Defenses and To Hits for Your Party ~ Averages

[Dausuul]

The upshot is that 4e really truly doesn't work well with stats much below 16 in prime reqs. It just assumes your character is heroically strong, smart, or whatever his forte is. Old D&D/AD&D/Basic sort of assumed you were a mostly ordinary person with maybe if you were lucky one strong point or two. It was scaled differently. Players making the transition can run into this problem.

The change really took place in 3E when stats went to the "+1 per 2 stat points" model and stat-boosting items started being thrown around like candy. Prior to that, stat bonuses were considerably smaller. In BECMI, you got +1 for a stat in the 13-15 range, +2 for a 16-17, and +3 for an 18. In AD&D, it was even less--while the details varied from one stat to another, you typically needed a 15 or 16 to see any benefit at all. And raising your stats after chargen was all but impossible.

4E scaled back the stat boosters but kept the basic mechanic. Coupled with 4E's much tighter control over the system math, stats remain extremely important.

 

[MrMyth]

Yeah, somewhat in agreement with the others. I mean, yes, a fighter can somewhat get away with lower Str and still fill the defender roll by getting in the way and being big and tough and surviving. And having Con-based basic attacks for his Combat Challenge / Opportunity Attacks helps, along with powers that will still be generating him temps even when he misses.

But Str 15 at Level 13 is... well, it is what it is. In the end, he's made a conscious choice to cripple his character's offensive power. And he may well still be playable, but his attack bonus is going to be undeniably below the expected norm, and that's simply how its gonna be.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The change really took place in 3E when stats went to the "+1 per 2 stat points" model and stat-boosting items started being thrown around like candy. Prior to that, stat bonuses were considerably smaller. In BECMI, you got +1 for a stat in the 13-15 range, +2 for a 16-17, and +3 for an 18. In AD&D, it was even less--while the details varied from one stat to another, you typically needed a 15 or 16 to see any benefit at all. And raising your stats after chargen was all but impossible.

4E scaled back the stat boosters but kept the basic mechanic. Coupled with 4E's much tighter control over the system math, stats remain extremely important.

Right. The situation is 3.x was a bit muddy though. At low levels you really wanted the high stats, but it wasn't quite as critical since the math was all over the place for monsters. Spell casting at low levels also was a lot easier for lower stat casters since saves were not really depending on stat bonuses. Once you got some levels under your belt stat boosters made most actual stat numbers meaningless, though it could vary some between groups.

Certain stats in AD&D did make a pretty big difference though. Having an 18 STR was a big bonus, especially for a fighter. Likewise having a 15+ DEX or CON was a fairly significant advantage. Some specific classes were also pretty stat dependent, like basically being a Cleric in AD&D with a less than 16 WIS was pretty worthless (spell failure plus a lot less spell slots). The effects of high stats were just not so apparent with the math being all over the place and the sheer fact that no matter how good your stats were your survival was often just luck of the dice anyway.

 

[MrMyth]

Also, something seems up with those starting scores. They come to only 18 points via the point-buy method. Are you guys rolling scores instead, or using a more limited point-buy? That might explain some of the low numbers.

Of course, I'm also not sure how his level 13 stats are explained, either. He's only gotten 3 stat bumps - how did Con get to 24 before level 14?

Anyway. If he used standard point-buy for his stats, and slightly devalued Con, he could start with:
Str 18, Con 18, Dex 10, Int 11, Wis 13, Cha 8.

And then, at level 13, have:
Str 21, Con 21, Dex 11, Int 12, Wis 14, Cha 9.

Or if he really wanted the extreme Con, then he could start with:
Str 16, Con 20, Dex 10, Int 10, Wis 11, Cha 8.

And then, at level 13, have:
Str 19, Con 23, Dex 11, Int 11, Wis 12, Cha 9.

 

[keterys]

Well, at level 10 you should have ... +3 from a magic item (your group should have gotten its first +3 item at level 6, 2 at level 7, 3 at level 8, 4 at level 9, and 5 at level 10. Since the first thing to be upgrades should always be the trifecta of Armor/Weapon/Neck, that basically means by level 10 the group has a total of 15 +3 items at level 10, which by no strange coincidence means everyone has a +3 armor/weapon/neck)

This is wrong on many levels...

First, assuming normal loot distribution, between 6th and 7th level you will find one 10th level item as your highest item found, and it may well be in the adventure/encounter that levels you to 7th assuming the highest level item is in the 'showdown' that gives the most xp. This means that the earliest you can find any +3 at all is 7th level, and you might as well count it as 8th level. This reduces the number of possible +3s by 5-9 there... if you've just reached 10th, then you could have, as a party, 1 13th, 2 12th, and 3 11th items. If you're a nanosecond from 11th, you might have 1 14th, 2 13ths, 3 12ths, and 4 11ths.

Next, you're assuming that the first items that you get are your +3s, which doesn't make sense for a variety of reasons:

First, because even with wishlists loot distribution is not getting the exact single thing you asked for, but the DM selecting from a list. Many groups don't use wishlists and some groups just give out the treasure in the adventure, roll randomly for treasure, or give out the DMG guideline (N+1, N, N-1, gp worth N-1)

Second, you're assuming that all 11th and 12th level items are +3s, when many people are actually looking for items with actual enchantments on them, and thus might be higher in the level span. Many people want Staffs of Ruin and Frost Weapons and Cunning Polearms or whatever... which means they can't afford to 'burn' one treasure pick for an 11th or 12th level +3 weapon when they're waiting for 13th to get the one they want.

