Level Up (A5E) Where to put ability bonuses during character creation

[Maxperson]

A life-path system is only worth it's salt if you can end up dead before character generation is finished!

I used to laugh at the old Travelers path system for that. It was fun to roll and see if you'd make it to the end.

 

[Micah Sweet]

For any one score, sure, but the cumulative effect is about 1.5 as I wrote depending on which methods you are comparing, and 1.5 is nearly the 2 you need for a +1 modifier. So, while the differences are not necessarily enough to make one system better to another, they can be used as such.

For example, the standard array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 or +2, +2, +1, +1, and -1, for a total of +5 modifiers. Point buy can give you 14, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12, for a total modifier sum of +7, which is +2 greater than the standard array. Even the accepted standard array equivalent for 4d6-L is 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9, totaling +6 in modifiers.

Thus, point-buy can give you +7, the "standard array" of 4d6-L gives you +6, and the standard array is +5. Each system can show a +1 total modifier better than the other. Is the difference meaningful? That is up the the individual to surmise, but the systems are not really equivalent. I would never use the standard array, for example, if point-buy was an option.

I think the issue is what you can get, not what you're statistically most likely to get. You can always roll an 18, plus ASIs. That's not an option with any other method.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think the issue is what you can get, not what you're statistically most likely to get. You can always roll an 18, plus ASIs. That's not an option with any other method.

But you can also roll below an 8, which isn't possible with the other methods (except for a few races with -2 to an ability score...).

The REAL issue, is when people roll, IME they don't want to accept the possible low rolls as the trade off for the high rolls. They roll a 5 or 6, and maybe an 8, and even if they have two 16's, they will want to roll again instead of accepting the low rolls. Most games even allow players to roll a few sets of ability scores using 4d6-L, and then choose the set they want to keep. This artificially increases the impact of 4d6-L because now you can choose the best of 3 sets, for example.

If DMs were all absolute in the 4d6-L, one set of scores ONLY, you would not see as much desire to do it IMO. If you rolled a 3 or 4, it can be severely harmful to a PC, even if you have a couple great score to make up for it. A lot of players say "Oh, no, I would play it" or "We only roll one set, take it or leave it." IME that is crap. It isn't like the DM will forbid them from playing if they won't accept a set of with bad rolls. At worse, the DM then resorts to "Fine, but then you are stuck with the standard array" or something.

This has been the real issue since the beginning of rolling stats.

 

[Stalker0]

If DMs were all absolute in the 4d6-L, one set of scores ONLY, you would not see as much desire to do it IMO. If you rolled a 3 or 4, it can be severely harmful to a PC, even if you have a couple great score to make up for it. A lot of players say "Oh, no, I would play it" or "We only roll one set, take it or leave it." IME that is crap. It isn't like the DM will forbid them from playing if they won't accept a set of with bad rolls. At worse, the DM then resorts to "Fine, but then you are stuck with the standard array" or something.

This has been the real issue since the beginning of rolling stats.

I think one really bad stat is fine, hell for most characters you can just toss that 3 into int, and other than the roleplaying aspect wouldn't even notice.

What really gets you is when you have 2 or 3 crappy or mediocre stats. Its hard to hide those, and then characters look weaker.

 

[jmucchiello]

I used to laugh at the old Travelers path system for that. It was fun to roll and see if you'd make it to the end.

The best thing to do was to make someone 90+ years old who was extremely skilled.

 

[CapnZapp]

This has been the real issue since the beginning of rolling stats.

The real issue is that people are bad at math and worse at probabilities.

And that they want to play an "objectively" random hero. Just not one that had bad luck during generation.

Which is what we call "not random"

So when people say they like random chargen, you should interpret that as the opposite.

At worse, the DM then resorts to "Fine, but then you are stuck with the standard array" or something.

If standard array is the fall-back option, rolling will produce significantly better results than "average".

Roll two sets of scores and pick the best isn't nearly as impactful as this.

(Yet another example of how unintuitive math is)

As The Kind GM puts it

The standard array is a bit lower than the median of that dice method. That’s because the standard array provides you with playable stats without having the risk of getting really bad ones if you had used the dice method.

If you get to pick the standard array after rolling, you've just negated the risk he mentions.

Since you're getting the rewards without having to pay the (potential) cost, you've short-circuited the system.

