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

[Hussar]

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.

True, but, then again, in the first encounter with a 1st level party, smoking one or more PC's in the surprise round isn't much fun for anyone. So, we run up against the old issue of what is "realistic" vs what is "fun". I mean, sure, you shoot the least armored target, get lucky and drop the wizard with one shot. Do you then start shooting the downed PC? It's not like it's likely the goblin can outright kill the PC - although that is possible depending on die rolls.

But, then again, once you get past those first three levels, then that sort of thing becomes less of an issue. At worst, you're just knocking out PC's for a round - then someone stands them back up and in a lot of groups, no one even loses an action.

Let's not forget too that most monsters don't have ranged attacks. Humanoids, sure, but, most of the Monster Manual don't have ranged weapons. Which means that they are going to get up to the front line and then usually blocked in by the tank characters, so, running around the fighters is only an option if you're fighting in open fields. Finding a choke point typically isn't all that hard.

And, finally, lots of monsters aren't smart enough to pick the "squishiest" target. The average ooze doesn't really care very much. Most beasts are likely going to attack the closest thing, rather than running by something to attack in the back.

So, yeah, it really, really does matter what kinds of opponents you generally use.

 

[Horwath]

True, but, then again, in the first encounter with a 1st level party, smoking one or more PC's in the surprise round isn't much fun for anyone. So, we run up against the old issue of what is "realistic" vs what is "fun". I mean, sure, you shoot the least armored target, get lucky and drop the wizard with one shot. Do you then start shooting the downed PC? It's not like it's likely the goblin can outright kill the PC - although that is possible depending on die rolls.

But, then again, once you get past those first three levels, then that sort of thing becomes less of an issue. At worst, you're just knocking out PC's for a round - then someone stands them back up and in a lot of groups, no one even loses an action.

Let's not forget too that most monsters don't have ranged attacks. Humanoids, sure, but, most of the Monster Manual don't have ranged weapons. Which means that they are going to get up to the front line and then usually blocked in by the tank characters, so, running around the fighters is only an option if you're fighting in open fields. Finding a choke point typically isn't all that hard.

And, finally, lots of monsters aren't smart enough to pick the "squishiest" target. The average ooze doesn't really care very much. Most beasts are likely going to attack the closest thing, rather than running by something to attack in the back.

So, yeah, it really, really does matter what kinds of opponents you generally use.

Sure, being dropped in 1st round would not be fun, but being down can be reduced a little, that if you had your turn and you were downed, you "delay" your initiative until you get healed up, and then you take your turn right after the healer.

also, I don't know is it fun to just whack a sack of HP while that same sack just "auto attacks" closest target without any special abilities.

This might work for 1st level, but becomes boring pretty fast.

with Oozes, it's always better to add some skulking ranger or shady wizard in the mix.
Then ooze, just becomes bodyguard for more intelligent opponent.

 

[Hussar]

Sure, being dropped in 1st round would not be fun, but being down can be reduced a little, that if you had your turn and you were downed, you "delay" your initiative until you get healed up, and then you take your turn right after the healer.

also, I don't know is it fun to just whack a sack of HP while that same sack just "auto attacks" closest target without any special abilities.

This might work for 1st level, but becomes boring pretty fast.

with Oozes, it's always better to add some skulking ranger or shady wizard in the mix.
Then ooze, just becomes bodyguard for more intelligent opponent.

Oh, fair enough. It's always going to depend on the situation. I recently had black puddings in the acid bath of the lair of evil monks who were disposing of their victims. Worked well. Monks make great baddies.

But, my point being, most monsters don't have a way to bypass the front lines easily. And, frankly, it's typically pretty easy for the folks in the back to avoid most attacks. And, besides that, if we're just going to ignore the front line fighters all the time, the players of those front line fighters are going to get kinda annoyed that they're just not doing what they are supposed to do.

Which tends to lead to things like Sentinel feats and the like. I like to mix it up as much as possible so that everyone gets their chance to shine.

 

[Horwath]

I like to mix it up as much as possible so that everyone gets their chance to shine.

mix is the key.

some fights there will be more work for melee, some for ranged, but it would be nice if all characters could shine in their own way.

