D&D 5E How much do you value your Con score?

[AaronOfBarbaria]

...no, I don't care about hit points...

Even if you did care about hit points, the portion of hit points gained from your Constitution score is rarely if ever going to be more impactful than your hit points gained from hit dice.

Even at the most favorable ratio, a +2 Con modifier is functionally less than 1/3rd of the total hit points of a d6 hit die class since choosing to take 4 HP per level instead of rolling is an option (and not one presented as "Maybe the DM says this is okay to do" so the default of the game is that the player can just choose as they see fit - and I think anyone concerned in the slightest about having "enough" HP is going to choose a guaranteed better than the average roll over risking rolling).

 

[CapnZapp]

10 con is the average for the general population. But being an adventurer is very physically demanding. Joe average with a con of 10 isn't frail and weak, but average health isn't good enough to be an adventurer. The average person can't keep up.

I want to be even more clear:

A 10 Str is fine, unless you happen to rely on Strength.

A 10 Dex is fine, if you wear heavy armor.

A 10 Int is fine, if someone else handles the skills.

A 10 Cha is fine, if someone else is the face.


The point is, a 10 Con is never "fine" in that sense.

Constitution is a special ability score, in that everyone should think of 10 Con as something considerably weaker than it could have been. Constitution is never an ability you should neglect, the way a Rogue could neglect Strength.

The reference to a 10 as "average" holds true only for the other abilities, but not for Con.

 

[CapnZapp]

Even at the most favorable ratio, a +2 Con modifier is functionally less than 1/3rd of the total hit points of a d6 hit die class since choosing to take 4 HP per level instead of rolling is an option (and not one presented as "Maybe the DM says this is okay to do" so the default of the game is that the player can just choose as they see fit - and I think anyone concerned in the slightest about having "enough" HP is going to choose a guaranteed better than the average roll over risking rolling).

Even for a d8 class, the difference between a +0 and a +2 is MASSIVE.

One character will sport 53 hp while the other will sport 73 hp. Those extra twenty hit points is a HUGE deal.

The irony is that the d6 classes benefit MORE, relatively speaking.

You're completely right about the take-the-average though.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Those extra twenty hit points is a HUGE deal.

Not in my experience.

If it were a "huge deal", I doubt that there would be as much variance in hit dice between classes as there are - given that they all have to survive the same threats in order to meaningfully participate in the game.

 

[KahlessNestor]

I want to be even more clear:

A 10 Str is fine, unless you happen to rely on Strength.

A 10 Dex is fine, if you wear heavy armor.

A 10 Int is fine, if someone else handles the skills.

A 10 Cha is fine, if someone else is the face.


The point is, a 10 Con is never "fine" in that sense.

Constitution is a special ability score, in that everyone should think of 10 Con as something considerably weaker than it could have been. Constitution is never an ability you should neglect, the way a Rogue could neglect Strength.

The reference to a 10 as "average" holds true only for the other abilities, but not for Con.

Where does it say Con is somehow special as regards 10 being average or not? The Commoner (Joe anf Jane Average in everything) has 10 Con.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I want to be even more clear:

A 10 Str is fine, unless you happen to rely on Strength.

A 10 Dex is fine, if you wear heavy armor.

A 10 Int is fine, if someone else handles the skills.

A 10 Cha is fine, if someone else is the face.


The point is, a 10 Con is never "fine" in that sense.

Constitution is a special ability score, in that everyone should think of 10 Con as something considerably weaker than it could have been. Constitution is never an ability you should neglect, the way a Rogue could neglect Strength.

The reference to a 10 as "average" holds true only for the other abilities, but not for Con.

Nope.

10 is definately average. Adeventurers tend to be tougher than average, to a greater degree than they are smarter or more wise than average, but that doesn't change that 10 is the norm.

And those 2 HP per level are only a huge deal on paper, for anyone that isn't a tank. But for tanks, high con is the same as high Dex for archers.

 

[CTurbo]

I'm part of a 3 man group and even though we rolled for stats, both the sorcerer and the cleric took 12 in their Con and I would just about consider their characters useless in a combat situations. We just hit level 4 and the Sorc has 22hp and the cleric has 27. They get KO'ed so easily. The Sorc does a decent job of avoiding melee, but still goes down very easily and has been one shot several times already. The only reason these characters have survived is from the DM being lenient on them and my Barbarian character constantly healing them. I swear they go down every single encounter. Sometimes multiple times. I urged them both to take the tough feat but they both took something different. They will not make it to level 5. I guarantee you they start with a higher Con with their next chars.


I know I would hate to play a character that either avoids getting hit completely or goes down after getting hit one time. That would be terrible to me. That's exactly what a low Con 1d6 or 1d8 char is.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

That's exactly what a low Con 1d6 or 1d8 char is.

There are a lot more factors necessary for a character to get taken down in a single hit than just a lower Con score and a smaller hit die.

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

I definitely agree with many sentiments here that constitution is an important stat. For melee characters I tend to try and get at least a 14, with a 16+ if I'm playing a tank or "beefy" character. However, I've had as a DM my fair share of Con 8 or 10 wizards or rogues, or other "squishies", and they have for the most part held up with decent tactics and reasonably expected player skill. They definitely did feel a little more glass cannon-y, but that was to be expected. It was a deliberate choice on the part of the player, and it many cases those characters were far more lethal than some of the other more balanced stat characters, or had other means of compensation outside of combat. If anything, I for one am very glad that all six ability scores actually matter now, for saves and skills. You all think a +1 or +2 bonus in your "dump stats" (a min/maxing term I have ALWAYS hated because I have always preferred balanced characters with multiple skill sets), but when taken over a long period in actual play they can and do effect a lot of situations. I'd sooner take a character with all 14's than a character with one one or two good stats any day (a related issue that is one of the reasons I hate rolling for stats, aside from the inherent unfairness towards some players).

 

[KahlessNestor]

I'm getting a huge badwrongfun vibe from this thread for those of is who don't think Con is some sort of god-stat. So what if that rogue is 20 hp behind the other? He is probably saving much more than that in Dex saves and finding and disarming traps, or not being surprised. No rogue in their right mind is just going to stand on the front line and go toe to toe. That's why they get Disengage and Hide as a bonus action and have ranged sneak attack. They don’t need that extra 20 hp. Nice to have, sure, but if yhey disarm the trap, they may save everyone in the party 20 hp each. But that isn't going to happen if they can't find they trap (Wisdom) and figure out how to disable it (Intelligence).

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk