D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Maxperson]

Not sure what was humorous about that post.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Really? So I'm just a lying SOB when I said it happened in my game?

I've seen hundreds of characters rolled up over the decades, maybe over a thousand, and I've never seen 3d6 or 4d6 drop the lowest generate stats like that. I have seen it with 5d6 drop the lowest 2 like a friend of mine likes to have players roll, but that's his system and not D&D.

I've seen 1e DMG "Method III" produce some crazy characters.

But, ultimately, what's an un-verifiable, anonymous, on-line anecdote about events 30 or 40 years ago worth?

Nope. wrong. lower. guess again...

Nope, lower...

lower...

...

It's all just joke fodder to me now.

Everybody's a comedian...

 

[Maxperson]

I've seen 1e DMG "Method III" produce some crazy characters.

I didn't talk about method III, or the one from the UA. We didn't use those, because they were too generous with stats. I'm talking about 3d6 and 4d6 drop the lowest.

But, ultimately, what's an un-verifiable, anonymous, on-line anecdote about events 30 or 40 years ago worth?

Quite a bit. I have enough D&D hours to qualify as an expert on D&D, and so have you and many others here.

 

[Hussar]

Not sure what was humorous about that post.

While I didn't laugh, it's funny because of the incredibly obvious presumptions on your part. You are presuming that just because you haven't seen it, it must be incredibly rare and therefore not worrying about.

It apparently doesn't occur to you that the irony here is that the reverse could easily be true. You are the outlier and just haven't seen something. I mean, for S&G's, I just used your rolling method and banged out 20 sets of stats. Three had multiple scores above 16 and nothing below a 12. So, using your stated rolling method, it's not rare IME, to get extremely high powered characters.

But, apparently, despite seeing "thousands" of characters generated, you have avoided the odds that say you should have seen at least one character like [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] mentioned.

So, yes, your post was really, really funny. At least, it made me laugh.

 

[Maxperson]

While I didn't laugh, it's funny because of the incredibly obvious presumptions on your part. You are presuming that just because you haven't seen it, it must be incredibly rare and therefore not worrying about.

It apparently doesn't occur to you that the irony here is that the reverse could easily be true. You are the outlier and just haven't seen something. I mean, for S&G's, I just used your rolling method and banged out 20 sets of stats. Three had multiple scores above 16 and nothing below a 12. So, using your stated rolling method, it's not rare IME, to get extremely high powered characters.

But, apparently, despite seeing "thousands" of characters generated, you have avoided the odds that say you should have seen at least one character like [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] mentioned.

So, yes, your post was really, really funny. At least, it made me laugh.

No presumptions on my part. There is a 0.38 chance of getting a character with 2 18's. Add to that a 17, a 16 and 2 14s all on the same PC and it's no wonder that I've never seen one. Math, it prevents presumptions. So no, I'm not the outlier, [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] is. Further, your twisting of everything you read continues unabated. I never said I saw thousands. You should re-read all posts 4 or 5 times until you are certain of what they say, it will help you tremendously. What's more, I hope you didn't really use my method to try and disprove straight 4d6 drop the lowest for all 6 stats like [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] and I have been discussing. That would be disingenuous and you wouldn't want people to think that of you, right?

 

[Lanefan]

... I have seen it with 5d6 drop the lowest 2 like a friend of mine likes to have players roll, but that's his system and not D&D. ...

Hey, that's our system too and it's certainly D&D to us.

 

[Hussar]

I used your method, [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], because that's the method you said you use.

So, you claim that you've never seen such high stats, but, I was able to see them pretty quickly using your die rolling method.

And excuse me if I don't quite take your math at face value.

So, your idea of a high stat character is limited to 18, 18, 17, 16, 14, 14? Well, sure, I can see how that would be pretty hard to achieve. Thing is, that's not the limit of what I consider a high stat character. I mean, good grief, 16, 16, 14, 14, 13, 12 is an VERY high stat character in 5e. THAT'S what I'm talking about when I say high stat. That array will play merry hell with the math of the system.

You've claimed multiple times that a +1 is unimportant in 5e. But, that ignores bounded accuracy. When the vast majority of checks should be about DC 10-15, a +1 is a HUGE benefit.

This isn't 3e or 4e where a single +1 doesn't matter. This is a system where a single +1 is all you get.

 

[Maxperson]

Hey, that's our system too and it's certainly D&D to us.

I wasn't judging!!!

He has created his own system and runs a Middle Earth game with it. He used the 5d6 drop the two lowest. Makes for some high numbers. Been playing with him for almost 20 years and my best rolled set was 3 18's, 17, 2 16's and a 15. Did that once and it was far and away the best set I've rolled. I rarely roll even 2 18's, and very often not even one of them.

 

[Maxperson]

I used your method, [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], because that's the method you said you use.

So, you claim that you've never seen such high stats, but, I was able to see them pretty quickly using your die rolling method.

Yada yada yada, I refuse to actually read what Maxperson writes yada yada yada. We're discussing 4d6 drop the lowest, so if you use anything else you're just wasting your time. You also didn't see two 18's, a 17, a 16 and 2 14's come up with just 20 rolls of my method. My method isn't that good.

And excuse me if I don't quite take your math at face value.

Do it yourself then. Do the math that shows the odds of 2 18's, a 17, a 16 and 2 14's with the 4d6 drop the lowest method.

So, your idea of a high stat character is limited to 18, 18, 17, 16, 14, 14? Well, sure, I can see how that would be pretty hard to achieve. Thing is, that's not the limit of what I consider a high stat character. I mean, good grief, 16, 16, 14, 14, 13, 12 is an VERY high stat character in 5e. THAT'S what I'm talking about when I say high stat. That array will play merry hell with the math of the system.

And now a Strawman! You're on fire today. Watch out that your straw doesn't catch. Go back and re-read my posts a few dozen more times until you know what I've said.

You've claimed multiple times that a +1 is unimportant in 5e. But, that ignores bounded accuracy. When the vast majority of checks should be about DC 10-15, a +1 is a HUGE benefit.

This isn't 3e or 4e where a single +1 doesn't matter. This is a system where a single +1 is all you get.

Eh, no. Even in bounded accuracy +1 isn't good. You'd need to roll a 14 just to hit a DC 15.

 

[FrogReaver]

Eh, no. Even in bounded accuracy +1 isn't good. You'd need to roll a 14 just to hit a DC 15.

I don't care about the rest but this... SERISOULY?