 

[Oofta]

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 think there are many differences. I was going over the post where a PC went "4 levels without ever getting hit" so I was thinking about what this requires. Just to consolidate the points a bit (@ECMO3 please correct me if I have something wrong) the PC after 3rd level (only went down once after 3rd level, not hit again until 7th):

• Had bracers and staff of defense for +3 AC. Both rare attunement items.
• Always had some way of making attacks at disadvantage, so first round of combat spent casting Blur? Pre-cast before combat?
• Mentions Silvery Barbs and Absorb elements, both reactions (along with shield) so 1/round:
  • Silvery Barbs is from Strixhaven, according to a wiki it's a reaction to cause and enemy to do a reroll.
  • Absorb Elements is from Elemental Evil Player's companion. It's a reaction gives you resistance to incoming damage
• Not uncommon to need double 20s so AC in the mid to upper 20s every round? Assuming 18 dex, studded leather you get to 19 AC. Bladesong can be used proficiency times per level to add int to AC for up to a +5 AC.

So sure, if you can have rare items, spend an action to get blur (or pre-cast), only have 2-3 combats between long rests so you can use your bladesong and/or shield it would be difficult to hit this PC.

I think this is more of a problem with an over generous DM giving you a 2 rare items at low levels, too few combats between long rests and the bladesinger class which IMHO is overpowered. Bladesong to add your int mod to AC is just too much. This one specific build doesn't rely as much on con which is why as a DM I'd throw in AOE and spells. I've personally never seen anyone do a PC this maxed out for AC, definitely not before level 10.

There's an exception to every rule, including this one. It wouldn't work in my campaign, but if you had fun with it go for it! Meanwhile in 98% of cases I still think an 8 con will be a mistake for most PCs.

 

[ECMO3]

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 have played with 11 different DMs in the past 2 years and what I said is broadly applicable for all of them. I also did not say characters don't go down, they do, but Wizards specifically rarely go down. Those that go down are typically the characters with the highest hit points (except Barbarians), because they are being targeted the most (bladesingers excepted) and in addition attacks that would be nullified or halved on the wizard they take the full damage on.

I only had one campaign where a wizard went down a lot and that is because the player was suicidal. He was an evoker with no armor or mage armor that regularly moved to the front and got himself surrounded with enemies. One time he actually went INTO a sickening radience laid down by another player and mixed it up with several Giants for some reason which totally screwed up our plan to attack them. I've played other games with that same DM where it was the melee martials that went down the most.

In the interest of fairness I did have a level 2 Wizard/Monk that died (as in hard dead failed 3 death saves), but more hit points would not have saved her. Silver weapons or better attack spells might have since we were fighting wererats and the party had no silver or magic weapons. Th rest of the party eventually killed them by bleeding them with necrotic damage from Hex and sacred flame.

 

[ECMO3]

I think there are many differences. I was going over the post where a PC went "4 levels without ever getting hit" so I was thinking about what this requires. Just to consolidate the points a bit (@ECMO3 please correct me if I have something wrong) the PC after 3rd level (only went down once after 3rd level, not hit again until 7th):

• Had bracers and staff of defense for +3 AC. Both rare attunement items.

Yes. Both of those items were in the adventures we were playing. she got the staff of defense off of a Bandit Wizard in Lost mines ofPhandelver, she got bracers of defense I think from a White Dragon's hoard in Hoard of the Dragon Queen (not 100% positive on the BOD).

• Always had some way of making attacks at disadvantage, so first round of combat spent casting Blur? Pre-cast before combat?

Blur or Protection from Evil and good. Sometimes cast by her, sometimes by another character.

• Mentions Silvery Barbs and Absorb elements, both reactions (along with shield) so 1/round:
  • Silvery Barbs is from Strixhaven, according to a wiki it's a reaction to cause and enemy to do a reroll.
  • Absorb Elements is from Elemental Evil Player's companion. It's a reaction gives you resistance to incoming damage

Yes. Usually shield is what she cast most often. she would cast SB if she got hit with a crit (before she cast shield). Getting critted did not really happen though once she had blur or PEG up.

Absorb elements was used on AOEs in those levels.

• Not uncommon to need double 20s so AC in the mid to upper 20s every round? Assuming 18 dex, studded leather you get to 19 AC. Bladesong can be used proficiency times per level to add int to AC for up to a +5 AC.

Mage Armor+Staff of Defense+Dex+Intelligence+Bracers of Defense=23 before the shield spell.

So sure, if you can have rare items, spend an action to get blur (or pre-cast), only have 2-3 combats between long rests so you can use your bladesong and/or shield it would be difficult to hit this PC.

We played exclusively in published adventures, which were honestly 2-3 fights that mattered. There were more than 2-3 fights though, but most of them are easy.

I think this is more of a problem with an over generous DM giving you a 2 rare items at low levels, too few combats between long rests and the bladesinger class which IMHO is overpowered. Bladesong to add your int mod to AC is just too much. This one specific build doesn't rely as much on con which is why as a DM I'd throw in AOE and spells. I've personally never seen anyone do a PC this maxed out for AC, definitely not before level 10.

