D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Hussar]

So instead it's more realistic that every man, woman and child in the world has 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8? Riiiiiiiiiiiight.

Why are you applying rules that are SPECIFICALLY for PC's to NPC's? The standard array is for making a PLAYER CHARACTER. That's why it's in the Player's Handbook. There is NOTHING in 5e to indicate that this is the baseline for anything other than PC's.

And, how am I wrong for 3e? ALL NPC's in 3e use straight 10's except for Elite opponents. In fact that's the baseline for creating EVERY SINGLE MONSTER in the game. The only reason an ogre has the strength it has is because of it's racial bonus to Strength.

Oops, I think the array is 3x11 and 3x10 is it not? Sorry, it's been a while. If that's the case, it doesn't really matter. EVERY single monster and NPC, other than the ones that the DM specifically stats out, has an IDENTICAL array.

So, no, I'm not wrong. 3e uses a flat baseline and 4e and 5e presume that NPC's aren't statted anyway since they don't need stats. You only stat stuff that is a potential threat to or ally of PC's, full stop. You can keep trying to cherry pick stuff from all the books, and I'll keep pointing you to the correct information.

You can only lead a horse to water I suppose.

 

[Lanefan]

Why are you applying rules that are SPECIFICALLY for PC's to NPC's? The standard array is for making a PLAYER CHARACTER. That's why it's in the Player's Handbook. There is NOTHING in 5e to indicate that this is the baseline for anything other than PC's.

I would posit that it's because a) NPCs and PCs come from the same base stock and b) there's no other useful or believable rules available to use.

If there was something - anything - in the PH or DMG suggesting how to bell-curve commoners in any meaningful fashion (resulting in a 3-18 range) this whole discussion would largely Go Away. But there isn't. And it would have taken what, two or three lines of text in the DMG?

All we have are the three methods of generating PC adventurers, all of which are expressly intended to on average give something slightly better than a commoner. But if we don't know how a commoner's stats are generated then it's hard to compare, and hard for a DM to tweak things if she wants her PCs to be closer to or more removed from the baseline average.

And, how am I wrong for 3e? ALL NPC's in 3e use straight 10's except for Elite opponents. In fact that's the baseline for creating EVERY SINGLE MONSTER in the game. The only reason an ogre has the strength it has is because of it's racial bonus to Strength.

Which is something I've always found a bit of a drawback in monster design in all editions: as written, every monster of a given species has the same stat line, or extremely close.

Now I freely admit I'm too lazy to fix this most of the time when chucking monsters at my players' characters; but it still bugs me.

Lanefan

 

[Hussar]

Sorry, Lanefan, I wasn't trying to be a dick. Your last line made me giggle, so I clicked laugh. Funny 'cos it's true.

But, going back to your first point, I think that's the point right there.

there's no other useful or believable rules available to use

Yup. That's 100% true. Because, frankly, there's absolutely no reason to extrapolate D&D rules onto the game world. Why on earth would I bother even considering the idea that all NPC's are generated on 3d6? It's ludicrous on its face. As [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] mentioned, that means that just about 3% of your population is physically or mentally challenged. Unless your game world is the recent victim of a massive plague, that's just not true. You couldn't possibly have a functioning society with that many people on the low end of the spectrum.

So, we presume, because D&D isn't all that granular anyway, that everyone that isn't right in the game spotlight right now, falls between 8 and 12. Because, THAT'S a believable world.

 

[Hriston]

All we have are the three methods of generating PC adventurers, all of which are expressly intended to on average give something slightly better than a commoner. But if we don't know how a commoner's stats are generated then it's hard to compare, and hard for a DM to tweak things if she wants her PCs to be closer to or more removed from the baseline average.

If you look at the Commoner NPC, I think it's obvious how its scores were generated. They were set by design at the stated average for normal humans (10.5), and rounded down to 10. I think the intent is for the majority of humanoid individuals to be completely unremarkable in their abilities.

