D&D 5E (2014) Is Point Buy Balanced?

[AlViking]

No they won't. Not in play they won't. They may be "balanced" on your character sheet when you are not playing the game; but when you start playing you can throw that out the window.



No it won't. Not usually. Generally your abilities have little affect on overall game balance when comparing the performance of one PC versus the performance of another PC.

If two characters are actually "close" and "reasonable" in play it is not because of their array. It is because their choices, the DMs rulings and the dice thrown in play just happened to result in the characters' performance being close and that is a rare thing indeed.




Potential effectiveness is not the same as actual effectiveness and has little to do with balance in play.



They won't be in the same ball park in play, but even if the scores were exactly the same they still would not be in the same ballpark in play.

In many games the PC with the lower array (9, 7, 11, 4, 13, 10) will outperform the PC with the higher array (9, 13, 13 15, 15, 18) and belief has nothing to do with it



You get significant imbalance regardless of ability scores and it happens in just about every single session.

Two PCs with the exact same ability scores, playing the exact same class and race with the exact same choices for weapons, spells, backgrounds, feats and skills will still typically be imbalanced in play in every single session of a campaign.

I just spent way to much time on building 2 characters in DndBeyond where "A" has 9, 7, 11, 4, 13, 10 and "B" has 9, 13, 13, 15, 15, 18. I made them both fighters to keep things simple, even though B would be good at any given class. I'm sure I could have built this other ways, but I'm assuming whoever rolled this was focused primarily on fighting. For example I could have put the 15 in charisma and made them the party face.

Anyway after adjustment from background or race A has Str: 15 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4. B has Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9. Against AC 16, A does 3 points of damage on average. B does doubles average damage to 6. At 8th level A finally has a 20 strength so the damage per round is the same (barring damage bonuses from feats). Thing is though, B never had to spend anything to increase their strength so I increased the Dex to 16, took the Tough feat and increased Con to 18. So at 8th level A has 60 HP, B has 100. A 2/3 increase in HP is pretty noticeable. In addition B can be a pretty good archer, has better initiative, can be stealthy, better overall saving throws. I could seeing them even subbing for a rogue with the right proficiencies. I don't see a comparison.

Anyway here's more pointless details because I can hear the reply now that "nobody will notice". As a reminder I got these numbers after rolling 5 characters for 10 groups. It's not like I rolled a thousand and found the worst case.

Spoiler: A rolled 9, 7, 11, 4, 13, 10 and B rolled 9, 13, 13, 15, 15, 18.

After adjustments at level 1. Human fighter with dueling to keep it easy. Target AC 16 for average damage.

A: is really limited in options, has average dex and poor skills outside of combat. Frightens children and most adults with their looks

• Str: 15 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
• Attack: +4, DMG: 1d8+4(avg 3), HP: 12.

B: Can be any class the want and excel.

• Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
• Attack: +7, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 6), HP: 13

So right away, A is doing average damage 3, B is doing 6 per attack. Combat effectiveness is noticeably better for B and B is a decent archer as well. Instead of putting that 15 they could put it in charisma and be the party face. They have a lot of options for out-of-combat utility and, of course, better saving throws.

Level 4
A: Limited options because they have to start getting their strength up. I'm going to take Athlete.

• Str: 16 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
• Attack: +5, DMG: 1d8+5(4), HP: 32.

B: I don't need to increase strength so I have a lot of options, but they want to be a better archer. He also has more options for armor and could consider breastplate so they can be good at stealth. So many options!
The HP difference is also starting to climb.
Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
Attack: +7, DMG: 1d8+7 (avg 6), HP: 40

Level 6
A: Again, probably going to just add to strength, not much is going to help
Str: 18 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
Attack: +7, DMG: 1d8+6(avg 10), HP: 46.

B: Lots of options but I don't really have a any weaknesses. I'll take the tough feat
Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
Attack: +8, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 14), HP: 70

Level 8
A: Finally maxing out strength. Finally catches up on strength but 2 feats behind.
Str: 20 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
Attack: +8, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 14), HP: 60. 60 * X = 100

B: Because I can't take tough again, I'll increas my con by 2
Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 18 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
Attack: +8, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 14), HP: 100


So until level 8, B does more damage. They also have an option of being a decent archer and good at stealth. At level 8, they're 3 feats ahead or just increase HP so they have 2/3 more HP. That's not even taking into consider options for multi-classing, being a really good MAD class and so on. I think it's a huge and noticeable difference both in combat and even moreso outside of combat.

 

[AlViking]

It would seem that 41% of people on these boards Roll with Dice, 31% Buy with Points, and 25% use the Standard Array.

The number of people responding to surveys, not to mention skewing older, on this forum makes any numbers pretty pointless.

 

[ECMO3]

I just spent way to much time on building 2 characters in DndBeyond where "A" has 9, 7, 11, 4, 13, 10 and "B" has 9, 13, 13, 15, 15, 18. I made them both fighters to keep things simple, even though B would be good at any given class. I'm sure I could have built this other ways, but I'm assuming whoever rolled this was focused primarily on fighting. For example I could have put the 15 in charisma and made them the party face.

