D&D 5E Ability Score Balance: through the eyes of fresh players

[Horwath]

Yeah, we're getting farther apart on this with every post.

the beauty of forums threads

I'd rather see a more 0e or 1e-like system, where actual bonuses don't start until you're well clear of the average in either direction; be that at 8/13 or 7/14 or wherever.

Then, I'd like to see far more things rely on the actual stat number (e.g. revive the roll-under mechanic, for cryin' out loud!) than the bonus.

Your math is off.

The average on a 3-18 bell curve is 10.5, which means 10 and 11 in theory have to mirror-model as the same. This if 10 is 0, 11 must also be 0; or if 11 is +1 then 10 must be -1.

who said that 3d6 has to be used for stat generation?

if you take 8d2-2 for stat rolls you get the 6-14 spread with 10 as average. If you use modifiers on one-on-one basis that gives you -4 to +4 modifiers. That gives max and min stat 1 in 256 chance. Not too far from 3d6 that is 1 in 216.

and instead of rolling 4d6-drop lowest you could roll 5d2+4. goes from 9 to 14 with 11,5 as average.

 

[Lanefan]

who said that 3d6 has to be used for stat generation?

if you take 8d2-2 for stat rolls you get the 6-14 spread with 10 as average. If you use modifiers on one-on-one basis that gives you -4 to +4 modifiers. That gives max and min stat 1 in 256 chance. Not too far from 3d6 that is 1 in 216.

and instead of rolling 4d6-drop lowest you could roll 5d2+4. goes from 9 to 14 with 11,5 as average.

So I guess I'd better ask:

What's wrong with very high or very low stats? What's the issue if my character starts with 18-15-13-12-9-7 as opposed to a rather bland 14-12-12-12-12-12 (same average)?

 

[Horwath]

So I guess I'd better ask:

What's wrong with very high or very low stats? What's the issue if my character starts with 18-15-13-12-9-7 as opposed to a rather bland 14-12-12-12-12-12 (same average)?

there is nothing wrong with 18 as a high stat. It's one of my favorite starting stats
In my version 14(+4) is an equal value to current 18(+4),

I just got rid of intermediate useless odd scores.

but as I stated, in any version, max stat is very rare, as rare as adventurers are comparing to common folk. If not more.

but I do have something against very low stats 7(-2) or lower.

They are not fitting for an adventurer, unless you play some nature hermit barbarian/druid/ranger with 6 charisma score.

every other stat at 7 or lower will get you killed sooner or later if you go on enough of various adventures.

also your scores are of the same sum but not the same value in point buy. since you have an 18, I will use 3.5 "point buy" value for it.

it's 32 vs 26 pts

 

[Lanefan]

there is nothing wrong with 18 as a high stat. It's one of my favorite starting stats
In my version 14(+4) is an equal value to current 18(+4),

I just got rid of intermediate useless odd scores.

but as I stated, in any version, max stat is very rare, as rare as adventurers are comparing to common folk. If not more.

but I do have something against very low stats 7(-2) or lower.

They are not fitting for an adventurer, unless you play some nature hermit barbarian/druid/ranger with 6 charisma score.

every other stat at 7 or lower will get you killed sooner or later if you go on enough of various adventures.

Arguably the best character I've ever played - and unarguably the most entertaining - had Wisdom 7 for her entire rather long career. This was in 3e, where a 7 carried some significant penalties.

In the game I DM (modified 1e), one of the longest-serving characters started with a 6 and seems to have done OK.

One of my current characters - a Dwarven War Cleric - started with Cha 6. I created most of his personality around that score.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Given some of the conversations on this thread, for the people who hanker to get rid of ability scores, why not just roll Xd6, minimum 6, but maybe 7 or even 8, and keep the best six to represent modifiers? Subtracting 2 from each gives you a range of -1 to +4 to start with. After all, 95+% of the game use the modifiers, not the scores.

Just some more of people to think on if you are bored.

 

[jmartkdr2]

So I guess I'd better ask:

What's wrong with very high or very low stats? What's the issue if my character starts with 18-15-13-12-9-7 as opposed to a rather bland 14-12-12-12-12-12 (same average)?

Abstractly, I think having low stats is better than not having them. Pc's should be bad at something. It makes them more interesting narratively (not as much as some people think but it helps) and it helps reinforce the team nature of the game.

In particular, certain rules create situations where having a low number is a particular ability score is very bad, to the point of making characters not really playable. This isn't a big problem in 5e where the traps options aren't well-hidden, but it does apply to certain well-known houserules that try to punish low numbers more than the base rules. That can end up with a situation where any character with a number under 10 goes from 'having an interesting weakness' to 'not really an adventurer.'

Which is why I prefer to add variety to ability options by making weaknesses less crippling. Basically, I want people to feel like putting their worst number into dex or con is as perfectly valid a build choice as putting the worst number into str or cha. Because I want to see a wider array of low numbers, nit just everyone being uneducated.

 

[TwoSix]

Given some of the conversations on this thread, for the people who hanker to get rid of ability scores, why not just roll Xd6, minimum 6, but maybe 7 or even 8, and keep the best six to represent modifiers? Subtracting 2 from each gives you a range of -1 to +4 to start with. After all, 95+% of the game use the modifiers, not the scores.

Just some more of people to think on if you are bored.

If I wanted to roll modifiers, I'd probably lean towards Fudge dice, something like 3dF+1. It is an interesting idea though.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If I wanted to roll modifiers, I'd probably lean towards Fudge dice, something like 3dF+1. It is an interesting idea though.

The idea ends up being a bit better than point-buy, so I would probably make it 7d5 instead of d6, use the best six results and -2 from each.

But, however you do it you can have stats that work. After all, it isn't the size of your modifier, it is how you roll with it.