 

[Caliban]

As [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] mentioned, that means that just about 3% of your population is physically or mentally challenged. Unless your game world is the recent victim of a massive plague, that's just not true. You couldn't possibly have a functioning society with that many people on the low end of the spectrum.

Must...resist...political...joke...

 

[Maxperson]

Why are you applying rules that are SPECIFICALLY for PC's to NPC's? The standard array is for making a PLAYER CHARACTER. That's why it's in the Player's Handbook. There is NOTHING in 5e to indicate that this is the baseline for anything other than PC's.

First, I was giving [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] a taste of his own medicine and twisting things. Second, straight 10's for everyone(except "specials") is just as bad as arrays for everyone. It's much less realistic than rolling, even with the math that [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] did concerning 3d6.

And, how am I wrong for 3e? ALL NPC's in 3e use straight 10's except for Elite opponents. In fact that's the baseline for creating EVERY SINGLE MONSTER in the game. The only reason an ogre has the strength it has is because of it's racial bonus to Strength.

I posted it. Page 110 of the DMG gives NPCs the average ROLLED ON 3D6. 3e gives averages as a quick stat block to use, but those averages are not what all people have. They are simply an average for quick use if the DM does not want to roll the NPC.

Oops, I think the array is 3x11 and 3x10 is it not? Sorry, it's been a while. If that's the case, it doesn't really matter. EVERY single monster and NPC, other than the ones that the DM specifically stats out, has an IDENTICAL array.

In 3e averages are just that, averages. They are not the range of stats for that creature. The range of stats for common NPCs is explicitly(see page 110 of the DMG) 3d6. Those average numbers are just for when the DM wants to be lazy and/or doesn't really need numbers.

So, no, I'm not wrong. 3e uses a flat baseline and 4e and 5e presume that NPC's aren't statted anyway since they don't need stats. You only stat stuff that is a potential threat to or ally of PC's, full stop. You can keep trying to cherry pick stuff from all the books, and I'll keep pointing you to the correct information.

So yes, you are wrong by RAW which explicitly says the stat range for common NPCs is 3d6.

You can only lead a horse to water I suppose.

I keep trying, but you won't even go that far.

 

[Hriston]

Page 110 of the DMG gives NPCs the average ROLLED ON 3D6.

So it comes from 3e. I stand corrected on my claim that no edition of D&D stated this explicitly.

My refutation of [MENTION=6799649]Arial Black[/MENTION]'s claim that D&D had this assumption from the beginning still stands, however. The 1e DMG is the first source for deriving the ability scores for the "average" NPC, and the method given is to roll three averaging dice.

I think Pathfinder got this right by giving this type of NPC the array 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, which is the array most likely to result from rolling three averaging dice. The most likely array resulting from 3d6, on the other hand, is 14, 12, 11, 10, 9, 7.

 

[Oofta]

And yet it's still more realistic than point buy or arrays, where nobody in the entire world can be below an 8!!

Nobody on this thread has ever said the standard array or point buy should be used for the general populace.

What should the numbers be? Heck if I know, it's not relevant to the game. I can tell you that I think it's silly to assume a method that makes 1 in every 216 people is as mentally handicapped as possible is a viable method.

 

[Oofta]

First, I was giving [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] a taste of his own medicine and twisting things.

By making up stuff that was never stated or implied.

So yes, you are wrong by RAW which explicitly says the stat range for common NPCs is 3d6.

In a previous edition that was published over a decade ago, which has nothing to do with 5E.

 

[Arial Black]

No, I wouldn't begin to try to convince you of that. But I will argue vehemently that Joxer was not a PC. He was the DM's comic relief NPC, created to give his little brother a way to join in without needing go pay attention to the story or any ongoing thing.

Autolycus and Salmoneus were played by the couple who were old friends of the group, but lived out of town and could only make to a session like twice a year.

Gabrielle was a PC. Was she generated using the same number of points as Xena?

What about Hercules and Iolus?