Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
I told you not to respond to me unless you were done trolling me.
D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats
- Thread starter Klaudius Rex
- Start date
I told you not to respond to me unless you were done trolling me.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
I find it amusing that their side of things is arguing that adventurers are a cut above commoners with stats, and also arguing that in editions past commoners didn't get 3-18 for stats, but rather 6-15. 8-15 isn't really a cut above the stats a commoner, but 3-18 is.
Wiseblood
Adventurer
I think comparing ability score generation across all editions is wrong. We should only consider 3e-5e because the difference between bonuses for earlier editions was smaller. 18 strength in 2e gets you a +1 to hit a 3 strength got you a -3 to hit. A four point difference on a d20. In 3e through 5e a strength of 18 is +4 vs a stength of 3 is -4 this increases the importance of the stat in each direction. Bad stats didn't hurt so bad before there was homogenization of stats.
Which is only an issue because you insist on the straw man argument that commoners must all have ability scores, and that the ability scores must be generated using 3d6. Get rid of that assumption which is never stated anywhere the 5E books and it's no longer an issue. Yes, some special unique NPCs may have ability scores higher than 1st level PCs depending what method you use to generate them, but those are unique individuals.
OB1
Jedi Master
I've been lurking on this thread for quite a while, and have been surprised by how few people seem to actually like rolling for stats, but even more surprising is the sentiment that having unbalanced PCs is bad for the game. I'm going to dip a toe into the conversation, and I hope, bring some new thoughts into the nature of the disagreement.
D&D is in the Fantasy genre, which tends toward stories about having the power to control the world around you and about being the chosen one who is destined to save the world via your power. Hence the concern by some that by being underpowered, you are relegated to the "sidekick" role and thus not participating in the game the way it was meant to be played. Point buy and Standard Array help to alleviate the disconnect between the genre defined need of a singular hero with the fact that this story has several "main" characters.
If however, the game is approached from a team sport perspective, the expectation for balance begins to change. Everyone isn't expected to be able to contribute at the same level, but that the contribution of everyone to the best of their ability in their role leads to the success of the team. One doesn't have to be the leading scorer on their team to enjoy playing, and is likely thankful to have someone of great talent to help them win.
I do think that the method of character generation needs to match the goals of the story. Are you an elite force assembled to battle a great evil? Point Buy is probably the way to go. Are you a group of misfits who came together by necessity and thrown into events? I think rolling leads to more interesting results.
By dismissing one style or the other, you are shrinking the toolbox you could be using to tell a great story. I see both as having a place.
For what it's worth, when I do have my players roll stats (as we have for YP), we don't just roll abilities, it goes.
Roll 4d6 drop lowest in order
Roll for race
Roll for background
Pick class (Per the PHB, your highest stat must be in the prime requisite for the class)
For us, the random results of this lead to unique characters and stories, as well as a different kind of challenge.
D&D is in the Fantasy genre, which tends toward stories about having the power to control the world around you and about being the chosen one who is destined to save the world via your power. Hence the concern by some that by being underpowered, you are relegated to the "sidekick" role and thus not participating in the game the way it was meant to be played. Point buy and Standard Array help to alleviate the disconnect between the genre defined need of a singular hero with the fact that this story has several "main" characters.
If however, the game is approached from a team sport perspective, the expectation for balance begins to change. Everyone isn't expected to be able to contribute at the same level, but that the contribution of everyone to the best of their ability in their role leads to the success of the team. One doesn't have to be the leading scorer on their team to enjoy playing, and is likely thankful to have someone of great talent to help them win.
I do think that the method of character generation needs to match the goals of the story. Are you an elite force assembled to battle a great evil? Point Buy is probably the way to go. Are you a group of misfits who came together by necessity and thrown into events? I think rolling leads to more interesting results.
By dismissing one style or the other, you are shrinking the toolbox you could be using to tell a great story. I see both as having a place.
For what it's worth, when I do have my players roll stats (as we have for YP), we don't just roll abilities, it goes.
Roll 4d6 drop lowest in order
Roll for race
Roll for background
Pick class (Per the PHB, your highest stat must be in the prime requisite for the class)
For us, the random results of this lead to unique characters and stories, as well as a different kind of challenge.
Tony Vargas
Legend
A good point. While the way 3e (and before it, IIRC, the 4th ed of Gamma World, BTW) standardized stat bonuses to the standardized d20 resolution mechanic, was a marked improvement, making the game simpler, more consistent, and thus easier to learn, it did, for some bonuses to some rolls from some stats, increase the swing from worst penalty to highest bonus. Though, to be fair, STR bonuses to hit ranged up to +3 for 18/00....
So you play it one way, which is fine. I'm glad it works for you. Fortunately there's no one true way. Want to randomize everything? Great. I just wouldn't want to play in that game. It's not like I've never done it, but much like sushi I tried it and didn't like it. Trying it again isn't going to change my opinion.
It's not a "perspective" or that somehow you're playing the game "the right way". It's a preference. On a related note, are there any online MMORPGs that use randomized ability scores? Not that I know of. There are the various roles such as healer, tank, striker and so on with different abilities just like D&D. In the same way, you don't randomize which role or race you're going to play (although loot drops vary of course).
So it seems like most modern game developers seem to disagree with you on what it means to be part of a team. That loosely balancing the different characters is an important part of the game to many people.
Wiseblood
Adventurer
True -3 through +3 is still a smaller margin and rolling 00 after getting 18 I have seen happen once. I have seen many many 18's.
Last edited:
OB1
Jedi Master
Absolutely agree that there is not just one true way! I play both ways depending on the group and the story we are trying to tell.
I brought up the team sport perspective because it is so different than the expectation that is the preference when playing a RPG. In any team sport, there is an expectation that some players on the team will contribute at a much higher level than other players, but that all members of the team are important to achieving the goal of winning. Additionally, there is no expectation that the rules of play will make the contest balanced between sides. And yet even on a team where I am not the best player and we get trounced by a team that is far superior, I still have fun because of the experience of playing with my team mates and doing something I enjoy.
I was curious as to why that experience doesn't translate to more RPG tables, and theorized that it's due largely to the nature of the genre itself, which tends towards stories of achievement by a special individual rather than a group, through the exertion of will over the environment (which also helps to explain why optimization is very popular in RPGs as well). And I enjoy being a part of that kind of story! I'm running that type of game in my homebrew, because the players prefer that Avengers Assemble type of dynamic and the story we are telling is one where each PCs was recruited to the cause due to their talent.
But I also enjoy the unique story and challenge that is created through random generation, where the party may have to protect it's weakest member, or the weaker members may have to protect it's strongest who constantly attracts the attention of the most deadly foes. Or simply the challenge of rising above what the character was "born" into to achieve great things as part of a larger team all trying to do the same.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
And look at The Archetypal Adventuring Party - is Pippin balanced with Aragorn? Do Sam and Legolas start out on an even footing, or even at the same level? Obviously not.
But do Pippin and Sam end up doing vital things and getting their share of the spotlight? Yes.
You're a harder-core randomizer than I am...and that's saying something.
For me it goes:
Roll stats and (later) rearrange to suit class/concept
Choose race from a short list or roll from a longer list, player's option but if you roll you're bound to it
Choose or roll class, player's option but if you roll you're bound to it
Roll secondary skill/past profession(s), build or roll background based on this
For each non-native language known, choose from a short list or roll from a long list
Roll proficiency levels in languages and secondary skills
Roll hit points
Class is just about always chosen, race is chosen maybe half the time.
Lanefan
Similar Threads
