D&D 5E Humans RAW Can Start With multiple 18's

[Zardnaar]

True, but that option also requires the DM to allow feats (and entitles humans to a free one at 1st level), so exercising one option takes another away if you follow the RAW.

And you can still roll the dice RAW

 

[Phaezen]

Can we get rid of RAW from our vocabulary?

When you play in a campaign, you use the ability score generation method agreed on by the group. If the table uses the variant point buy then that is what you use.

 

[delericho]

Surely if you're going to roll then any race could end up with multiple 18's?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Can we get rid of RAW from our vocabulary?

Yes, please. 5e is the era of DM empowerment. The rules in the book are not as important as the DM's decision.

 

[Mandragola]

Can we get rid of RAW from our vocabulary?

When you play in a campaign, you use the ability score generation method agreed on by the group. If the table uses the variant point buy then that is what you use.

Totally. DnD is a social game so showing up with an attitude that says "the rules say this so you can't stop me" will only prove that people can stop you, by choosing not to spend time with you.

On the other hand if you say you'd really like to roll stats because you think it's more interesting that way, I doubt many people would object. It probably isn't going to make all that much difference. I expect that the group would probably expect you to roll your stats for them to see.

 

[wedgeski]

On the other hand if you say you'd really like to roll stats because you think it's more interesting that way, I doubt many people would object. It probably isn't going to make all that much difference. I expect that the group would probably expect you to roll your stats for them to see.

The only issue is mixing point-buy with rolled stats, or playing with a mix of any score-rolling strategies in fact. The danger of one character dramatically out-powering another is high.

Roll how you like, but all PC's must roll the same way.

 

[Gargoyle]

The only issue is mixing point-buy with rolled stats, or playing with a mix of any score-rolling strategies in fact. The danger of one character dramatically out-powering another is high.

Roll how you like, but all PC's must roll the same way.

Not all players want to roll, even if others are. Some love to. I let them roll once and then if they don't like their rolls, use the array. Gives them all a chance to roll 18's but keeps things relatively balanced.

 

[Mandragola]

The only issue is mixing point-buy with rolled stats, or playing with a mix of any score-rolling strategies in fact. The danger of one character dramatically out-powering another is high.

Roll how you like, but all PC's must roll the same way.

I would leave the choice up to players actually.

The greatest risk of different power levels comes if everyone rolls, not if only one or two people roll. If everyone rolls you'll probably get someone who rolls well and someone who rolls badly. Giving people the option of using points buy if they prefer, and guaranteeing a character who will be pretty good but not amazing, seems reasonable. Then if people want to take the chance and roll they have the option of taking the risk.

Also, if people roll stats that do come out way too good or awful, then you as DM can change them, if it really bothers you or the player. You might say a rolled character's stats have to cost no more than X and no less than Y if they were bought through points buy.

In general I think people worry slightly too much about stats. Raising a stat by +2 makes you hit when you would have missed or pass a save you would have failed one time in 20. That isn't such a big deal really.

 

[Evenglare]

I dropped the "RAW" term like a rock, the instant I picked up 13th age (because the designers tell you several times to change ANYTHING you want) and have never looked back. You need to trust your DM, if you are using RAW to overshadow others, make everyone else feel bad, and "win" the game I don't need you anywhere near me or my group.

 

[Unwise]

As a DM I don't like the idea of rolling stats at all. People only do it because they think I will have pity on them if they roll terribly. The thing is, that really skews things, as if I do that, I should also force them to reroll obscenely good stats, which nobody wants. The net effect of rerolling bad ones is that it is always worth taking a punt, the worst you can end up with is near average.

For instance, rolling for myself in a game I play, I rolled a great set of stats, then rolled a 4 for the last stat. The DM said that it would be unplayable no matter where I put it, so opted to let us all reroll our lowest stat. I ended up with an 17, making the array superhuman. DMs are effectively going to let people reroll anything lower than 6, but it is not like they are forcing them to reroll anything higher than 16.

In the past, dealing with rather annoying players, I have said that stats last for 4 levels. So if you roll a gimp and they die, your next character will use the exact same stats. Up until you have played through 4 levels (we level pretty quickly). This stopped people playing in such a way as to get to reroll until they end up with great stats. They would simply retire a character after a while, or undergo a magical/alchemical/training regime to reroll on the existing character if it made plot sense.

As a DM, I don't want to have weak characters that people are unhappy to play at my table. The flip side of this though, is that we lose out on some very interesting characters that we might have had doing the old-school roll in order thing. What I have tried recently, is giving people three good stats to put in their main stats, they then have the option of rolling randomly for their three other less important stats, no swapping. This has worked well, as it has meant we have ended up with a Wizard who is a part-time bodybuilder, a Fighter who just always wanted to be a bard and a monk who was as thick as two short planks, but somehow really like able.