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

[TwoSix]

Do ability scores matter? I think they do.
Do they matter as much as some folks say they do? I don't think so.

Well, sure. But "matter" is kind of a limp word without any definable metric. Of course we're all going to disagree on that.

 

[AlViking]

You lost me here. Which extra bonuses are you talking about?

The bonuses you mention like advantage/disadvantage, lucky and so on.

I used an attack roll as an example but I could have just as easily used Athletics checks or Strength saves. It's going to be the same number, adjusted by as much as +/- 20 points completely at random, then compared to a moving target set by the DM.


That's not what I'm trying to say. I'll summarize:

Do ability scores matter? I think they do.
Do they matter as much as some folks say they do? I don't think so.

For an individual swing it may not matter, it significantly matters over the course of an entire session or campaign. I agree that a +1 or even a +2 matters as much as some people think. But if we're talking about balance and methods to generate ability scores we need to look at probabilities and how often you're going to get results like the one I got. The possibility of getting significant difference in ability scores across the board with 4d6dl is far too high and despite people claiming it doesn't "really" happen I've seen it. My example is from 10 tables of 5 so it's not that uncommon and that was just the worst offender I saw while glancing through the results.

I think reasonably close ability scores, and not just for the primary stat, makes for a better game.

 

[CleverNickName]

Well, sure. But "matter" is kind of a limp word without any definable metric. Of course we're all going to disagree on that.

And let's not gloss over my use of passive voice either ("I think," "I don't think," "I believe," etc.) I was never trying to define a metric.

 

[CleverNickName]

For an individual swing it may not matter

That's all I was trying to say, really. When you make a roll, that d20 doesn't "see" how many attack rolls you have made so far in the campaign, and how many times it rolled a 3 or whatever. It will always return a number between 1 and 20, no matter what the last roll was.

The other bonuses you mention aren't always applied evenly (you can get advantage on an attack roll more easily than you can on a save throw, for example) but even if they were, the target changes. You might always be making the same save throw with the same bonus, but it's not always going to be against DC 12, for example. In most cases, the DM has more influence over your result than Advantage, Inspiration, etc. will have.

So yes, I think ability scores are important, but I don't think they are as important as some folks say.

 

[Yaarel]

Is the current point buy system balanced? No, but if the highest value available is a 15 score, it doesnt really matter, and isnt really abusable.

The main thing is, D&D has evolved beyond the math of the original 3d6 score generation. Today the values are considered in their own right, according how they balance within the game engine.

Example after background modifications, the following resulting arrays feel about equally worthwhile depending on the character concept.

+2, +2, +2, +2, +2, +2
+3, +1, +0, +0, +0, +0

For pointbuy generally, moderate high scores should be cheaper, and high scores should be much more expensive.

This is why I prefer the array for character generation. I offer three arrays, each about equally desirable. Players choose whichever makes sense for their character.

 

[TwoSix]

It's pretty wild how this thread has gone from "Are the differences between 2 distinct 27 point buy arrays meaningful for balance" to "actually, using a d20 means nothing is ever balanced". That's more variance than a d100!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It's pretty wild how this thread has gone from "Are the differences between 2 distinct 27 point buy arrays meaningful for balance" to "actually, using a d20 means nothing is ever balanced". That's more variance than a d100!

Just a reminder that some people might have an Int 18 and Expertise with the Game Mechanics skill, but they could still roll a 1!

 

[Lanefan]

Individual rolls will be random. Long term averages will be the same if the ability scores are the same. Individual rolls do not matter.

Short-term trends in rolls, however, can lead to something of a butterfly effect with long-term consequences.

Consider this example, which I don't think is the least bit far-fetched:

You and I start out playing two characters, mechanically-identical in every way including starting gear and xp, in the same party. In the field we meet some nasty foes intent on capturing anyone they can (for whatever reason, not relevant here). Your dice get on a hot streak for that encounter; you beat your foes, evade capture, and get away. My dice, on the other hand, run cold; and my character gets beaten up and captured.

