D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Tony Vargas]

It wouldn't solve the main issue I have with it, which is lack of realism. People can't select the stats they have.

So random-in-order, all the way? Fair 'nuff. People, can't choose their race, assigned sex, nor the circumstances of their birth, either.
Noble background? Random.

Actually, I've seen systems that have random determination for all sorts of life-path influences, so you might pick what you want do (adventuring wizard), but you also had to contend with what your parents wanted you to do ("accountant, hey, they both spend a lot of time with books and numbers, and you should have a back-up plan, we just want what's best for you...").

You are just going to have to live with the fact that thousands of people all across America...

...so ~0.001%...

play point buy and enjoy it. No matter how much badwrongfun you think it is.

... I think he can deal.

 

[Caliban]

...so ~0.001%... ... I think we can deal.

*shrug* I'm not claiming to know the actual number of people who play AL. I just know it's a lot.

Are you claiming to know the number of people who only play home games with random roll?

 

[Tony Vargas]

*shrug* I'm not claiming to know the actual number of people who play AL.

Just a bit of perspective. 5e is very popular - for post-fad D&D, but that's not saying much.

 

[Caliban]

Just a bit of perspective. 5e is very popular - for post-fad D&D, but that's not saying much.

So you don't actually know then. Thought so.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So you don't actually know then. Thought so.

Hey, you said 'thousands throughout America,' I didn't argue with it. I didn't snidely pretend you had to document a hard number, I just pointed out that thousands throughout America is out of the hundreds of millions of Americans...

Folks appeal to popularity when advocating for one opinion or version or way of playing the game, but they forget that, were appeals to popularity not a fallacy, they'd be proof that D&D is crap, because it's still a tiny obscure little hobby.

 

[Eric Olson]

This allows for stats in the 16-18 range but still doesn't allow for anything lower than 8, and in fact even makes 8 less likely.

The way to game this one is to PB to a 15-15-15-8-8-8 stat line and then roll. Odds are very high that at least two of those 8s will significantly improve...

Lanefan

To get the desired blend of randomness and play-ability you would want to modify and scale the point-buy system (so it acts more like "insurance" on certain abilities. Start with [3 3 3 3 3 3] and 30 points. The point table would need to get further curved to balance the probabilities:
(3=0 pt, 4=x, 5=.5 pt, 6=1 pt, 7=1.5 pt, 8=2 pt, 9=3 pt, 10=4 pt, 11=5 pt, 12=6pt, 13=8pt, 14=10 pt, 15=13 pt)
Then roll "4d6 keep 3" (in-order, no cheating) and keep either the roll or the point-buy score.

This should give reasonable average scores according to my simulation:
[11 11 11 11 11 11] gives an average stat value of 12.9 (avg. char, no bad stats and a random chance of something good)
[15 15 10 3 3 3] give an avg stat value of 13.3 (2 very good stats, 13% of improving each very good stat and chance of really bad stat)

So we can keep the averages close to normal. Chance of 16/17/18 are same as regular 4d6 keep 3 (but on only have one chance, since it is in-order rolling). Can guarantee 2 good stats for particular character concept. Randomness may bring interesting 'character' to the character -- especially since you can't re-order the stats.

Using 3d6 instead of 4d6 keep 3 drops the averages scores by about 1 (12-12.2) - so you would want to boost the buy points to bring the averages back to the 13 range.

 

[Caliban]

Hey, you said 'thousands throughout America,' I didn't argue with it. I didn't snidely pretend you had to document a hard number, I just pointed out that thousands throughout America is out of the hundreds of millions of Americans...

Folks appeal to popularity when advocating for one opinion or version or way of playing the game, but they forget that, were appeals to popularity not a fallacy, they'd be proof that D&D is crap, because it's still a tiny obscure little hobby.

No, you snidely assumed that it was only a tiny fraction of the total number of D&D players, and then referred to numbers from 20 years ago when you were questioned on it. Meaning you don't know and were just being condescending.

And now you claim you were referring to the total population of America, rather than the number of D&D players who don't play AL.

I know for a fact that it the number of AL players is at least in the thousands, so that's the general number I used. It may in fact be in the tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands. I really don't know and I'm not going to pretend otherwise. You did, and you got called on it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No, you snidely assumed that it was only a tiny fraction of the total number of D&D players

Nope, the ~0.001% would clearly have to be relative to the total population of the region in question.

and the referred to numbers from 20 years ago

(Edit: a bit over 30 years ago, actually. Peaked in the 80s, D&D did.)
Oh, those are numbers we have a hint or two about. Recently, it was revealed that 5e is coming up on selling 800k books, after over 3 years. At the height of the fad, TSR was moving 750k per year. So about a third the popularity (in terms of gross units, relative to the population, well, it was about 65 million fewer back then).
FWIW (nothing, really, that's the point, appeals to popularity are fallacious).

 

[Caliban]

Nope, the ~0.001% would clearly have to be relative to the total population of the region in question.

It was in no way clear. I was referring to a subset of D&D players, you would clearly have to be referring to the total number of D&D players.

Now you claim otherwise. Fine, you were in a hurry to be condescending and made an unclear statement.

Let's say you were in fact referring to the total population of America. How is that relevant to anything we have been discussing? It's meaningless.

Oh, those are numbers we have a hint or two about. Recently, it was revealed that 5e is coming up on selling 800k books, after over 3 years. At the height of the fad, TSR was moving 750k per year. So about a third the popularity. FWIW.

Also not relevant to the point I was making. But if lets you feel superior, great. More power to you. I'll get off your lawn now.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It was in no way clear. I was referring to a subset of D&D players, you would clearly have to be referring to the total number of D&D players.

Do the math.

Let's say you were in fact referring to the total population of America.

Lets say I was because 1) I was and 2) I would have to have been off by many orders of magnitude, otherwise.

How is that relevant to anything we have been discussing? It's meaningless.

Exactly. Folks appeal to popularity when advocating for one opinion or version or way of playing the game, but they forget that, were appeals to popularity not a fallacy, they'd be proof that D&D is crap, because so few people, relative to how many people there are, actually play it.

Whatever makes you feel better.

If I ever find anything that does, I'll share.

I'll get off your lawn now.

Don't worry about it, my lawn died years ago.
...
It's all "drought-tolerant California natives" now.
...
OK, they're weeds.
...
Dead weeds, this time of year.