Anyway after adjustment from background or race A has Str: 15 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4. B has Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9. Against AC 16, A does 3 points of damage on average. B does doubles average damage to 6. At 8th level A finally has a 20 strength so the damage per round is the same (barring damage bonuses from feats). Thing is though, B never had to spend anything to increase their strength so I increased the Dex to 16, took the Tough feat and increased Con to 18. So at 8th level A has 60 HP, B has 100. A 2/3 increase in HP is pretty noticeable. In addition B can be a pretty good archer, has better initiative, can be stealthy, better overall saving throws. I could seeing them even subbing for a rogue with the right proficiencies. I don't see a comparison.

Anyway here's more pointless details because I can hear the reply now that "nobody will notice". As a reminder I got these numbers after rolling 5 characters for 10 groups. It's not like I rolled a thousand and found the worst case.

Spoiler: A rolled 9, 7, 11, 4, 13, 10 and B rolled 9, 13, 13, 15, 15, 18.

After adjustments at level 1. Human fighter with dueling to keep it easy. Target AC 16 for average damage.

A: is really limited in options, has average dex and poor skills outside of combat. Frightens children and most adults with their looks

• Str: 15 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
• Attack: +4, DMG: 1d8+4(avg 3), HP: 12.

B: Can be any class the want and excel.

• Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
• Attack: +7, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 6), HP: 13

So right away, A is doing average damage 3, B is doing 6 per attack. Combat effectiveness is noticeably better for B and B is a decent archer as well. Instead of putting that 15 they could put it in charisma and be the party face. They have a lot of options for out-of-combat utility and, of course, better saving throws.

Level 4
A: Limited options because they have to start getting their strength up. I'm going to take Athlete.

• Str: 16 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
• Attack: +5, DMG: 1d8+5(4), HP: 32.

B: I don't need to increase strength so I have a lot of options, but they want to be a better archer. He also has more options for armor and could consider breastplate so they can be good at stealth. So many options!
The HP difference is also starting to climb.
Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
Attack: +7, DMG: 1d8+7 (avg 6), HP: 40

Level 6
A: Again, probably going to just add to strength, not much is going to help
Str: 18 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
Attack: +7, DMG: 1d8+6(avg 10), HP: 46.

B: Lots of options but I don't really have a any weaknesses. I'll take the tough feat
Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 16 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
Attack: +8, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 14), HP: 70

Level 8
A: Finally maxing out strength. Finally catches up on strength but 2 feats behind.
Str: 20 Dex: 10 Con: 14 Wis: 9 Int: 7 Cha: 4.
Attack: +8, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 14), HP: 60. 60 * X = 100

B: Because I can't take tough again, I'll increas my con by 2
Str: 20 Dex: 15 Con: 18 Wis: 13 Int: 13 Cha: 9.
Attack: +8, DMG: 1d8+7(avg 14), HP: 100

If you played 100 different sessions with characters using those two arrays and 200 different players each playing a PC of their own design for a session with that arry: PC A would outperform PC B in a substantial number of those sessions and as a matter of fact if they knew the ability scores in those sessions PEOPLE WOULD NOTICE that PC A outperformed PC B in those sessions despite having MUCH lower ability scores.

I notice every time when I outperform someone or someone outperforms me and I notice it even when my PCs stats are much better and another player does better than me.

So until level 8, B does more damage.

This is not true in play. In play B does more damage sometimes, they do the same damage sometimes and B does less damage sometimes. If you assume the players are playing the exact same characters, making the exact same choices in play with the exact same DM, B will do more damage most times, but A will still do more sometimes.

If we use the 1st level fighter examples you gave above (dueling 15 and 20 strength for A and B respectively): on rounds where both of them take the attack action with their 1d8 weapon against an enemy with 16 AC and 26hps or more the round is balanced 24% of the time, the round is unbalanced in favor of fighter A 23% of the time and unbalanced in favor of fighter B 53% of the time.

Those are two characters with huge disparity in ability scores but the exact same builds taking the exact same action against a foe whos hit points they can not possibly eclipse.

In the same example, if they were both using standard array with a 16 strength the chance they would be balanced is 27%, which is essentially the same.

As I noted initially, you get virtually no balance improvement in play by giving them the same ability scores even when the characters are exactly the same and take exactly the same action. You know what does improve balance though - changing the foe. If we go from a AC16 26hp hypothetical to a AC12 5hp Kobold, the chance the round is balanced in terms of damage dealt jumps from 24% to 59% for the two characters with wide ability disparities and for characters with standard array it similarly jumps from 27% to 58%.

 

[Lanefan]

FIGHT CLUB!!!