The DM gave us what was published in the adventures. Most of the gmaes I play the DM does not "give" out items for PCs. It just so happened that those adventures had items that suited her.

She also got a pretty awesome dragontooth dagger and there was a staff of fire she took off of a dead Wizard, but did not use because she had no attunement slots and a spider staff she took off a Drow but only used for a little while.

Those were probably 5 of the 6 best items that party got over the whole campaign and yes she got them all, but it was luck of the draw.

I had another game I played where my Undead Warlock who was not proficient ended up with a legendary shortsword. With the +3 bonus it outdid her other weapons despite no proficiency. Again luck of the draw.

There's an exception to every rule, including this one. It wouldn't work in my campaign, but if you had fun with it go for it! Meanwhile in 98% of cases I still think an 8 con will be a mistake for most PCs.

For clarification she had a 10, not an 8.

 

[Oofta]

Yes. Both of those items were in the adventures we were playing. she got the staff of defense off of a Bandit Wizard in Lost mines ofPhandelver, she got bracers of defense I think from a White Dragon's hoard in Hoard of the Dragon Queen (not 100% positive on the BOD).



Blur or Protection from Evil and good. Sometimes cast by her, sometimes by another character.




Yes. Usually shield is what she cast most often. she would cast SB if she got hit with a crit (before she cast shield). Getting critted did not really happen though once she had blur or PEG up.

Absorb elements was used on AOEs in those levels.



Mage Armor+Staff of Defense+Dex+Intelligence+Bracers of Defense=23 before the shield spell.




We played exclusively in published adventures, which were honestly 2-3 fights that mattered. There were more than 2-3 fights though, but most of them are easy.



The DM gave us what was published in the adventures. Most of the gmaes I play the DM does not "give" out items for PCs. It just so happened that those adventures had items that suited her.

She also got a pretty awesome dragontooth dagger and there was a staff of fire she took off of a dead Wizard, but did not use because she had no attunement slots and a spider staff she took off a Drow but only used for a little while.

Those were probably 5 of the 6 best items that party got over the whole campaign and yes she got them all, but it was luck of the draw.

I had another game I played where my Undead Warlock who was not proficient ended up with a legendary shortsword. With the +3 bonus it outdid her other weapons despite no proficiency. Again luck of the draw.


For clarification she had a 10, not an 8.

I'm glad it worked for you. It's a very specific build with what I consider over-generous items and number of combats, whether it's in a published mod or not. I also think the bladesinger ability is overpowered because it can stack with mage armor and dex bonus.

I just think your PC was the exception to the general rule in games I've experienced.

 

[Sacrosanct]

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 a strange thing to say. You're basically saying anyone who rolls random stats cheats, and we need to prove you wrong. Um...no. With a claim like that, you need to prove yourself right. Anecdotal information (especially one probably clouded by bias) isn't evidence. For example, my experience (using random rolling as a preferred method for 40+ years) is not that. I've had tables that were below, tables that were above, but most were around the same. There, I just showed you one. In fact, most folks who prefer random rolling often make the argument that having a low stat (lower than the lowest you can get in array--8) has created some really interesting and fun role-playing opportunities.

 

[Oofta]

What a strange thing to say. You're basically saying anyone who rolls random stats cheats, and we need to prove you wrong. Um...no. With a claim like that, you need to prove yourself right. Anecdotal information (especially one probably clouded by bias) isn't evidence. For example, my experience (using random rolling as a preferred method for 40+ years) is not that. I've had tables that were below, tables that were above, but most were around the same. There, I just showed you one. In fact, most folks who prefer random rolling often make the argument that having a low stat (lower than the lowest you can get in array--8) has created some really interesting and fun role-playing opportunities.

I think some people like rolling because of optimization bias - we assume we're going to be the lucky one that gets that 18, not that person that gets as single 12 as our high score. I can only speak from my personal experience of course but way back when we rolled the PCs with low stats tended to die early on or decided to stay on the farm. For that matter when I play a video game that uses rolling for ability scores I almost always hit the "reroll" button until I get something I like.

When people discuss their rolling options, many people do us a modified 4d6 drop lowest. Minimum score is 8, roll until you get something you like, everybody chooses from a single set of rolls, roll n times and so on. Not universal of course, but quite common. If someone rolls truly bad and has a high attribute of 6 would you really expect a person to play that PC? Do you force them to continue playing after the PC dies?

My own personal experience is that the only thing gained from rolling is that some PCs will be statistically significantly better than others in the same group. Great if you happen to be on the high end but people who like playing the ones on the lower end are the exception not the rule.