Ability Score Blues

[WalterKovacs]

I was just thinking about it today. In general the 16/16 vs. 18/14 [before racial mods] is going to favor the 18/14 ... assuming the 3 extra points from the "even" build aren't difference makers. Since many of the reasons to get a 16/16 would be for say a Rogue to have a great sly flourish ... which will be equal for either one.

However, I left out one other possibility:

17/16/11/10/10/8 vs. 18/14/11/10/10/8

Giving up the single point gets you +2 in the other column. For say a Rogue [let's go with brutal scoundrel] you are doing the same damage every time you sneak attack for about half your levels [although with a lesser chance to hit], and the other half of the time, you are doing more damage with the same chance to hit. If the secondary stat pays off like that [for example, the paladin having the attacks that deal extra damage equal to wisdom], having the 19 in their main stat to get a 16/18 in their secondary can be rewarding. Unlike the 18/18 vs. 20/16 it isn't a "lower to hit, same damage" but a "some time same damage lower hit, some time more damage same to hit" ... at least in the second case there is an argument ... also both cost 21 pts, so it's easier to compare the two configurations in a vacuum.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Since we're both going to be biased, after making our cases for the teams, it's going to be up to people to decide for themselves what's better.

I'm just trying to show that buying a 20 doesn't gimp your party, but is in fact much stronger for a lot of builds.

@Walterkovacs
17 16 11 10 10 8 .. seems like an awesome array for a tac warlord.

 

[ProdigalTim]

That's what my dilemma is, Walter. Except with ranger instead of rogue.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Ranger is a little tougher, but rogue is a no-brainer ..
Those half-levels of a weaker dex mod also mean weaker AC, ref, initiative, stealth, acrobatics, thievery ...
Would you really trade all that for +1 damage (ok, some powers are double-benefit, like torturous strike, and higher basic attack is nice, but still)?

 

[Xris Robin]

I would never take a 20 personally. The +1 is just completely useless. The only time that would help, haha, is when my to hit roll is off by 1. Typically, this doesn't happen to me. If I need say, 17 to hit, I usually don't get a 16 and then curse the fact I didn't take a 20 in my attack stat.

I'm much more likely to curse the fact I took an 20 and now none of my abilities using secondary stats work very well, or I have lousy skills and have to sit out every challenge.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Ah, but I don't build for a +1 .. I build for bonus stacking.
Fighter weapon talent, hellfire blood, +3 prof weapons, archers and wizards that aren't afraid to stand up front and provide flanks ...
Throw righteous brand into the mix, and I'm disappointed to miss on a 3.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Ah, but I don't build for a +1 .. I build for bonus stacking.
Fighter weapon talent, hellfire blood, +3 prof weapons, archers and wizards that aren't afraid to stand up front and provide flanks ...
Throw righteous brand into the mix, and I'm disappointed to miss on a 3.

those builds are more than viable. I really don´t want any character standing next to the cleric and the fighter... I must resist the temption to just copy the builds... All good choices for a 20 in main attribute...

@walter: hmmh maybe i will actually use the 17/16 array for my paladin...

 

[Destil]

A dagger rogue could easily survive with a 16 (after racial bonuses) too. Nimble blade + dagger prof bonus + rogue bonus for a general attack bonus of +7 or +10 with combat advantage at 1st. And they have a very good selection of powers that hit AC, Reflex (at will!), Fort (strength) and Will (charismatic).

My human dagger rogue with 20 Dex at 1st (14 str and 11/10/8 in everything else) has hit on 2s at least once a session when not fighting solos or being unable to flank.