There 54,264 different combinations off ability scores. So I think the probability of two people rolling the same set of scores would be a 1/54264 chance multiplied (?) by another 1/54264. If my math is correct then the chance of two people rolling the same set of scores is 1/2944581696 chance. You would have a much better chance of winning the Powerball jackpot, which is 1/292400000. It's likely you would never roll the same set of scores in your lifetime.

Two things about this.

First, you're rolling on a bell curve, meaning duplicate stats near the centre of that bell curve are considerably more likely (relatively speaking) then you posit here. 4d6drop1 averages at something like 12.2, meaning the most likely (and thus most likely to be duplicated) set of stats is something like 12-12-12-12-12-13.

Second, if we assume rearranging is allowed then the order the stats are rolled in doesn't matter, just the resulting six numbers.

For me this is a feature, not a bug. Because there are only 65 possible Point Buy options. And I suspect that we actually only use less than 10 in practice. I think D&D Beyond has this data, but I'm not so sure they'd want to share it.

This is a quantification of the cookie cutter criticism of Point Buy.

I'm with you on this.

 

[Lanefan]

If you played 100 different sessions with characters using those two arrays and 200 different players each playing a PC of their own design for a session with that arry: PC A would outperform PC B in a substantial number of those sessions and as a matter of fact if they knew the ability scores in those sessions PEOPLE WOULD NOTICE that PC A outperformed PC B in those sessions despite having MUCH lower ability scores.

I notice every time when I outperform someone or someone outperforms me and I notice it even when my PCs stats are much better and another player does better than me.



This is not true in play. In play B does more damage sometimes and B does less damage some times. If you assume the players are playing the exact same characters, making the exact same choices in play with the exact same DM, B will do more damage most times, but A will still do more sometimes.

For the sake of discussion, how close do they have to be to be balanced in play? In terms of damage what percentage difference makes PCs "unbalanced".

While I agree with your overall stance, I do have to ask why damage output is seen as the primary (or only) measure of balance.

 

[ECMO3]

While I agree with your overall stance, I do have to ask why damage output is seen as the primary (or only) measure of balance.

It is the example that was used in the post I replied to. That said compared to other metrics it is more straightforward mathematically (although still not particularly straightforward without a bunch of assumptions that are typically untrue in play).

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

The chance is higher than that because not all of those combinations have an equal chance of occuring.

Yeah, you're right. Now I'm going to have to do some real math. Just multiplying them won't work.

Maybe I shouldn't have gone out and bought so many lottery tickets.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Not so much for 15/14/13/12/10/8.

If the point buy method gives me 18/18/18/18/18/18, then I have some opinions on its balance.

I kinda want to see what players would do with that. Why not be all superheroes for once?
I guess multiclassing will become a lot more attractive...

 

[AlViking]

If you played 100 different sessions with characters using those two arrays and 200 different players each playing a PC of their own design for a session with that arry: PC A would outperform PC B in a substantial number of those sessions and as a matter of fact if they knew the ability scores in those sessions PEOPLE WOULD NOTICE that PC A outperformed PC B in those sessions despite having MUCH lower ability scores.

I notice every time when I outperform someone or someone outperforms me and I notice it even when my PCs stats are much better and another player does better than me.



This is not true in play. In play B does more damage sometimes, they do the same damage sometimes and B does less damage sometimes. If you assume the players are playing the exact same characters, making the exact same choices in play with the exact same DM, B will do more damage most times, but A will still do more sometimes.

If we use the 1st level fighter examples you gave above (dueling 15 and 20 strength for A and B respectively): on rounds where both of them take the attack action with their 1d8 weapon against an enemy with 16 AC and 26hps or more the round is balanced 24% of the time, the round is unbalanced in favor of fighter A 23% of the time and unbalanced in favor of fighter B 53% of the time.

Those are two characters with huge disparity in ability scores but the exact same builds taking the exact same action against a foe whos hit points they can not possibly eclipse.

In the same example, if they were both using standard array with a 16 strength the chance they would be balanced is 27%, which is essentially the same.

As I noted initially, you get virtually no balance improvement in play by giving them the same ability scores even when the characters are exactly the same and take exactly the same action. You know what does improve balance though - changing the foe. If we go from a AC16 26hp hypothetical to a AC12 5hp Kobold, the chance the round is balanced in terms of damage dealt jumps from 24% to 59% for the two characters with wide ability disparities and for characters with standard array it similarly jumps from 27% to 58%.

Player B will hit more often and do more damage when they do hit. They do double the damage of A. They have 40 more HP at 8th and it's not going to be noticed? Even though I picked classes that minimized the disadvantages? Yeah, I would notice, I don't know how you couldn't.

So "stats don't matter" even when they have significant impact on play. As I predicted.

 

[AlViking]

While I agree with your overall stance, I do have to ask why damage output is seen as the primary (or only) measure of balance.

I picked one simple metric because it was easy to calculate. In my scenario B is also better at everything outside of combat as well, not to mention just something as simple as having a far better initiative.