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

[Lanefan]

But it did point out a certain .... unfairness, and made for a helluva time planning encounters. I do think I'd be better today as a more mature geezer, but ... let's hold onto that thought for a second.


^^^
That's what I had to deal with as a result of a randomly generated Glock, tho. And I had to deal with it at fifth-seventh level. I'm going back into the grey matter hard, here, but IIRC, at sixth level, Glock was pushing 76 hp or something obscene, and overusing the thinky bits, I think the next in line was Ronwind in the mid-forties, and then the various rangers, with the nature cleric and bard holding up the back end of the bus in the mid-thirties.

In redesigning the wheel, I've gone with the 5e idea of d6 for the squishies.

But you raise an interesting concern for which there may be a simple solution: cap dice earlier for fighters and let the squishes get dice until 12/14th level?

Right now the crew I'm running range from a Fighter with just over 100 h.p. all the way down to a Thief-Illusionist who is in the low 30s I think. Level range is about 8th-11th; what really makes the group tough to scare is their massive healing resources: in a party of nine (including henches) they've got 28 levels worth of Nature Cleric and a 7th-8th Fighter-Cleric as well, plus devices.

Lets them punch way above their weight sometimes, that's for sure.

As for the idea of capping hit dice at different levels, one of the relatively few things the warrior types consistently have going for them at higher levels is lots of hit points, I wouldn't want to take that away from them.

 

[Thomas Shey]

For the record I would allow you to lower your Wisdom score to anything less than what you rolled. But your not getting anything for it. I detest dump scores.°

° Low scores are not dump scores. Dump scores are scores that are low in order to make other scores high.

If you've got an array setup that sets at least one score sub-normal, I don't know what to call placing that score in the place it will least matter other than a dump score. Its "dumping" the low stat after all.

 

[Moving Pictures]

Right now the crew I'm running range from a Fighter with just over 100 h.p. all the way down to a Thief-Illusionist who is in the low 30s I think. Level range is about 8th-11th; what really makes the group tough to scare is their massive healing resources: in a party of nine (including henches) they've got 28 levels worth of Nature Cleric and a 7th-8th Fighter-Cleric as well, plus devices.

Lets them punch way above their weight sometimes, that's for sure.

As for the idea of capping hit dice at different levels, one of the relatively few things the warrior types consistently have going for them at higher levels is lots of hit points, I wouldn't want to take that away from them.

How the frig does a high level (10-ish) character only have 30 hp?

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

If you've got an array setup that sets at least one score sub-normal, I don't know what to call placing that score in the place it will least matter other than a dump score. Its "dumping" the low stat after all.

"...in the place it will least matter..."

Yeah, I agree. It's like dumping the trash; we're dumping the low score somewhere we can forget about it. Because we're dumping it in an Ability that will least matter, that's what makes it a dump score rather than simply a low score.

One way to avoid dump scores is the Classic method of rolling scores in order. This way, we remove our ability to choose where the low score goes. In the analogy above, our trash goes on the ground, and we have to live with it just blowing around in the wind as litter. But, I'm not advocating for that.

Don't get me wrong, creating a random character is fun, but most of the time we want to create specific characters: fighters, clerics, goliath bards, etc. So we allow ourselves to rearrange the scores, and then we are faced with the dump score problem. Take for instance the Standarard Array; we're faced with that low score of 8. It doesn't matter what specific vision we have for our character--it's going to have a low Ability. Many times I've faced this dilemma, haven't you? I mean, when faced with where to place this score I'm thinking I didn't really imagine this character as stupid, or weak, or sickly, but I guess it'll have to be.

Point Buy has the same problem. It's a case of arranging the Points rather than the Scores themselves. And when we apply optimization guidelines to the arrangements we are usually left with 2 or 3 pretty low scores. So we place them in 2 or 3 Abilities that matter the least. Not that they don't matter, they just matter less than other scores, so we "dump" them by choosing to spend less points on them even though they started at 8 to begin with. Even if we don't apply optimization guidelines we usually run low on points after we distibute them to the scores we're focused on.

Rearrangement of Scores and arrangement of Points generally forces us to pigeon hole our characters into predictable archetypes: Dumb, daft, or dull fighters; weak or weak-willed wizards, etc. We have to try really hard with Point Buy to avoid these predictable characters because we only have 65 options, of which about 2/3rds are sub-optimal.

