D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Oofta]

....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.

Can't speak for anybody else, but for me it's both. Sure, when I was as teenager I wanted super high stats, but nowadays? Now I don't want to outshine everyone simply because I have better numbers.

I want to show off how brilliant I am by building a character with point buy that dominates combat anyway.

 

[Caliban]

....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.

I don't think I "protest to much" - I've been pretty up front about the fact that the major turn off for me with random is my paranoid belief that dice hate me.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't think I "protest to much" - I've been pretty up front about the fact that the major turn off for me with random is my paranoid belief that dice hate me.

Someone I used to game with had a creative, if extreme, solution to this:

Take the worst-offending die and put it on a concrete slab somewhere
Line up all the other dice so they can see what happens next
Use a blowtorch to melt the offending die into a little puddle....

 

[Lanefan]

Can't speak for anybody else, but for me it's both. Sure, when I was as teenager I wanted super high stats, but nowadays? Now I don't want to outshine everyone simply because I have better numbers.

I want to show off how brilliant I am by building a character with point buy that dominates combat anyway.

And System Mastery(TM) is a game I absolutely don't want to play.

I'll take me chances with the dice...

 

[Oofta]

And System Mastery(TM) is a game I absolutely don't want to play.

I'll take me chances with the dice...

Yeah, it was an attempt at humor. Honestly, I don't min-max much or look up "optimal" builds or any such thing. We have a guy in our current group that is always stretching things to the breaking point and then pouts if the DM decides to rule against their interpretation of the rules (usually some edge case used to justify cheese). But yeah, he's the guy that does the multi class warlock/cleric that somehow has the save DCs for his spells in the 20s and so on and so forth. Not my style.

If my character is fun to play and works well with the group, it's a good character.

At the same time I do want my character to be good at their job whether that's being a front-line tank or a support cleric.

 

[Caliban]

And System Mastery(TM) is a game I absolutely don't want to play.

I'll take me chances with the dice...

For me, the "System Mastery" game is the major thing that attracts me to point buy. I enjoy the feeling of coming up with a "build", then creating a background for the character that explains "in universe" what experiences and choices the character would make that lead to whatever combination of abilities, spells, and skills that comprise the build. Or come up with a background and craft a build that optimizes it. It just gives me a sense of accomplishment when I see all the moving parts in action and they work the way I expect them too. Not trying to break the game, just to do something unusual or different. (My most powerful character is probably my single class lvl 15 Tiefling Warlock.)

It is simply more enjoyable for me.

I don't have a problem with other people preferring Random Stats. I just have a problem when they act as if that method is somehow superior and subtlety (or blatantly) imply that "you just haven't been doing it right" if you don't enjoy Random Stats as much as they do. And then come up with utterly ridiculous rationalizations to "prove" it.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

That's not control.

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.

Just........wow! I should expect a 1 in 5517 chance to happen? I've been playing for about 34 years and I'd be surprised if I rolled up 500 PCs, and certainly not more than 1000. Even if I go with the upper end of 1000, it would be 120ish more years before I could expect that to have happened ONCE. So yeah, it's freaking slim.

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.

The rules specify rolling for. The rolling rules are in the PHB. Unless you're suggesting that the PHB is for players only, those rules are also for the DM and his NPCs. I hope you aren't suggesting that, though, since it hasn't been true for any edition of the game yet. I suppose you could also be suggesting that the designers were too stupid to put the rolling rules for NPCs into the game, yet told you to roll anyway. Which one is it?

 

[Parmandur]

Point buy and the array aren't fun to me: however, trusting people to roll at home is silly. Enforce the rules, watch the the rolls and let the dice lay where they fall. Mo' random is mo' better.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

Not only is it not persuasive, it wasn't even my argument!! It takes no more skill to roll low than high, but then I didn't say that it did. What DOES take more skill is to be successful with low stats, which is something only rolling allows for(by RAW(yes I know how you feel about that)). The skill involved with system mastery in point buy is miniscule compared to rolling low. The skill is over and done with in a very, very small fraction of the game, where low stats is for most or all of the campaign.

 

[Maxperson]

Point buy and the array aren't fun to me: however, trusting people to roll at home is silly. Enforce the rules, watch the the rolls and let the dice lay where they fall. Mo' random is mo' better.

Or just play with people you trust. My players have on occasion rolled without me, and the numbers I get are proof positive that they don't cheat. I get many more average and low stat rolls than high ones, as you'd expect.