Third, there are an awful lot of non-enhancement items out there. Healer's Gloves, for instance, are quite common as 12th level items. Gloves of Ice, Dragonshards, Bracers that add damage to melee basics... even in a land of wishlists, these things really do come up.

Anyhow, that math aside...
At 10th, I think my characters tend to have around...
Lvl +5
Stat +5
Enh +2 or +3
Feat +1
(if melee, +3 prof, if implement +1 accurate)

So, pretty close to their guidelines. I'd suggest that if you're more than 2 behind there, you might be a bit off.

 

[Mentat55]

Interestingly, I think those sidebar numbers use the same math as companion characters (from the DMG2). Since companion characters should have similar numbers as PCs, but without the plethora of tricks, I think the math is right on.

My level 16 wizard has AC 29, Fort 24, Ref 29, Will 29, and is +19 vs. NADs, which is pretty close to those guidelines (-2 AC, -5 Fort, just right for Ref and Will, -1 attacks), and I haven't yet picked up a +4 item.

As keterys noted, the math seems right on.

 

[Lancelot]

Here are my thoughts on the posted character:

• Melee Training only applies to basic attacks, which means this PC's attack bonus is going to be horrible for all their regular fighter powers. This will impact attack bonuses against all defenses. Note that if this was an Essentials fighter build, it might be more acceptable. Essentials fighters primarily use basic attacks; their powers are stances and "special use" abilities that augment basic attacks.
• As noted, the point-buy seems to be off. Normal point-buy is 22; this appears to be an 18-point build. That'll impact expected values.
• Also, that's some slightly odd stat advancement. Most players pick two stats and pour all their +1/+1 bonuses into those two stats. Instead, this character has regularly put +1's into CON... and spread the other +1's between STR, INT, and WIS. The latter two are slightly helping the non-AC defenses, but it's probably better picking one non-CON stat and buffing it regularly.
• It's a STR/CON build, which is going to hurt in any case. You have one good non-AC defense (Fort). Assuming you pour all your +1/+1 bonuses into STR/CON, your Reflex and Will defenses simply aren't going to keep pace with monster attack bonuses. C'est la vie - that's the unfortunate cost of playing a STR/CON, INT/DEX or WIS/CHA character. Personally, I try to avoid these builds (which is why I played a vengeful Deva and a valorous Bard, rather than a pursuit avenger and a prescient Bard). However, many of my players are happy playing "single defense" builds. You just have to recognize that you will be highly vulnerable to two different attack forms, rather than just one.
• There's only one feat listed for the dwarf that is helping their numbers (plate armor prof). I'd strongly recommend at least one of the non-AC defense feats (Improved Defenses for a general buff, or Great Fortitude if you really want to go nuts on Fortitude) and/or one of the expertise feats (as mentioned, the new Essentials feats would give +2 attack at level 11 and above).

To "correct" this character, I'd recommend working with the DM to see if the PC could be switched to an Essentials fighter build (where the low STR wouldn't hurt much, as they use mostly basic attacks - and Melee Training would apply). Alternatively, retain the pre-Essentials build and see if the stats can be rejigged to improve STR. Consider retraining 1-2 feats to further improve numbers.

Otherwise, I'd suggest this would be quite frustrating to play. You're looking at a +13 attack modifier, true? If you're fighting a typical "soldier" monster of your own level (13th), you'll need to roll a 16 or better to hit under normal circumstances. If you're fighting a "boss monster" several levels higher than you, you'll be missing nearly every attack - unless you're simply using Basic Attacks, where Melee Training kicks in. Ouch.

 

[hayek]

Yeah, I can't overemphasize how broken (negatively) this character is to have a 13 in his primary starting stat. Nothing wrong with that if that's how you want to play, the character clearly seems to be built purely for the sake of roleplaying a certain type of character rather than being optimized for combat. The DM just needs to reduce the difficulty of all the monsters the party fights.

Of course, it's also a huge issue if everyone else in the party actually built their characters to be good at combat. Then the player may not feel like they're contributing and consequently won't have much fun.

As it stands, this character is the scrawny, clutsy dwarf that all the other dwarves made fun of when he was a kid for being horrible at fighting, and he keeps trying to prove them wrong (to much comic effect). That can be fun to play, but to expect to compete in combat with a primary stat at 15 at level 13 is pure insanity...

 

[TarionzCousin]

Also, something seems up with those starting scores. They come to only 18 points via the point-buy method. Are you guys rolling scores instead, or using a more limited point-buy? That might explain some of the low numbers.

Of course, I'm also not sure how his level 13 stats are explained, either. He's only gotten 3 stat bumps - how did Con get to 24 before level 14?

I honestly don't know what this character was like at 1st level. I am taking over the DM reins at level 13 and I only joined when they were just moving up to level 8.

It is entirely possible that the original DM made them use an 18 point buy--he is notoriously stingy. When I joined at 8th level all of the PC's had one or two magic items each. The rogue didn't have any magic armor and nobody even knew what a neck slot item was.

Do the feats "Weapon Expertise" and "Versatile Expertise" stack? Why is my offline Character Builder not stacking them?

 

[Mentat55]

No, Weapon Expertise and Versatile Expertise do not stack, they are both feat bonuses.