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

[Sword of Spirit]

so like, reorient intimidation as your capability to exert authority?

Doesn't have to be valid authority, but it can be. It can also be fear, or just seeming like you are more powerful and should be obeyed.

After I had the idea, I texted a friend about it, then unpaused a show I was watching and immediately saw an example of a failed Intimidation attempt (military officer ordering his second in command to do something else before rescuing his son), followed up by a successful Persuasion attempt (by explaining the reason for the order).

An example from my D&D character is that he had just defeated the leader of a bandit gang in single combat, and then said something like "I'm the boss now!" In that case there was a certain amount of fear involved (and no authority), but in both cases there is the idea of exerting dominance.

 

[ECMO3]

Your argument redefines balance into meaninglessness, and is inconsistent with basic probability theory, basic game design principles, and decades of both observed play and RPG design practice. And it does this with self-defeating claims like "dice make balance impossible" and "rare outcomes don't matter."

The idea of balance is inconsistent with rolling dice and the rules and method of play for D&D and I said so when I first started talking about it on this thread some 10 or so pages back.

You can design a game without dice or other random variables though, and with some houserules you can even play a D&D without dice and that is what you should do if you actually want a balanced game.

Come on Alviking. We’re being asked to accept that mechanics both matter and don’t matter at the same time. And every game with variance is impossible to balance.

It is not impossible to have balanced outcomes, but it is extremely unlikely when variability and variance are as large and dominant as they are in RAW 5E.

If you want to guarantee a balanced game, you need to get rid of dice. If you want a reasonable chance of a balanced game while still having an element of randomness you need to dramatically reduce the amount of variance.

 

[ECMO3]

There isn't much ambiguity in the implication here. That a mechanical bias introduced by attributes is "overwhelmed" by the variance introduced through dice.

Exactly! So reducing that "mechanical bias" to zero does not improve the chance of a balanced outcome.

So I assume you agree with me, that the mechanical bias given by higher attributes does matter, and does impact play.

Absolutely it does and I think I have said so on 4 separate posts on this thread, including one other post that was a reply to you.

That's, of course, unless you want to defend the idea that the mechanical biases only matter sometimes. In which case, I'd love to hear that defense as I can't come up with one myself.

No they always matter. The difference between a 15 and a 16 in an attribute does matter. It just does not significantly change the chance of a balanced outcome in the game.

 

[Thomas Shey]

The idea of balance is inconsistent with rolling dice and the rules and method of play for D&D and I said so when I first started talking about it on this thread some 10 or so pages back.

I think at this point I agree with a number of others that your personal definition of balance is both idiosyncratic and, honestly, pretty useless.

 

[CleverNickName]

Going back to the original post, from @Lakesidefantasy so many pages ago:

Anyway what do you think? Is Point Buy totally balanced?
. . .
Remember, any comparison to rolling is irrelevant because this thread is about the balance of the Point Buy method compared to itself.

There was an example given as well:

There are over 54,000° combinations°° of ability scores. From 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, to 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 18; and everything in between. With Point Buy this gets reduced to a few hundred that are equivalent to 27 points.

One of those combinations is the Standard Array of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Another is 13, 13, 13, 12, 12, 12. Are these two combinations balanced against each other? Would two characters created with these combinations be equally effective? Would two characters of identical Race, Background, and Class built with each of these combinations be equally effective?

The question was (and has always been) whether or not Point Buy was balanced with itself---in other words, are all 65 possible combinations of ability scores equally effective---and I completely ignored it and jumped right to dice rolling and whatnot. Sorry about that.

So. Like any other comparative analysis, we start with the outliers and compare them to the stuff in the middle.

Case 1: 15-15-15-8-8-8
Case 2: 13-13-13-12-12-12
Case 3: 15-14-13-12-10-8

Comparing the same character that is identical in every way except for these ability scores, I'll start with a Human Wizard.

Spoiler: Boring Stuff

Case 1:
STR 8+1=9
DEX 15+1=16
CON 15+1=16
INT 15+1=16
WIS 8+1=9
CHA 8+1=9

This wizard has a total ability score bonus of +6. Their ability scores give them a -1 penalty to Strength, Wisdom, and Charisma-based skills and saves, but gain +3 hit points, +3 to AC, and +3 to their spell attacks. Three +3s in exchange for three -1s.

Case 2:
STR 12+1=13
DEX 13+1=14
CON 13+1=14
INT 13+1=14
WIS 12+1=13
CHA 12+1=13

This wizard has a total ability score bonus of +9. They have no ability score penalties, and either a +1 or a +2 bonus to all ability checks and saves. They have no penalties, but the tradeoff is that they have +2 hit points, +2 to AC, and +2 to their spell attacks.

Case 3:
STR 8+1=9
DEX 14+1=15
CON 13+1=14
INT 15+1=16
WIS 12+1=13
CHA 10+1=11

This wizard has a total ability score bonus of +7. They have only a single -1 penalty (I put it in Strength), everything else is either +0 or higher. For that single -1 to Strength saves and ability checks, they have +1 to Wisdom-based skills and saves, +2 to AC, +2 hit points, and their spell attacks are at +3.

All other cases will fall somewhere in the middle of these. How about my favorite case, 15-13-13-13-11-8?
STR 8+1=9
DEX 13+1=14
CON 13+1=14
INT 15+1=16
WIS 13+1=14
CHA 11+1=12

This would give our wizard a total ability score bonus of +9, just like in Case 2, but sacrifices their bonus to Strength in order to get a +3 to their spell attacks.

Are these cases all balanced? Yes, IMO. Each one of them will create a character that is fun to play, with unique strengths and weaknesses, and presents interesting choices at each ASI. Do you choose a feat? Do you spike one score as high as possible, as quickly as possible? or do you nullify some weaknesses first? Choose any of these cases, and the game will be fun and rewarding, and your choices will be meaningful.

Are they balanced with each other, as the original post asked? No, IMO. Some ability score combinations are going to play differently at low levels, and will be better-suited to different character classes and races. Some sets will make optimization easier, others make versatility easier, some trade penalties for higher bonuses and others don't. And you know what? I believe that's the whole point. If the devs intended otherwise, they wouldn't have given us three different ways to get ability scores. IMO, YMMV, etc.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, its hard to see how some of those setups aren't going to serve different needs and masters better than others, especially in something like D&D.