D&D 5E Convince me that the Ranger is a necessary Class.

[ezo]

First of all, regarding the weakest Orc, when ever you're talking about the 5e or 3.5, you are wrong. In 5e you cannot willingly decrease a dump stat bellow 8, so weakest Orc has STR of 10, as much as Joe Commonner. In 3.5 you could decrease ability score to 3, yes. But in that game Orcs gain +4 STR, meaning weakest Orc is nearly the same as an average human Commoner.

I really think you need to get the idea that 8 is a minimum out of your head. The default method for generating ability score is still roll 4d6, drop lowest. You can roll below 8. It is not "willingly decreasing a dump stat", it is the lowest score you rolled. It's rare, sure, but it happens. So, the lowest score you can have IS a 3.

Rolling for scores als ocaters to power gamers, because you on average get better stats than through point buy.

Actually, it depends on what you do with the point-buy, there are sets which give you a better average stats than rolling.

Regardless, rolling is a risk-reward scenario compared to the standard array or point-buy. You might generate better scores, but they often won't be significantly better, and they can be worse...

Rolling in order is just needless pidgeonholding the player into role they never wanted. What purpose does it serve to force a new player, who dreamed of playing a wizard, to be dumb fighter just because they had poor rolls, other than to bully them out of the hobby?

Not at all. It is only pigeonholing if play that your highest score must be optimal to your class.

As far as what a player "dreams of playing", if a player has such a strong vision in mind, you might as well just let them pick their ability scores so they get to "play what they're dreaming of".

I've never met a player who, new or otherwise, who felt bullied when I told them we are rolling in order. Two years ago I played with a group of entirely new players (they just started D&D about a month or so before we met). One of them was DMing, but they asked me to take over. I had them roll in order, and no issues at all.

I still say the best option is what ToV did, by just increasing points in point buy. ASI was a poor idea when it was introduced and it's even worse idea now, that we know better.

You're entitled to your opinion, certainly! My opinion is the best option is to remove them, and just roll. In order or not, doesn't matter to me if you don't have any way to inflate your scores beyond the rolls.

Racial adjustments is not a poor idea, it makes sense to the fiction. There is no "now that we know better". A stronger race is stronger and should hit harder, for instance. The +1 damage bonus STR +2 grants represents that, too.

I'm not saying there aren't other ways to do this. But different ways don't make one way good or poor over another, just different ways according to your personal tastes. ASIs don't "taste good" to you, and that's fine. I don't like them because I think inflating scores is unnecessary, not because I think another method to represent differences between races.

But given that we have ability score called "strength" which is supposed to measure physical might, this seems very confused. Like you're strong, but you're not strong? What?

Yeah, also when you consider all the things strength does in the game, it is odd that you are strong enough to lift more than a creature with equal strength, but you don't "hit harder".

 

[Horwath]

I really think you need to get the idea that 8 is a minimum out of your head. The default method for generating ability score is still roll 4d6, drop lowest. You can roll below 8. It is not "willingly decreasing a dump stat", it is the lowest score you rolled. It's rare, sure, but it happens. So, the lowest score you can have IS a 3.

It it really?

how fairs well your rolled up character in official games?

 

[Mecheon]

But given that we have ability score called "strength" which is supposed to measure physical might, this seems very confused. Like you're strong, but you're not strong? What?

Flavour abilities always make the character feel better than bumping your "Character needs these to be effective" points, them's the problem

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Flavour abilities always make the character feel better than bumping your "Character needs these to be effective" points, them's the problem

Perhaps, but that's not the problem I'm alluding to, that problem is that we have two different, differently working mechanical ways to represent the same fictional quality, and that is confused.

 

[CreamCloud0]

This just reminds me that Powerful Build is a far better way at expressing "This dude strong" than mucking around with stat totals and all that nonsense

Powerful Build goes "You're strong. Here's your strong stuff" even if you've got terrible strength

But given that we have ability score called "strength" which is supposed to measure physical might, this seems very confused. Like you're strong, but you're not strong? What?

i think it's a bit of both, powerful build is Very Good at representing your character's strength...for the things it affects, but there are also alot of other bits of the game where it doesn't do anything to represent your character's innate might for things like your damage or affect your athletics checks, well actually besides those two things i can't think of anything off the top of my head it would affect but i think that speaks more to the lack of things STR does than the coverage of powerful build, if it were DEX there'd be a whole list of things a hypothetical 'dexterous build' wouldn't be affecting that a flat +2 would be improving your capability to do.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It it really?

how fairs well your rolled up character in official games?

Please define "official game".

 

[Horwath]

Please define "official game".

Adventurers league, various Conventions,

 

[Remathilis]

But given that we have ability score called "strength" which is supposed to measure physical might, this seems very confused. Like you're strong, but you're not strong? What?

An orc and a human have the same strength score for purposes of fighting, athletics and strength saves, but the orc can carry more weight and push and pull more weight than the human of comparable capacity.

Too many people still try to make ability scores objective measures, like how many pushups you can do for strength or how often you were in the newspaper for charisma.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Adventurers league, various Conventions,

That is a kind of game, but no more "official" than table play at home or in a game store (or a Denny's, for all that). You are ascribing importance to AL that it doesn't possess by labeling it as more "official" than all other forms of play, because they added additional rules for organized play.

At one point did the AL rules become a corebook? Because otherwise, all WotC 5e games use the same PH, it seems to me.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

An orc and a human have the same strength score for purposes of fighting, athletics and strength saves, but the orc can carry more weight and push and pull more weight than the human of comparable capacity.

Yes. Which is weird. What does this represent?

Too many people still try to make ability scores objective measures, like how many pushups you can do for strength or how often you were in the newspaper for charisma.

If they don't measure anything objective, why we have them then? If a strength score doesn't measure how strong you are, why call it strength and why have it in the first place?