Since a player who's stuck with [10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10] will like suicide her character at the earliest opportunity, the question becomes: What is the poorest, "most average", set of scores your players can abide? Then use that as your fall-back array.

And if the answer is "standard array", you should not allow rolling! Any player unwilling to risk worse starting scores than the standard array should be directed towards the standard array.

 

[Minigiant]

But you can also roll below an 8, which isn't possible with the other methods (except for a few races with -2 to an ability score...).

The REAL issue, is when people roll, IME they don't want to accept the possible low rolls as the trade off for the high rolls. They roll a 5 or 6, and maybe an 8, and even if they have two 16's, they will want to roll again instead of accepting the low rolls. Most games even allow players to roll a few sets of ability scores using 4d6-L, and then choose the set they want to keep. This artificially increases the impact of 4d6-L because now you can choose the best of 3 sets, for example.

If DMs were all absolute in the 4d6-L, one set of scores ONLY, you would not see as much desire to do it IMO. If you rolled a 3 or 4, it can be severely harmful to a PC, even if you have a couple great score to make up for it. A lot of players say "Oh, no, I would play it" or "We only roll one set, take it or leave it." IME that is crap. It isn't like the DM will forbid them from playing if they won't accept a set of with bad rolls. At worse, the DM then resorts to "Fine, but then you are stuck with the standard array" or something.

This has been the real issue since the beginning of rolling stats.

The other issue is that main classes in D&D historically required or were dependent on having multiple good ability scores. Whereas some classes only needed one ability score. So depending on what you roll, your options for classes and even races were determined.

 

[DND_Reborn]

And if the answer is "standard array", you should not allow rolling! Any player unwilling to risk worse starting scores than the standard array should be directed towards the standard array.

Agree completely.

The other issue is that main classes in D&D historically required or were dependent on having multiple good ability scores.

While no longer any requirements, the way some people feel (apparently) nothing has changed.

for most characters you can just toss that 3 into int, and other than the roleplaying aspect wouldn't even notice.

Which is a true, but sad, fact IMO.

Enforcing a house-rule of losing a skill for each negative modifier would help a lot since in this case your character would likely only have one proficient skill with INT 3.

 

[Minigiant]

Here's a Q.

What would we use as culture?

1. Is it just subraces renamed (elves get dark, wood, and high but not mountain and swamp)
2. Would every species get access to all cultures?
   • If so would it be based on fantasy archetypes? (High, Dark, Light, Nature, Warrior, City)
   • tropes? (stout, lightfoot, smart, magical, sneaky, normal)
   • terrain? (arctic, coast, desert, forest, grassland, mountain, swamp, underdark, urban)
   • caste? (royal, noble, priest, warrior, merchant, craftsman, commoner)
   • class? (warrior, thief, mage, priest, bard)
   • psuedo background? (foreign, urban, classy, tribal)
   • a mix? (arctic, high, dark, tribal, commoner, stout)

Because to me, it kinda matters. It would determine the logical spread of ability score bonuses.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But you can also roll below an 8, which isn't possible with the other methods (except for a few races with -2 to an ability score...).

The REAL issue, is when people roll, IME they don't want to accept the possible low rolls as the trade off for the high rolls. They roll a 5 or 6, and maybe an 8, and even if they have two 16's, they will want to roll again instead of accepting the low rolls. Most games even allow players to roll a few sets of ability scores using 4d6-L, and then choose the set they want to keep. This artificially increases the impact of 4d6-L because now you can choose the best of 3 sets, for example.

If DMs were all absolute in the 4d6-L, one set of scores ONLY, you would not see as much desire to do it IMO. If you rolled a 3 or 4, it can be severely harmful to a PC, even if you have a couple great score to make up for it. A lot of players say "Oh, no, I would play it" or "We only roll one set, take it or leave it." IME that is crap. It isn't like the DM will forbid them from playing if they won't accept a set of with bad rolls. At worse, the DM then resorts to "Fine, but then you are stuck with the standard array" or something.

This has been the real issue since the beginning of rolling stats.

You're absolutely correct. Even so, I've never run a game where everyone was ok with point buy or the standard array, so rolling is what we get. Maybe I can get away with point buy in a non D&D game where it's not a listed option, but to my players, rolling stats is a sacred cow of the game. I'm sure if we play Level Up it will be the same.