D&D 5E Point buy vs roll

[Cadence]

Rolling all the way. The way I see it, a big part of the game (most types of games really) is playing the hand you're dealt, and that occasionally means low to average scores.

I like a lot of card games like that... but you usually get a new hand in somewhere between a few minutes and an hour.

 

[Blue]

Never done anything other than rolling. No interest in non-random methods. If anything, more randomness in character generation would be strongly preferable.

Do you find that characters being at very different power levels betweem the best rolls and the worst, a pretty much automatic result of honest rolling, enhances the game? For everyone at the table? Including the DM?

 

[Blue]

Both 5E and older editions share that Ability scores aren't as make or break as people seem to think.

I find the exact opposite to be true in practice. When you have a party with ability scores aqll over the place and the "haves" are enhancing their characters with feats while the "have-nots" are taking ASIs just for the math bonus trying to catch up to deal with the challenges the DM sets, well the power difference just broadens in Tier 1 & 2 play that most people play.

 

[overgeeked]

Roll. Prevents stock builds. Messes with power gamers. Typically provides some actual low stats with negative modifiers.

 

[Cobalt Meridian]

This is my experience as a GM as well: 5e's bounded accuracy makes a character that their player rolled an 18 for their primary ability score, which they were able to bump to 20 and then take feats asap, vs a character with a 13 in their primary stat who needs to spend a couple of ASI's to "catch up" both cause some resentment between the players but also make balancing encounters harder.

After seeing this in play a couple of times I just took the easier route of mandating point buy.

 

[Blue]

I prefer a modified Standard Array, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 .

Pre-Tasha's, if a DM presented that I would argue strongly against it, because 16+2=18 and among many (not all, but many) players it would limit class/race combos to only the races that give +2 to the prime ability score of the class.

Now post-Tasha's I'm fine with it.

 

[overgeeked]

I just learned of the 'Holy Grail' method. I will be using it in my next game.

View attachment 149984

That seems really time consuming. Create a special deck of 2-6 of the four suits, and draw three for each stat. Just roll 3d6 and re-roll 1s. It would be so much quicker and provide basically the same spread.

 

[Parmandur]

How long do you play that PC? Because for me it could be years. I don't want to play this guy for years. View attachment 150023

Never had a PC last a full year, to be honest. WotC's assumption of 9-12 mo th campaigns, if we are lucky, is spot on.

 

[Parmandur]

Do you find that characters being at very different power levels betweem the best rolls and the worst, a pretty much automatic result of honest rolling, enhances the game? For everyone at the table? Including the DM?

Never heard anyone question it, outside of the Internet, nor observed any problems st the table across q6 years and multiple editions now.

I suppose, thinking on it, that we probably used the array when I made my two 4E characters. Didn't impress me as better, apparently.

 

[Parmandur]

I find the exact opposite to be true in practice. When you have a party with ability scores aqll over the place and the "haves" are enhancing their characters with feats while the "have-nots" are taking ASIs just for the math bonus trying to catch up to deal with the challenges the DM sets, well the power difference just broadens in Tier 1 & 2 play that most people play.

Never seen Feats in play (in 5E). Once my brother-in-law excitedly emphasized thst he would allow Feats in a campaign he put together, but nobody took him up on the offer.