D&D 5E Reduced standard array in exchange for a bonus feat at 1st.

[Charlaquin]

So, I’m really liking the idea of giving players the option to start with the standard array, an array of 14, 13, 13, 12, 10, 8 and a Feat, or to spend 4 points from their point buy for a Feat... But what if players want to roll stats? Any ideas how a DM might allow players to modify their rolls and get a Feat for it? 3d6 instead of 4d6k3 maybe? Any math magicians know how that would compare statistically to the lowered array and the 23 point buy?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Hasn't Theros made this thread obsolete by demonstrating that nothing breaks if you just give a bonus feat at first level in exchange for nothing?

 

[clearstream]

So, I’m really liking the idea of giving players the option to start with the standard array, an array of 14, 13, 13, 12, 10, 8 and a Feat, or to spend 4 points from their point buy for a Feat... But what if players want to roll stats? Any ideas how a DM might allow players to modify their rolls and get a Feat for it? 3d6 instead of 4d6k3 maybe? Any math magicians know how that would compare statistically to the lowered array and the 23 point buy?

As I replied, elsewhere, you can use AnyDice to tune the dice thrown, but first you have to frame the problem. AnyDice showed that the average array with 4d6k3 is 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9, (average 12.3, +6). The highest average 23 point array is 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, 11 (11.83, +5) and the most extreme is 15, 15, 13, 8, 8, 8 (11.17, +2). Compare that with 27 points, 13, 13, 13, 12, 12, 12 (12.5, +6) or 15, 15, 15, 8, 8, 8 (11.5, +3). It seems like you want to reduce the rolled array by about 0.5, +1.

So I think your question might be framed - what reasonable dice can I throw that averages about 11.8 and does not change the range? You suggested 3d6, but that is too penalising because it changes the average to 10.50.

1d6+3d6k2 gives about that, i.e. one die in the normal pool of four is rolled separately and must be kept.

 

[TwoSix]

So, I’m really liking the idea of giving players the option to start with the standard array, an array of 14, 13, 13, 12, 10, 8 and a Feat, or to spend 4 points from their point buy for a Feat... But what if players want to roll stats? Any ideas how a DM might allow players to modify their rolls and get a Feat for it? 3d6 instead of 4d6k3 maybe? Any math magicians know how that would compare statistically to the lowered array and the 23 point buy?

I'd say that if they roll, they can subtract 1 point from their highest 2 rolls to gain a feat. Assuming their highest 2 rolls are in the 14-16 range, that's right around 4 points worth of point-buy. If they roll lower, the feat becomes a (mathematically) better option, but they could use the boost.

I like that idea; combine it with a relatively bounded rolling method and I think I might use it in my next game.

 

[clearstream]

I'd say that if they roll, they can subtract 1 point from their highest 2 rolls to gain a feat. Assuming their highest 2 rolls are in the 14-16 range, that's right around 4 points worth of point-buy. If they roll lower, the feat becomes a (mathematically) better option, but they could use the boost.

I like that idea; combine it with a relatively bounded rolling method and I think I might use it in my next game.

Thinking about that, it means on average their array is changed to 15, 13, 13, 12, 10, 9 (12, +4) which looks very fair. It'd feel bad for a player who rolled one 18, but I don't personally feel that is much of an issue given how mechanically powerful an 18 and a feat may well be.

I quite like my proposal - make one or two dice kept - but your way is also nice.

 

[ccooke]

The issue here is that conflating an array or point buy option to "buy" a feat with rolling is... well, it's not comparing apples to oranges, but it is comparing apples to pears, I think.

People will roll for stats for a large number of reasons, but I think a large proportion of the people who use it are doing it because they like the randomness. All of the discussion above is about making level 1 feats "fair" when you roll. So here are two options for people for whom fairness in rolled stats isn't a feature:

Special Gifts
When you roll an 18 during character gen, you may reduce it to a 16 and instead take one feat

Interesting compensations
For each stat lower than an 8, gain one feat of your choice

Obviously, these options should not be used together... unless you want to.

 

[CleverNickName]

Starting the game with a feat at 1st level feels very different from getting a feat at 4th level, I think. At 1st level, a feat can be a literal game-changer: your fighter can use eldritch blast, the rogue can reroll d20s at will, etc. By 4th level, your characters have more hit points, better combat options, a whole subclass, etc., so getting a feat doesn't feel as significant.

I think that's why the only race in the PHB that starts with a feat (the variant human) has 4 fewer ability points than the garden-variety human.

That said: your house-rule looks fine to me. A bit harsh; I'd make it a net -4 instead of -5, but that will all depend on your table and your game setting. Give it a shot and see how it runs.

 

[TwoSix]

Thinking about that, it means on average their array is changed to 15, 13, 13, 12, 10, 9 (12, +4) which looks very fair. It'd feel bad for a player who rolled one 18, but I don't personally feel that is much of an issue given how mechanically powerful an 18 and a feat may well be.

Ehh, they can always use the feat to replace it. So they're gaining a half-feat feature in exchange for -1 to their 2nd highest stat. That's probably worthwhile, especially if the 2nd highest stat is odd.

I quite like my proposal - make one or two dice kept - but your way is also nice.

I personally prefer my proposal because it puts the decision making after the rolls, so the player can make an informed choice. But both proposals are absolutely workable.

 

[clearstream]

Ehh, they can always use the feat to replace it. So they're gaining a half-feat feature in exchange for -1 to their 2nd highest stat. That's probably worthwhile, especially if the 2nd highest stat is odd.

That's a good point.

I personally prefer my proposal because it puts the decision making after the rolls, so the player can make an informed choice.

Oh? I thought you meant they commit to the feat before rolling. I guess I feel like the trade-off for rolling rather than buying is that kind of loss of control. Thus I lean the opposite direction i.e. choose first and/or lock in one dice. I'd have no issue with doing it your way though.

 

[Charlaquin]

You know, now that I think about it, the “reduce your two highest ability scores each by 1” rule could be applied as-written to all three methods, and it’s much cleaner and easier to explain than “If you use an array, pick from standard or reduced array and a feat. If you use point buy, spend 4 points on up to one Feat. If you roll use this special dice code.” It’s a very Gordian sort of solution, and that appeals to me quite a lot.