How important is an 18 ability score?

[Quasqueton]

In the same vein as the discussion of "How bad is an 8 ability score?" from a few days ago. . .

How important is it to have an 18 in a PC's ability score?

Which would you rather have for a character's stats:

28 points

18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 8

16, 16, 10, 10, 10, 10

14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10


Is an 18 a must for a PC?

Quasqueton

 

[HellHound]

I would definitely go with the 14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10 over the 18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 8

Although I could also be convinced (for specific character types) to go with the 16, 16, 10, 10, 10, 10

 

[Darius101]

I would say that an 18 is a nice score but with the ability increases and more focus on Skills and Role Playing it is less important that it used to be.

 

[Holy Bovine]

Not to me it isn't. I would rather have a 16 and several 12's and 14's than one 'big' stat and then nothing. My optimal 28 point buy would be

16 14 12 12 10 10

or for variety

16 14 13 12 10 9

allowing for a stat bonus at 4th level on the 13 (or eliminate the -1 penalty).

An '18' is hardly necessary with the extra ability points available to 3E D&D characters. Far better to have it be something that only mid to high level characters get by gaining levels and working at it as, IMO, it has more 'meaning' that way.

 

[Seule]

It all depends on the character and the party composition. A character heavily specialized on one stat (say a wizard) can afford to sacrifice the other stats for power if the party is large enough to protect him. A Paladin can't really afford to specialize, as they need to be good at 4 of the 6 stats to be really effective.
Most of the time I'd go for the 14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10 stat spread, but some characters (like spellcasters) would really benefit from a 16, 16, 10, 10, 10, 10, and the occasional character I could see using 18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 8 for.

--Seule

 

[Endur]

It depends

A specialist might want the 18: i.e. a Wizard or a Fighter who is specialized on magic or combat.

A jack of all trades might want the 4 14's, 2 10's spread, especially a Paladin or a Monk.

A second rank specialist (i.e. a specialist with other stats) might go with 1 or 2 16's.

Tom

 

[nsruf]

Using point-buy, I consider 18 "too expensive" (not that I think it should cost less, just that it isn't worth taking for most characters). The highest score I buy is usually odd, either 15 or 17, and is the first one to be raised from levelling, since this is more cost-effective.

While it is true that 14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10 or any other sequence with no value above 14 has the maximal sum of bonuses (for 28 pts.), I still prefer having one or two larger values "where it counts".

 

[diaglo]

it depends on the campaign and the party.

i prefer the spread scores.

but if you are filling a niche in a group. it is probably better to be uber.

 

[F5]

Good question. It kind of depends on my mood.

Generally, I like the 18,14,10,10,10,8 spread. Not because I like having the 18, but because I like having slightly exaggerated ability scores. It makes your character sort of a cartoonish caricature of a person, to have a massive strength but be dumb, for example. But that kind of character can be easiest to roleplay, and lots of fun.

For a more well-thought-out character, I'll usually go with a more balanced spread. I like to have one medium-high stat, at least, because it feels more heroic. But an 18 isn't required by any means.

Of course, this is all talking point-buy. If I'm rolling stats, I'll take whatever I can get, and like it.

 

[Celebrim]

It really depends on what you are playing.

For many classes - Ranger, Rogue, Monk, Paladin - something like 14, 14, 14, 12, 12, 10 is a very good choice. If you have a way to get advantages from all of your stats, then getting the most total +'s is desirable. You can play classes like Cleric, Druid, and Barbarian with these stats too, though you rarely see it done.

For other classes - notably Wizard and Fighter - you can get a big boost by specializing, so you will see a few 18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 8's or even 18, 14, 12, 10, 8, 8 (fighter dumbs int and cha, wizard dumps str and cha). You see alot of large weapon Barbarians built like this too, to maximize that damage bonus, but frankly I think it is a waste of Barbarians nice skill set to do so. But that will depend on your DM and how often you make skill checks in your campaign.

For most spell casting classes, and frequently Rogues, you'll see something in the middle like - 16, 14, 12, 12, 10, 10 or 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8. I'd probably build a Cleric, Bard, Druid, or Sorcerer along these lines.

However, it is an important point that you don't have to be 'optimally' twinked to be a survivable and interesting character. It is perfectly fine to build a fighter or barbarian with a 14, 14, 14, 12, 12, 10 stat set, or a have rouge or cleric built with 18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 10. There is nothing wrong with a fighter with 14 in wisdom and only a 10 in dexterity. There is nothing wrong with a rogue with Int as his highest stat, or a barbarian with 14 charisma. There are all sorts of ways to play the game that don't involve smackdowns, provided you and your DM are both willing to focus on something other than creating smackdown characters and sending them against each other.