D&D 5E Why no 16-18s allowed in Point Buy?

[fba827]

Keep re-rolling stats until you get awesome ones? Do these DMs also let players reroll attacks until they crit and then reroll damage until it's max?

I've had players that if they didn't roll something awesome and they were nit allowed to Errol, basically they did not take the character seriously. Either having him act like an idiot, or with a clear death wish, etc. overall just becoming a disruption to the game. So it can just be easier for the sake if table harmony if it's a friend and not just a gaming buddy to let the re roll happen.

 

[Agamon]

I've had players that if they didn't roll something awesome and they were nit allowed to Errol, basically they did not take the character seriously. Either having him act like an idiot, or with a clear death wish, etc. overall just becoming a disruption to the game. So it can just be easier for the sake if table harmony if it's a friend and not just a gaming buddy to let the re roll happen.

Don't get me wrong, I've always allowed rerolls on PCs that were garbage due to incredibly bad variance. But I've never had a player cry that he didn't have awesome stats. If that were the case, I'd make everyone use point buy, then everyone's even, if that actually matters.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Keep re-rolling stats until you get awesome ones? Do these DMs also let players reroll attacks until they crit and then reroll damage until it's max?

I feel like everyone who says stuff like this should be forced to present the character sheets of all the PCs in their groups for the last ten years so they can be audited by the Game Police. It's funny how everyone is all "Oh I make them keep what they roll!", and then when you see actual PCs from their games it's strangely all 17, 16, 14, 14, 12, 12-type arrays...

Personally, if we roll (which we didn't, generally in 3E, and never in 4E), each player generates 10 "sets" of stats (usually using a spreadsheet or java program), then picks one of those. We disregard total outrages as well as rubbish stats, though (fr'ex, even before this, with normal 4d6-drop-the-lowest, my brother rolled an 18, 18, 18, 17, 17, 16 array, so we made that PC into an NPC, because damn...). Certainly produces much higher results than point-buy or similar, but makes for characters people get very attached to, in my experience, which is very good for the game.

If I wanted to play "most of you will be dead..."-type D&D, I'd be playing DCC (which is a fun game, in a different way).

 

[mach1.9pants]

Really? In 30+ years of gaming I have never seen or even heard of doing such a thing. With 3d6 in order we often made 5 rolls you pick the best couple, use them for PCs - cos always good to have a back up. If I wanted the scores to be higher I would go 5d6 or 1E UA's 9d6, 8d6, 7d6 etc.

But I would have never even thought of making multiple 4d6 PCs. Learn something everyday!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Really? In 30+ years of gaming I have never seen or even heard of doing such a thing. With 3d6 in order we often made 5 rolls you pick the best couple, use them for PCs - cos always good to have a back up. If I wanted the scores to be higher I would go 5d6 or 1E UA's 9d6, 8d6, 7d6 etc.

But I would have never even thought of making multiple 4d6 PCs. Learn something everyday!

I think we read the suggestion in Dragon. Certainly we were using it by the time Dark Sun came out (which had you roll what, 5d4 or something, instead of 4d6-drop-the-lowest, I remember there being a conflict between the systems), so 1992. Most other groups I knew in London in the '90s did something similar. As did the groups I met in the US (East Coast) in the mid and late '90s.

FWIW, I literally never saw 3d6-based (as opposed to 4d6-drop-the-lowest-based) character generation used in a real game until well into the '00s for an intentionally old-school BD&D campaign. So I think it's kind of cultural.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Well most of my gaming (that did rolls rather than point buy) has been in New Zealand, so pretty isolated!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Its funny, but when people (even going back to 2e) rolled stats and brought characters to game, no matter the method everyone had at least 1 16+ stat... and most had an 18... when rolling at the table we always had lesser stats...

My fav examples will for ever be the 3d6 place as you get them wizard and theif set... the wizard had a 9 INt the thief a 15 and that was also the game where even with a nat 18 a player had a character that quilfoed for no class... he had an 18 cha and a 17 con... a str, dex,int, and wis all 8 or less...

And even better the game we were playing in 3.5 where everyone rolled 4d6 drop lowest, reroll 1's and 2's gen 7 numbers drop the lowest... and one player infront of everyone ended up with a character who had 4 9's and his high stat was a 13

 

[GameOgre]

I always like rolling 3D6 in order and dealing with whatever drops. As long as whatever drops is awesome stats that make me a young god!

The is the same way I love Hardmode video games set to the max of hardness and brutality,as long as I kick arse!

Playing without carebear nets is the much better way to go as long as I don't fall and end up a bloody mess.


Secretly I just want to rock and have fun and out Conan,Conan. I want to look Elric in the eye as I take Stormbringer from him and show him what a real player can do with it. I want to pimp slap Smaug and steal from Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser. I want to take the one ring and rule over them all and ask Gandalf why he doesn't have teleport.I want to be The Bloody Ten,because I don't lose fingers.Show Luke what happens to pansy emo dark siders with red flashlights who get on my nerves.I want to slay ten dragons for breakfast and two Gods for dinner.

Roll stats,point buy,it doesn't matter to me as long as I don't suck.


I would like to do all that with 3D6 in order while sneering at those who feel the need to use other more easy methods to create characters. How about we just roll at home and use the honor system and show up with our lucky stats like we always do?

Point by is so limiting compared to my rolled at home in front of my trusty dog characters.

 

[Sadras]

Our group prefers the lower attribute score. It suits our story-style, especially if we start off our characters in their late teens it makes sense that they would not have an 18 but possibly grow to have that score. So if we would like to have that 16-18, we age & level the characters appropriately.

The lower attributes also work well with the 5e perceived "weaker" monsters (AC) and with Bounded Accuracy as others have pointed out.
Gauntlets of Ogre Strength just became even more valuable!

 

[Phoenix8008]

I like that they're limiting the starting stats to lower amounts. It gives room for growth and makes it not feel as expected to start with massive stat bonuses.

I'll admit to being a DM that has allowed some power gaming as far as starting stat rolls go. I used to allow 4d6 (drop lowest) rolled for 6 stats and arranged how you want. And if that grouping seemed kinda low, then I allowed a second grouping of 6 to be rolled and they could take the better of the two. Like I said though, the systems being played nearly required or assumed really high stats like that, so we went with it. With the system of 5e pointing the way toward assuming lower starting stats (and having a cap of 20), I'd be alot less likely to allow rerolls like that now. Lower starting scores would be the assumption and would be the norm.