D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Tony Vargas]

commented earlier about D&D not doing the sidekick role very well. I'm not sure I agree. 5e has a number of "support" character options.

Sure, three full casters and the Palladin.

 

[Maxperson]

Which is only an issue because you insist on the straw man argument that commoners must all have ability scores,

That's just simple logic and reading comprehension. Unless you are suggesting that they are all dead, paralyzed, and in a persistent vegitative state, they have strength, con, wisdom, etc. That means that they have ability scores, whether you know those scores or not. That's logic. The rules also say that they have stats. There is nowhere in the 5e rules that says that they don't have stats, or that you can choose whether or not they have stats. There's a part that says they don't need combat stats, but ability scores are not combat stats. There's a section about choosing qualities, but that doesn't mean that they don't have stats. There's blurb that says you don't need to roll ability scores, but again, that doesn't mean that they don't have them. It just means that you can choose not to know the numbers of those ability scores that the NPCs possess, and just use descriptors.

Not one thing in 5e suggests that NPCs don't have ability scores.

and that the ability scores must be generated using 3d6.

More reading issues? I've never once insisted that anyone else roll NPC stats at all, let alone 3d6. You know this since we've discussed it for many pages, so I'm going to issue you a "Put up or shut up" challenge. Quote me saying that other people must roll 3d6 for stats or be silent on that issue when talking to or about me.

 

[Maxperson]

Or let me turn that around. What value does it add to have some PCs be significantly worse at their roles than others?

Realism has value.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh, and as far as the gambling, maybe that's part of why I don't like rolling. I hate gambling. It's a stupid waste of money, and I see no entertainment value whatsoever.

Of course I'm also the guy that went to Vegas (not my choice) with $200 to gamble and lost everything without ever winning one dime so I'm biased. Games of pure chance? I lose every single game. They just aren't fun.

Give me a game of skill every time. I may not win, but I generally have a better than even chance.

That's why I play poker and other card games, and not things like craps, slots and roulette. I like games of skill, not chance as well.

Rolling stats doesn't remove an iota of the skill from D&D, though. In fact, it highlights the skill more if I roll poorly, than any point buy or array ever will. If I can use my skill to do well with low stats, I'm doing better than someone doing just as well with higher stats.

 

[Hriston]

There are no numbers whatsoever prior to rolling, so when I pick rolling I have picked no numbers.

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that by rolling you are picking whatever numbers result from the roll.

Other than a colossal coincidence, nothing.

It isn't that much of a coincidence. It's actually one of the most likely results of rolling 4d6 drop lowest.

No, but that's what the 5e rules give all NPCs, which includes commoners, to roll.

No, 4d6 drop lowest is given to determine the ability scores of adventurers, not commoners.

 

[Maxperson]

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that by rolling you are picking whatever numbers result from the roll.

Not if you know how to look at things it isn't. You quite literally cannot pick a number that you had no control over and goes on the sheet whether you want it there or not.

It isn't that much of a coincidence. It's actually one of the most likely results of rolling 4d6 drop lowest.

The odds of rolling exactly 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 out of 6 rolls is slim.

No, 4d6 drop lowest is given to determine the ability scores of adventurers, not commoners.

There is nothing that says that 4d6-L is only for adventurers. Only that adventurers roll that during creation, which is not the same thing.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Just because it's been 25 years since Lafayette High and 20 since moving to Los Angeles doesn't mean I've forgotten!

Bishop DuBourg, then South County Technical High School when I wore out my welcome....

 

[OB1]

How is it a false choice? No, the results are not uniform - after all the points/array are assigned to different stats. And, with point buy, there are 60 ish different iterations of those numbers (as was shown earlier in this thread). Even with standard array, there are hundreds of different combinations. True, that's less than what you'd have with random. Absolutely. And a whole lot less to be fair.

But, I'm not seeing how the results can be considered uniform.

So, maybe a bit of hyperbole on my part in response to the /snark of the original comment, but isn't the point of point buy/ array to produce tightly constrained results in the name of balance/fairness? The typical result that you get from point buy has your prime attack and secondary stat at +3, resulting in very similar attack and damage options regardless of the class you choose.

That being said, the 5e system I think does a great job of offering real and difficult choices when you use point buy, making sure that you are always giving up at least one thing you want in order to get something else. What you put your 3rd and 4th stats into does make a difference in how the character plays. As does what you decide to dump.

But compared to rolling, the variance is minuscule. Whether that is a feature or a bug is up to the personal tastes of the players making the decision.

 

[Hriston]

You quite literally cannot pick a number that you had no control over and goes on the sheet whether you want it there or not.

I think this is splitting hairs, but the dice do give you a certain degree of control over the outcome. You know you won't roll a 1 or 2, for example. You know you're going to get a number in the 3-18 range at the frequency those numbers appear when you use that method. In that way you're picking those numbers and not picking other numbers.

The odds of rolling exactly 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 out of 6 rolls is slim.

Well, the odds of rolling up the standard array are about 1 in 5517, which seem pretty slim. But when you consider the odds of getting the most likely outcome of 4d6 drop lowest: 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 9, which is about 1 in 4400, and that the vast majority of other results is far less likely, it isn't much of a coincidence when the standard array results. It should sort of be expected.

There is nothing that says that 4d6-L is only for adventurers. Only that adventurers roll that during creation, which is not the same thing.

I agree with that. What I don't agree with is your statement that, by the rules, all NPCs for which you roll abilities use 4d6 drop lowest. The rules don't specify a rolling method for NPCs, unless you're also giving them a class from the PHB.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Rolling stats doesn't remove an iota of the skill from D&D, though. In fact, it highlights the skill more if I roll poorly, than any point buy or array ever will. If I can use my skill to do well with low stats, I'm doing better than someone doing just as well with higher stats.

So, let me get this straight: rolling low requires more skill, but rolling high doesn't require less? And, somehow, having more degrees of freedom and opportunities to apply system mastery in point-buy /doesn't/ showcase skill any more than just arranging six random numbers?

That's not very persuasive.

So, maybe a bit of hyperbole on my part in response to the /snark of the original comment, but isn't the point of point buy/ array to produce tightly constrained results in the name of balance/fairness?

Not tightly constrained, no. Standard Array is more tightly constrained. But better-balanced than random, sure.

The typical result that you get from point buy has your prime attack and secondary stat at +3, resulting in very similar attack and damage options regardless of the class you choose.

Identical proficiency for all classes has a more significant impact, I think. That and the 15 cap on point-buy.
You're vanishingly unlikely to roll a random character that has a 13 or less as it's best stat (and likely to be allowed a re-roll if you do), so, high stat in your primary, +2 racial, and you're at the same +5 with proficiency as the point-buy character with a pre-racial 15, if you can't manage a single stat over 13 on six rolls of 4d6, and your DM's too much of a hard case to let you re-roll, you're at +4, post-racial + Prof, instead. OTOH, if you roll a 16-18, you're ahead. The variance seems to be more in one direction, as well as greater, for random....


....hmmmm: I can't help but noticing that folks advocating for random like to emphasize how random can give you lower stats, while those advocating against it point out that it can deliver higher stats. But, it seems like both are 'protesting too much.' If you'd rather use random, you're probably hoping to roll well, and if you'd rather not, you're probably afraid you'll roll badly.