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

[Sword of Spirit]

so like, reorient intimidation as your capability to exert authority?

Doesn't have to be valid authority, but it can be. It can also be fear, or just seeming like you are more powerful and should be obeyed.

After I had the idea, I texted a friend about it, then unpaused a show I was watching and immediately saw an example of a failed Intimidation attempt (military officer ordering his second in command to do something else before rescuing his son), followed up by a successful Persuasion attempt (by explaining the reason for the order).

An example from my D&D character is that he had just defeated the leader of a bandit gang in single combat, and then said something like "I'm the boss now!" In that case there was a certain amount of fear involved (and no authority), but in both cases there is the idea of exerting dominance.

 

[ECMO3]

Your argument redefines balance into meaninglessness, and is inconsistent with basic probability theory, basic game design principles, and decades of both observed play and RPG design practice. And it does this with self-defeating claims like "dice make balance impossible" and "rare outcomes don't matter."

The idea of balance is inconsistent with rolling dice and the rules and method of play for D&D and I said so when I first started talking about it on this thread some 10 or so pages back.

You can design a game without dice or other random variables though, and with some houserules you can even play a D&D without dice and that is what you should do if you actually want a balanced game.

Come on Alviking. We’re being asked to accept that mechanics both matter and don’t matter at the same time. And every game with variance is impossible to balance.

It is not impossible to have balanced outcomes, but it is extremely unlikely when variability and variance are as large and dominant as they are in RAW 5E.

If you want to guarantee a balanced game, you need to get rid of dice. If you want a reasonable chance of a balanced game while still having an element of randomness you need to dramatically reduce the amount of variance.

 

[ECMO3]

There isn't much ambiguity in the implication here. That a mechanical bias introduced by attributes is "overwhelmed" by the variance introduced through dice.

Exactly! So reducing that "mechanical bias" to zero does not improve the chance of a balanced outcome.

So I assume you agree with me, that the mechanical bias given by higher attributes does matter, and does impact play.

Absolutely it does and I think I have said so on 4 separate posts on this thread, including one other post that was a reply to you.

That's, of course, unless you want to defend the idea that the mechanical biases only matter sometimes. In which case, I'd love to hear that defense as I can't come up with one myself.

No they always matter. The difference between a 15 and a 16 in an attribute does matter. It just does not significantly change the chance of a balanced outcome in the game.