While in captivity I can't do much, so minimal xp and no treasure for me while I'm there. You, on the other hand, carry on adventuring; let's say you go back to town, recruit some more people (including my replacement PC!), then come back, beat the adventure, and successfully rescue my original character along with any other captives. In so doing you've quite reasonably earned xp (or a level or two) and gained treasure-reputation-etc. along the way which I have not, meaning our originally game-identical characters are now not identical at all.

And all of this disparity stems from a brief run of rolls in the encounter where I got captured.

Further, even had we not been game-identical to start with (i.e. our rolled stats were highly disparate) the same sequence could just as easily have occurred: my character with a stat average of 15.2 gets captured while yours with the stat average of 11.5 gets away, and by the time they meet again you're two levels higher than I am and rocking considerably better gear as well.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Short-term trends in rolls, however, can lead to something of a butterfly effect with long-term consequences.

Consider this example, which I don't think is the least bit far-fetched:

You and I start out playing two characters, mechanically-identical in every way including starting gear and xp, in the same party. In the field we meet some nasty foes intent on capturing anyone they can (for whatever reason, not relevant here). Your dice get on a hot streak for that encounter; you beat your foes, evade capture, and get away. My dice, on the other hand, run cold; and my character gets beaten up and captured.

While in captivity I can't do much, so minimal xp and no treasure for me while I'm there. You, on the other hand, carry on adventuring; let's say you go back to town, recruit some more people (including my replacement PC!), then come back, beat the adventure, and successfully rescue my original character along with any other captives. In so doing you've quite reasonably earned xp (or a level or two) and gained treasure-reputation-etc. along the way which I have not, meaning our originally game-identical characters are now not identical at all.

And all of this disparity stems from a brief run of rolls in the encounter where I got captured.

Further, even had we not been game-identical to start with (i.e. our rolled stats were highly disparate) the same sequence could just as easily have occurred: my character with a stat average of 15.2 gets captured while yours with the stat average of 11.5 gets away, and by the time they meet again you're two levels higher than I am and rocking considerably better gear as well.

that a character would be removed from the group for that long for such an experience divide to arise between the characters (and that you're tracking individual character XP totals in the first place) feels like like contrived arguments chosen specifically to attempt to poke holes IMO.

i know that some people still play that way but it feels far from the norm nowadays.

 

[AlViking]

Short-term trends in rolls, however, can lead to something of a butterfly effect with long-term consequences.

Consider this example, which I don't think is the least bit far-fetched:

You and I start out playing two characters, mechanically-identical in every way including starting gear and xp, in the same party. In the field we meet some nasty foes intent on capturing anyone they can (for whatever reason, not relevant here). Your dice get on a hot streak for that encounter; you beat your foes, evade capture, and get away. My dice, on the other hand, run cold; and my character gets beaten up and captured.

While in captivity I can't do much, so minimal xp and no treasure for me while I'm there. You, on the other hand, carry on adventuring; let's say you go back to town, recruit some more people (including my replacement PC!), then come back, beat the adventure, and successfully rescue my original character along with any other captives. In so doing you've quite reasonably earned xp (or a level or two) and gained treasure-reputation-etc. along the way which I have not, meaning our originally game-identical characters are now not identical at all.

And all of this disparity stems from a brief run of rolls in the encounter where I got captured.

Further, even had we not been game-identical to start with (i.e. our rolled stats were highly disparate) the same sequence could just as easily have occurred: my character with a stat average of 15.2 gets captured while yours with the stat average of 11.5 gets away, and by the time they meet again you're two levels higher than I am and rocking considerably better gear as well.

I don't really care about Putzy the Poor one time got lucky and rolled better than Grognard the Great. The only reason Putzy's story stands out was that even though the odds are low there's that 1 in 100 chance they'll stand out. Grognard is still the star of the show 99% of the time. It was fun when my 6 charisma dwarf (he was literally hit with the ugly stick) rolled a 20 in a performance contest and the bard rolled a 1, but most of the time both of us were good at our respective rolls.

In any case it's all just preference.