Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 8514475" data-attributes="member: 20564">Your analysis is looking at the wrong thing.&nbsp; 5e cares about specialization.&nbsp; It wants 1 highest, and then 1-2 pretty high scores.But, it also is a team game.&nbsp; You have a +2 or even +3 modifier difference in that prime ability score between the one that rolled best and the one that rolled worst, that's a really big deal.&nbsp; Heck, that takes a rare magic item just to make up that difference in attacks or DCs.&nbsp; Assuming a DM is putting out a challenge for the whole party, the one behind will really feel like they need the math adjustment of the ASI, while the one ahead can either maintain the gap with an ASI of their own, or enhance their character in other ways via feats.So if you want to do an analysis, look at the highest score of each, and then compare to a party of 5 or 6.&nbsp; I think you'll find that a good number of campaigns, definitely more than a quarter of them, would have that sort of issue.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 8514475, member: 20564"] Your analysis is looking at the wrong thing. 5e cares about specialization. It wants 1 highest, and then 1-2 pretty high scores. But, it also is a team game. You have a +2 or even +3 modifier difference in that prime ability score between the one that rolled best and the one that rolled worst, that's a really big deal. Heck, that takes a rare magic item just to make up that difference in attacks or DCs. Assuming a DM is putting out a challenge for the whole party, the one behind will really feel like they need the math adjustment of the ASI, while the one ahead can either maintain the gap with an ASI of their own, or enhance their character in other ways via feats. So if you want to do an analysis, look at the highest score of each, and then compare to a party of 5 or 6. I think you'll find that a good number of campaigns, definitely more than a quarter of them, would have that sort of issue. [/QUOTE]

Verification