D&D 5E Array v 4d6: Punishment? Or overlooked data

[ECMO3]

I was assuming 14 con. Also, if one can have false life, both can have it. I see no reason their defenses would be different.

Yeah they both do have it in the example I gave and as a result it is not close to being "twice as much". It is a bit more and that is all.

The thing is as levels get higher more and more spells become available so you never will get to where it is a lot more. At 11th level you can get contingency and put even more hitpoints with false life under a contingency. So then it is 85 with an 8 con or 105 with a 12 con.

I agree more hit points are always beneficial, but the benefit is not big, it is small, almost miniscule if you are talking about a 2 or 3 point difference in constitution score.

 

[Brotton Goodfellow]

I’m currently using 4D6, drop lowest, in order of stats, nothing lower than a 6. And it’s been great to see how creative my players get when presented with a 7 in constitution.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Use whatever those gold box games used

 

[Fifth Element]

This thread puts the "Is the forum getting more antagonistic" thread in perspective. Reading through many of the posts from 7-8 years ago...yikes. That was around the time I stopped posting here for a very long time. I can see why.

 

[Hussar]

that is literally difference between life and death.

wizards needs to survive a bad position for one round so it can reposition somehow or turn the tables.

with 8 Con you cannot survive a round at 5th level or 10th level or whatever level.

that is why I only saw 1 character in 5E with 12 Con in the games I played, all others were 14 con with few having 16.

right now, I play in two campaigns, out of 10 characters, 9 have 14 con and one has 16.

12 Con is risky, anything lower is suicide.

We play with standard arrays. A 16 is impossible (or at least extremely unlikely) and 14 is pretty rare.

Oh, noes, I drop below zero HP. Whatever shall I do? Oh, wait, all it takes is a quick bit of HP and poof, I'm up again.

It's not like 10 HP (the difference at 5th level) is going to make any difference.

 

[Hussar]

This thread puts the "Is the forum getting more antagonistic" thread in perspective. Reading through many of the posts from 7-8 years ago...yikes. That was around the time I stopped posting here for a very long time. I can see why.

Funny thing is, I took a saunter back at my first post in this thread, and yup, my opinion here has never changed. Die rolling is just a way to play higher powered characters while pretending that it's "fair" or something like that. All you have to do is canvass tables with die rolled character and the average is ALWAYS higher than base point buy. It is never below. No one ever plays a group with lower than standard point buy. You might, maybe, get that one character that's slightly below the 25 point buy value, but a group? Nope.

And before anyone gets in a huff about me badwrongfunning tables or anything like that, prove me wrong. Show me a table that has a group where the average is below standard point buy value. Because I can point to any number of other tables where the average is higher (and often considerably higher) than standard. If die rolling was truly random, then the average should be below the standard as often as it's above.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Funny thing is, I took a saunter back at my first post in this thread, and yup, my opinion here has never changed. Die rolling is just a way to play higher powered characters while pretending that it's "fair" or something like that. All you have to do is canvass tables with die rolled character and the average is ALWAYS higher than base point buy. It is never below. No one ever plays a group with lower than standard point buy. You might, maybe, get that one character that's slightly below the 25 point buy value, but a group? Nope.

And before anyone gets in a huff about me badwrongfunning tables or anything like that, prove me wrong. Show me a table that has a group where the average is below standard point buy value. Because I can point to any number of other tables where the average is higher (and often considerably higher) than standard. If die rolling was truly random, then the average should be below the standard as often as it's above.

What I don’t understand is why this matters?

I’ve played point buy, and I’ve played generous rolled stats*, and “3d6 drop lowest +6”, and the game barely changes once you’re in play. All I’ve observed changing is how easy it is to play mechanically non-standard characters like a Paladin/Monk or a character with higher tertiary stats for better knowledge skills or whatever, without the system punishing you for it.

Regardless, it certainly doesn’t make the game less fair or any other thing I can imagine caring about.

*generous rolled stats meaning 4d6 drop lowest, reroll 1s, with at least two full sets you can choose between.

 

[Lanefan]

Wizards last a LOT longer in our games than Monks, Figthers and Paladins do. Bladesingers are the most survivable characters I've seen except maybe some corner-case Barbarians, and even rear guard Wizards that get wrapped up in melee usually don't take enough damage to go down because of shield, absorb elements, false life, contingency and similar spells.

Monks, Fighters and Paladins are the guys that go down the most IME, followed by Rangers, then Warlocks, then Rogues.

Clerics, Druids, Wizards, Barbarians and Sorcerers tend the last the longest, Barbarians because of the damage Reduction that comes with Rage, Clerics due to Death Ward, Druids because of shapeshifting, Wizards and Sorcerers due to the aforementioned spells.

Having more hps is always better, but Constitution does not give enough for a few more points to matter a whole lot IME.

I wonder if the difference here simply lies in your DM and @Oofta 's DM tending to throw different types of challenges and combats against the party.

From what you say above, my impression (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that your DM goes after the front-liners with lots of melee while not hammering the back-liners so much with archery or AoE spells or Giants' thrown boulders. That, and-or your DM tends to be more generous in giving your PCs time to get all those defensive spells away before combat begins, which obviously can make a huge difference.

 

[Hussar]

What I don’t understand is why this matters?

I’ve played point buy, and I’ve played generous rolled stats*, and “3d6 drop lowest +6”, and the game barely changes once you’re in play. All I’ve observed changing is how easy it is to play mechanically non-standard characters like a Paladin/Monk or a character with higher tertiary stats for better knowledge skills or whatever, without the system punishing you for it.

Regardless, it certainly doesn’t make the game less fair or any other thing I can imagine caring about.

*generous rolled stats meaning 4d6 drop lowest, reroll 1s, with at least two full sets you can choose between.

Well, frankly, yeah, you're right. It doesn't really matter. About the only place where it does start to creep in is when people talk about the game being on "easy mode" or "combat as sport" (I think I'm using that right). That sort of thing.

When a character with significantly higher stats is effectively a level higher than whatever the character sheet says. More spells, better success rates, more HP, etc. Just like a higher level character. Which then tends to roll right into the notion that the game isn't "balanced" and encounters are too "easy".

In the Venn diagram of people who complain about balance, and the people who die roll their characters, there is significant overlap.

 

[Horwath]

I wonder if the difference here simply lies in your DM and @Oofta 's DM tending to throw different types of challenges and combats against the party.

From what you say above, my impression (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that your DM goes after the front-liners with lots of melee while not hammering the back-liners so much with archery or AoE spells or Giants' thrown boulders. That, and-or your DM tends to be more generous in giving your PCs time to get all those defensive spells away before combat begins, which obviously can make a huge difference.

I believe that this is the problem with most published adventures, they do not give good advice how to run combat.

Even the very good intro adventure of Lost mines does not describe opening combats very good.

In 1st battle you have 4 goblins in ambush with good stealth(+6) and since they are lying in ambush probably that check should be with advantage.

They should be described as little bit smarter and examining the party as they approach and investigate and determine what target is most squishy to attack from ambush.
This might look like no brainer for experienced DMs, but new ones might value this added advice for combat tactics.

also, solo monsters are never a good combat, unless they have teleportation, they are locked down by 2 or 3 melee characters and then 2 or 3 ranged characters can attack them with impunity, never worrying about their own defenses.
If you are ranged character and never enter closer than 100ft of your target and always ducking behind total cover after your shot(s), then it does not make a difference if you have 8 or 16 con in that case.