D&D 5E (2014) Is Point Buy Balanced?

[Maxperson]

Ok, but what argument are you making, then? Are you saying that the numbers don’t matter? Is there a magnitude where they start to matter? Are they meant purely as an aid to characterization?

The core issue with the “balance doesn’t mean much” idea is that it means all the progression and decision making we do around our characters isn’t really that important. And that means we’ve moved from “playing a game” to “engaging in a shared activity”.

I actually agree with you that in the D&D case the numbers aren’t that meaningful, which is why I’ve mostly moved to other games with more meaningful decision making.

It starts to be noticeable at +3 or +4 difference. Someone with a 20 will succeed quite a bit more often than someone with a 12. But with 5e's low DCs and ACs, a 20 is a waste of time and effort to achieve. The benefit of a 20 over an 18 is miniscule and a feat is much more impactful.

The only time my stats increase after I make a PC is if the feat I want just happens to come with a +1 or if I get a bump from the DM side of things. Picking ASI's instead of feats is gimping yourself.

 

[AlViking]

Yes, 2 is greater than 3. Neither is meaningful. Stat modifiers are not where the damage is at in 5e. Class abilities, feats, spells, etc. are where it's at.

It's not 2 vs 3 it's 9 vs 14 damage. It's not 2 vs 3 it's 60 HP vs 100, AC 12 (at best 15 with armor) vs AC 17 with the same class and player goals. Ignore all the feats, multi-classing different class options.

Ignore the results all you want.

 

[Maxperson]

It's not 2 vs 3 it's 9 vs 14 damage. It's not 2 vs 3 it's 60 HP vs 100, AC 12 (at best 15 with armor) vs AC 17 with the same class and player goals. Ignore all the feats, multi-classing different class options.

Ignore the results all you want.

9 vs. 14 over multiple hits vs. multiple big bags of hit points. That 5 damage spread out over multiple creatures is.........bupkis. Feats and class abilities will have a far greater impact.

Even with everything else being the same, that will just mean that both PCs are virtually identical, because 5 damage over multiple big bags of hit points won't differentiate things by enough to really notice.

And it requires 1) the rare really bad roll for stats, 2) the rare DM to force playing of those stats.

 

[AlViking]

9 vs. 14 over multiple hits vs. multiple big bags of hit points. That 5 damage spread out over multiple creatures is.........bupkis. Feats and class abilities will have a far greater impact.

Even with everything else being the same, that will just mean that both PCs are virtually identical, because 5 damage over multiple big bags of hit points won't differentiate things by enough to really notice.

And it requires 1) the rare really bad roll for stats, 2) the rare DM to force playing of those stats.

Just ignore the differences in damage per turn, HP, AC, class options, multi-classing feats. Ignore that I generated 10 tables of 5 so the differences aren't that unusual. Suddenly it's not a big deal!

 

[Maxperson]

Just ignore the differences in damage per turn, HP, AC, class options, multi-classing feats. Ignore that I generated 10 tables of 5 so the differences aren't that unusual. Suddenly it's not a big deal!

I mean, if my saying this isn't a big deal for years is "suddenly," you must be an elf or something.

I've played the game. If I have a 16 in my main stat, you won't see me with an 18 or 20 unless the DM gives magic items, rewards, etc. or I pick feats that coincidentally come with +1s for that stat. My feats will out perform ASI increases 100% of the time with regard to the impact to the game both in and out of combat.

Stats used to matter a lot. They don't in 5e.

 

[ECMO3]

As I said before equal or equivalent ability scores do not increase the likelihood of balance in play.

If people want to talk about reasons to have equal ability scores that is fine, but balance should not be what they hang their hat on if they are rolling dice for results in play, because ability scores have almost no effect on balance in play.

The only way two characters with the same abilities will be balanced in play is if they take the same actions and get the same results from the dice.

 

[AlViking]

I mean, if my saying this isn't a big deal for years is "suddenly," you must be an elf or something.

I've played the game. If I have a 16 in my main stat, you won't see me with an 18 or 20 unless the DM gives magic items, rewards, etc. or I pick feats that coincidentally come with +1s for that stat. My feats will out perform ASI increases 100% of the time with regard to the impact to the game both in and out of combat.

Stats used to matter a lot. They don't in 5e.

We disagree, I'm done.

 

[AlViking]

As I said before equal or equivalent ability scores do not increase the likelihood of balance in play.

If people want to talk about reasons to have equal ability scores that is fine, but balance should not be what they hang their hat on if they are rolling dice for results in play, because ability scores have almost no effect on balance in play.

The only way two characters with the same abilities will be balanced in play is if they take the same actions and get the same results from the dice.

So someone can either be a kick-ass barbarian or a pretty pathetic barbarian, 60 HP as a fighter at 8th level or 100 HP. These aren't significant? It only doesn't matter if you ignore the impact. If you have a house-rule that means everybody has decent scores, then I agree a +/-1 here and there doesn't really matter much but rolling can regularly make a far larger difference.

Just a side note - I double checked 2e and there was no guidance on what numbers were too low to play. The guidance was basically "Suck it up Buttercup and play what you got." Which seems to be the answer for anyone on the rolling for scores side of things. If that works for you, great. I don't see the point.

 

[ECMO3]

So someone can either be a kick-ass barbarian or a pretty pathetic barbarian, 60 HP as a fighter at 8th level or 100 HP. These aren't significant?

Ok you have the either-or wrong. I am talking about balance here.

We can have a party A - with two average barbarians and party B - with one kick ass Barbarian and one pathetic Barbarian.

It is extremely unlikely either set of barbarians will be balanced in play and the Barbarians in party A are NOT going to be more balanced in play than the Babarians in party B just because they have identical abilities.

To put it another way - one of the identical Barbarians in party A WILL do better than the other Barbarian in party A even though they have identical abilities. Likewise one of the Barbarians in party B WILL do better than the other Barbarian in party B. Neither group will be more balanced than the other in play because of their ability scores

It only doesn't matter if you ignore the impact.

YOU are the one ignoring the impact. It has a large impact on mean effectiveness, it has almost NO impact on balance.

If you have a house-rule that means everybody has decent scores, then I agree a +/-1 here and there doesn't really matter much but rolling can regularly make a far larger difference.

+1/-1 or +4/-4 Almost no effect on balance in play.

There are lots of reasons equivalent ability arrays might improve your game, but balance is not one of them.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

In the end, I think the Point Buy method is balanced. It seems to me that the team who put together Dungeons and Dragons 5e did the math and put some thought into it. They balanced the Point Buy method against the Standard method.

The rules for generating ability scores on page 13 give us as Players, two options; the Standard method and, "If you...don't like the idea of randomly determining ability scores," the Standard Array.°

I was surprised when Fifth Edition came out. I was anxious and I immediately turned to the page on generating ability scores when I first got the book. At that time in 2014, Fight Club was raging, and it certainly seemed that they might remove the Standard method from the game, or make it a mere alternative method.

However, no, they didn't. Instead they adjusted the point buy scale so that we payed a price for the control offered by the Point Buy method: a limited range from 8 to 15. This is the balance.

Previous to 5e the Point Buy method allowed you to buy all the way up to 18, which made it superior to The Standard method because we didn't have to sacrifice anything to get that control.

In my opinion Dungeons and Dragons 5e got it right.



° I take it a step further and offer the Point Buy method as well, but I also ask that Players just give the Standard method a shot. If they don't like what they rolled, they can use one of the other methods. I also offer my Dice Point method but they might have to commit to that one.