D&D 5E How do you determine your initial Attributes?

[Vaalingrade]

Dunno. This isn't anything I claimed.

And we're done here.

 

[Maxperson]

You did. You used him as a description for someone with an 8 intelligence.

Did not. I said Forest Gump. He then used "slightly below average." D&D doesn't have slightly below or above average, because it only has a few categories. 8 is below(not slightly) average. 6 is markedly below average. 4 isn't really functional as a PC if you are going to roleplay what it represents.

 

[Maxperson]

And we're done here.

Good. If you have to misstate my position not once, but twice in a single short post, you should reexamine your position. Someone whose position can stand on its own doesn't need to twist the other guy's argument.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Did not. I said Forest Gump. He then used "slightly below average." D&D doesn't have slightly below or above average, because it only has a few categories. 8 is below(not slightly) average. 6 is markedly below average. 4 isn't really functional as a PC if you are going to roleplay what it represents.

Okay, then let me reword the problem so as to be a bit less vulnerable to pedantry-as-argument. You are equating Forrest Gump, a character noted for having a significantly impaired reasoning process, with an intelligence ability score of the smallest functional penalty represented in the system. A person with this ability score would only suffer a 5% lower chance in intelligence related checks than someone of average intelligence.

I do not feel that expecting that level of impairment from someone with that small of a mechanical penalty is reasonable. Further, I don't feel that such an assessment leaves much room for variety in levels of intelligence below the average. Above average (but within normal mortal ability) is represented by a span of 8-10 points from the average, but anything 2 points below average is pretty much nonfunctional without assistance? Sounds like a pretty poorly defined range.

 

[AtomicPope]

I use the classic AD&D Unearthed Arcana method for rolling stats, but in 5e.

Not really, we just point buy. Though I've considered using the Gamma World system for D&D stats. I like it better.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I expect my players to roleplay their stats. An 8 intelligence should not be roleplayed as average or better. Forest Gump had around an 8 int. Below average reasoning ability.

That's fine if that is the expectation at your table. Although it reads as if you are venturing into the "your character wouldn't do/say that" territory if someone should do something which is outside of what you expect - an utterance which is like the 5 of the holy hand grenade for many: right out. Worth noting: 8 is mechanically 5% off the average when rolls are involved. Discernable from average in gameplay? I think we've agreed elsewhere that it is not.

This ground has been tread before and I know you have disagreed before. There are suggestions and qualified statements about how one might play stats in 5e - with many "usuallys" and "probablys" and "might bes" - but, again, there is nothing exacting or prescriptive in the rules about it. Anyone else that wants to review the "Your Character's Abilities" section, it's on pg 14 of the PHB.

So... the actual ability score means nothing. Just the modifiers. I disagree.

At the end of the day, players can roleplay their character any way they like - as defined by the 5e PHB. It's "you as a player determining how your character thinks, acts, and talks." Not the dice. Not the stats. The player. It's absolutely fine to have the dice or stats determine those things, if that is what your table finds fun. But it is not a baseline expectation of 5e.

It will be the modifiers, however, that directly influence success or failure - when rolls are even required.

I mean, for example, you may have a player who plays their INT 6, CHA 18 character as someone who pretends (or has even convinced themselves) that they are smart. But they are more likely to falter if the dice get brought out to resolve an action that calls for an INT ability check. Is that somehow "improper" roleplaying?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Point buy only. I'm shocked at how many roll. Ever since 3e unified the way ability scores worked (and weighed the point buy as well), there has been no need to roll stats.

 

[Lyxen]

Point buy only. I'm shocked at how many roll. Ever since 3e unified the way ability scores worked (and weighed the point buy as well), there has been no need to roll stats.

It's not a question of "need", it's the fact that, on the contrary ever since 3e, we have been plagued by people playing D&D like an MMO with "builds" optimising stats. So actually, the need is the other way around, counter this purely technical way of building characters for technical advantage.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

It's not a question of "need", it's the fact that, on the contrary ever since 3e, we have been plagued by people playing D&D like an MMO with "builds" optimising stats. So actually, the need is the other way around, counter this purely technical way of building characters for technical advantage.

For me it's about fairness, not builds. You wouldn't play a 6 on 5 player game of hockey, would you?

 

[Lyxen]

For me it's about fairness, not builds. You wouldn't play a 6 on 5 player game of hockey, would you?

And this is not a competitive sport, you are not playing against the other players or against the DM, and luck will play a major factor for your character during its life, with no regards to fairness. Moreover, as a player, how do you even know the stats of the characters of other players ? And even with equal stats, the game is not balanced, the classes and races are not balanced, the situations are not balanced. All of this is completely artificial anyway.