20 vs 18

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm running a Starlock who is 16/14 in his casting stats. OTOH, I'm in an 8 man party.

IOW, I think how much it matters depends upon:

1) the particular makeup of your party

2) what that high stat means to your PC relative to his others from a RP standpoint. That is, what is the opportunity cost of that stat vs the others.

 

[KarinsDad]

At first level, a PC with a D8 damage and 50% chance to hit with an 18 stat does dpr of:

20 stat: 5.4 dpr
18 stat: 4.425 dpr
16 stat: 3.55 dpr

Not counting other boosts to damage or accuracy, this means that if his foe has 30 hit points, he will kill that foe in:

20 stat: 5.4 rounds
18 stat: 6.8 rounds
16 stat: 8.5 rounds

The difference between a 20 stat and a 16 stat is that the 20 stat kills off a foe in less than 2/3rds the number of rounds of a 16 stat.

A party with 5 PCs with 20 stats would probably be devastating. Yes, they would also be low on other defenses and weaker on secondary abilities, but it's a case of kill the foe before the foe kills you.

This becomes especially true for PCs that roll multiple dice like Rangers and Avengers.


At higher levels when foes have more conditions, a party of 20 stat PCs would start hurting a bit more because of more conditions sticking to them.

 

[Nifft]

I believe that 16 in a primary stat, after racial modifiers, can work pretty well. It's not the optimal choice, but it works rather well. It is, I think, expected for characters whose racial modifiers and class primary ability don't synergise well (like, say, dwarf fighters).

16-20 is the 'acceptable' range. 16 is low, 20 is high, 18 is normal.

If you go for abnormal (i.e. anything other than 18 post-racial) in your primary attack stat, you should think about what you're giving up and how you're going to compensate. The Dwarf Fighter (16/16/16 post-racial) is a specific case where not having an 18 (post-racial) in your primary attack stat works perfectly well.

Cheers, -- N

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Another factor to consider is feat access. The higher you set your primary the more constrained you are going to be in terms of picking up certain key feats. This piles on top of things like reduced defenses due to lower secondary and tertiary scores as well. Some builds tolerate this with no real problems, like wizards where INT is obviously boosting your AC on top of increasing your to-hit. OTOH there are a bunch of feats that some wizards will really want to have, especially at paragon, that are going to be tough to pick up. Raw to-hit is obviously important, but if you can get an extra target into your AoE fairly consistently, exclude an ally, do a bit of extra damage, etc it can quickly make up for a 5% lower to-hit chance.

The upshot is you really can't generalize. The best strategy is to build a character that is going to be fun to play and matches your character concept. Look at what you need to make that concept work and allocate stats accordingly.

 

[circadianwolf]

This becomes especially true for PCs that roll multiple dice like Rangers and Avengers.

Actually avengers generally fare better (or, really, are penalized less) for lower attack stat because of the double rolling (because they don't benefit from having both rolls hit, a super high attack bonus just isn't as useful). Rangers function somewhat similarly, as they'll still due quarry damage as long as one roll hits (assuming the same target for both rolls), but since both rolls have potential damage do care more.

 

[KarinsDad]

Actually avengers generally fare better (or, really, are penalized less) for lower attack stat because of the double rolling (because they don't benefit from having both rolls hit, a super high attack bonus just isn't as useful).

The dpr for an Avenger with a D8 weapon at level one, 50% chance to hit with an 18, and with nothing else and two rolls is:

20 stat: 8.3925 dpr
18 stat: 7.09875 dpr
16 stat: 5.8725 dpr

If his foe has 30 hit points, he will kill that foe in:

20 stat: 3.6 rounds
18 stat: 4.2 rounds
16 stat: 5.1 rounds

That's still ~70% of the time to take out the foe with a 20 stat over an 18 stat. Not much different than 2/3rds.

Avengers are penalized approximately the same as everyone else for having a lower stat. A lot of their damage comes from accuracy. The 20 stat still helps a lot.

The point I was trying to make is that an Avenger with a 50% single swing chance to hit with an 18 stat will with Oath of Emnity hit 69.75% of the time with a 16 stat, and 79.75% of the time with a 20 stat. He still gains +2 to hit and +2 damage with the 20 stat over the 16 stat as other PCs. But he's hitting a devastating 80% of the time. He rarely wastes Encounter and Daily powers. Just like the Ranger rarely wastes his Quarry damage.

 

[babinro]

Very class dependent, though in my opinion:

For AC attacking classes, a 20 is a must if only using a +2 proficient weapon and not playing a class that grants the extra bonus to attack rolls like Rogue or Fighter. Otherwise 18 with a +3 prof weapon is fine.

For Implement ranged attackers who do not benefit frequently from combat advantage: 20 is a must if you plan on targeting Fort with a decent amount of spells. Particularly at-wills. Or if you don't plan on using an accurate implement from the PHB3. An 18 is sufficient for those targeting reflex or will primarily. Particularly Reflex.

The above is of course subject to change based on what must-have feats you intend to qualify for with the build. A 20 score highly limits feat selection for most classes

 

[Runestar]

4e more or less did away with MAD, so I am fairly comfortable with base 16s in my key stats (together with a race granting +2 to those key stats), still leaving enough for a modest con. The rest of the stats typically aren't worth the effort to boost, as the benefit is likely negligible (or even irrelevant, such as int for a rogue).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

4e more or less did away with MAD...

Uhhh, not entirely. It depends on your build.

I'm playing a Starlock. Their powers are distributed fairly evenly between a few damage types. There are feats that boost the damage by type.

To take the 3 feats that cover the Starlock's damage types, you'd need 13s in Int, Wis, Cha, Con & Dex.

Now, I realize that feat selection is entirely optional, but still, that's a clear invitation to MADness.

(And I'm sure you can find other examples.)

 

[Obryn]

Uhhh, not entirely. It depends on your build.

True!

It would be much more accurate to say that "4e largely did away with MAD in PHB 2 and 3"

PHB1 has several MAD classes - Starlocks and Paladins being the worst offenders. Heck; if you're restricted to PHB1, any V-shaped class gets hit a bit. Fighters have a bit of MAD, too, needing Strength, Wisdom, and a variable 3rd stat depending on which weapon they're using.

-O