Now we also have the opposite problem when it comes to rolling scores in order. What if we imagined our character is very sickly but we rolled a 15 in Constitution and the lowest score we rolled in the set was a 10? I would allow you to lower your Constitution score to any value below 15, but this does not impact any other scores. If I wanted a sickly character I'd probably lower the score to 6 or 7. This may be a low score but it is not a dump score.

Low scores are low; dump scores are lower so that another score can be higher.

 

[Lanefan]

How the frig does a high level (10-ish) character only have 30 hp?

Thief-Illusionist rolls d5 (average of d6 and d4). 10 of those would average exactly 30, meaning if the rolls were just a slight bit below average overall it'd be in the mid-high 20s, with the body points (usually 3 or 4) taking it to around 30.

Con bonus for this character isn't a thing, she's a spindly Elf.

 

[CleverNickName]

Low scores are low; dump scores are lower so that another score can be higher.

This is an excellent point.

 

[Thomas Shey]

"...in the place it will least matter..."

Yeah, I agree. It's like dumping the trash; we're dumping the low score somewhere we can forget about it. Because we're dumping it in an Ability that will least matter, that's what makes it a dump score rather than simply a low score.

One way to avoid dump scores is the Classic method of rolling scores in order. This way, we remove our ability to choose where the low score goes. In the analogy above, our trash goes on the ground, and we have to live with it just blowing around in the wind as litter. But, I'm not advocating for that.

Well, yeah, if you have no control over where attributes land, its going to be hard to do that. Two things though: since you don't do other elements of character design until after that roll, there's probably some class or other character structure that can be fit around the cruddy attribute (though in particular with D&Doids, by the time attributes actual meant things, a crud Con was bad for pretty much everybody); secondly, all that really does is push people who care toward the swordbush solution.

Don't get me wrong, creating a random character is fun, but most of the time we want to create specific characters: fighters, clerics, goliath bards, etc. So we allow ourselves to rearrange the scores, and then we are faced with the dump score problem. Take for instance the Standarard Array; we're faced with that low score of 8. It doesn't matter what specific vision we have for our character--it's going to have a low Ability. Many times I've faced this dilemma, haven't you? I mean, when faced with where to place this score I'm thinking I didn't really imagine this character as stupid, or weak, or sickly, but I guess it'll have to be.

Well, I'm not sure when, if ever, I've used an array as a player. Most of the games I've played do some variation of point assignment or similar structures. As such, its been a very long time since I had to deal with a low attribute if I didn't want to. At worst I've had to decide if I really wanted a high attribute how I was going to pay for it (and with some games there's only so low you're allowed to push an attribute).

Point Buy has the same problem. It's a case of arranging the Points rather than the Scores themselves. And when we apply optimization guidelines to the arrangements we are usually left with 2 or 3 pretty low scores. So we place them in 2 or 3 Abilities that matter the least. Not that they don't matter, they just matter less than other scores, so we "dump" them by choosing to spend less points on them even though they started at 8 to begin with. Even if we don't apply optimization guidelines we usually run low on points after we distibute them to the scores we're focused on.

That one I've seen, though I'm usually more tolerant of good-but-not-great scores than some people are, so the problem is not severe in cases where I'm the one building the character. I mean I'm tolerant of having a modifier point lower than it could be forced to in PF2e, and it has a lot more impact there than in a lot of games because of how crits and fumbles are handled.

But honestly, my feeling about having some mediocre scores is that if you're having a serious problem there, you're playing in a game with a point distribution budget that isn't entirely congruent with what you want and, well, surprise when you're out of sync with a significant element of a game or campaign, there's going to be problems.

Rearrangement of Scores and arrangement of Points generally forces us to pigeon hole our characters into predictable archetypes: Dumb, daft, or dull fighters; weak or weak-willed wizards, etc. We have to try really hard with Point Buy to avoid these predictable characters because we only have 65 options, of which about 2/3rds are sub-optimal.

Now we also have the opposite problem when it comes to rolling scores in order. What if we imagined our character is very sickly but we rolled a 15 in Constitution and the lowest score we rolled in the set was a 10? I would allow you to lower your Constitution score to any value below 15, but this does not impact any other scores. If I wanted a sickly character I'd probably lower the score to 6 or 7. This may be a low score but it is not a dump score.

Low scores are low; dump scores are lower so that another score can be higher.

Sure. I was just noting that with arrays, something is going to get put there, so a dump stat is in a sense, unavoidable.

 

[Moving Pictures]

One way to avoid dump scores is the Classic method of rolling scores in order. This way, we remove our ability to choose where the low score goes. In the analogy above, our trash goes on the ground, and we have to live with it just blowing around in the wind as litter. But, I'm not advocating for that.

