never build a character like that. The difference may only be 5%-10%...but attacks are rolled more than anything else in the game, it will simply add up over time.
It should be noted that if you intend to get combat advantage a lot with a character or get bonuses from other party members consistantly, a 16 starting score will be more than enough.
Though personally, I would still never build a character like that. The difference may only be 5%-10%...but attacks are rolled more than anything else in the game, it will simply add up over time.
It should be noted that if you intend to get combat advantage a lot with a character or get bonuses from other party members consistantly, a 16 starting score will be more than enough.
Similar Threads