But that removes player agency. So I roll
14
7
12
16
9
9

Won't be playing the mage I had my heart on. I'm limited to fighter, maybe a thief... but I just finished a campaign where I did that and I wanna try something else....

Point Buy has the same problem. It's a case of arranging the Points rather than the Scores themselves. And when we apply optimization guidelines to the arrangements we are usually left with 2 or 3 pretty low scores. So we place them in 2 or 3 Abilities that matter the least. Not that they don't matter, they just matter less than other scores, so we "dump" them by choosing to spend less points on them even though they started at 8 to begin with. Even if we don't apply optimization guidelines we usually run low on points after we distibute them to the scores we're focused on.

Solution: start with "average" values. A human in my system has all 11's, can't subtract. But at least there's choice on where to put the points, and now - hey, wanna play a mage? Skookum.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

Well, we're talking past each other here so let's clear that up.

First, I don't advocate for the Classic method. Random characters generated through the Classic method are fun to make and play, but we have to be willing to relinquish our agency as Players in this part of the game. I like it sometimes, but most of the time I'm trying to create something more specific: a fighter or bard maybe; so, the Classic method is not great for this.*

I advocate for the Dice Point method (as well as other methods that combine the control of Point Buy with the diversity of the Standard method of rolling). In the Dice Point method we spend points to protect scores from the vicissitudes of dice by gaining a measure control over them. We also roll dice to generate the scores in order. This elminates dump scores because the points we spend can only make scores higher--we cannot make them lower, the dice do that.

Now, if we set the lowest score to 11 and use our points to buy up from there, then we have 1,716 possible combinations of scores. That eliminates 52,548 other possibilities out of the total of 54,264. I don't think 1,716 is enough for me. Maybe, but I don't think so.

Now that number, 1,716 is significant. It is the same as the number of combinations that are evaluatable by the Point Buy method: from 0 points (8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8) to 54 points (15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15). I think it's just a coincidence.


* Although it can be a lot of fun to make it work. One improvement that has come with modern Dungeons and Dragons is that there are no minimum requirements; you can make a wizard with a 7 Intelligence if you want.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Don't get me wrong, creating a random character is fun, but most of the time we want to create specific characters: fighters, clerics, goliath bards, etc. So we allow ourselves to rearrange the scores, and then we are faced with the dump score problem. Take for instance the Standarard Array; we're faced with that low score of 8. It doesn't matter what specific vision we have for our character--it's going to have a low Ability. Many times I've faced this dilemma, haven't you? I mean, when faced with where to place this score I'm thinking I didn't really imagine this character as stupid, or weak, or sickly, but I guess it'll have to be.

This is where I interpret ability scores a lot different than most people do. I spent a little bit of time a few years ago clearly defining what the numbers mean. Here's how I do it:

8-13 = Average range. People won't notice the difference with casual contact. If you spend a lot of time with someone, you'll be able to tell the difference between your friend with an 8 and your friend with a 13, but you likely won't notice the difference between you friend with a 10 and your friend with a 13, or your friend with an 8 and your friend with an 11 unless you are really into assessing people.
6-7 and 14-15 = Below/Above average. Observant people will notice that you are clearly bright, strong, agile, personable/charming (or the opposite), etc with a bit of interaction, but you won't stand out in a room of people.
4-5 and 16-17 = Exceptional. You will stand out with any interaction. Everyone will notice.
3 and 18+ = Radiant. You will stand out from across the room. If you walk down the street with that 19 Charisma you can't hide it. That 18 Intelligence will be seen just in your gaze, etc. Constitution and Wisdom are the two that aren't as easily noticeable as the others.

8 is technically below average, but not meaningfully so. You can lift a few less pounds, or your IQ is 97, etc. I think the main reason we've come to see 8 as actually being bad in that area is because you aren't allowed to go lower than that with point buy, and it seems weird for the game to say "unless you use point buy, your character can't have any innate weaknesses in their ability scores"...but, I mean, the way I see it that is what they are saying.

In older editions 3 was a valid score you could have. It was the lowest you could have for a playable character, but it was enough for you to lift your own weight, move across a battlefield without tripping, not pick up a disease and die in your first week adventuring, be able to process information in a manner to allow meaningful moral judgment (ie, alignment), not get lost trying to cross a battlefield, and not immediately be chased away by any NPC you ran into. Yeah, 3 is as low as you can go, and you can really play it up, but you can play it. And everything between 3 and 8 is a range of low scores you could role-play differently.