D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Maxperson]

They also have points, but can't do piercing damage. But don't have reach.

Exactly. There is a level of realism that does not reach mirroring of reality.

Meh. More of the same 'benefits/negatives.' You can see it as a 'sliding scale,' I see it as a double-standard. ;P

It would have to be absolute reality on one end and absolute unreality on the other for it to be a double-standard. All else is a sliding scale between absolute reality, and the absolute chaos of unreality.

Player agency isn't simply getting to do whatever you want, it's making meaningful decisions among viable choices. Balance supports that, rolling undermines balance (but, can't stress this enough: is still /fair/.)

Rolling gives you meaningful decisions among viable choices. They are just different viable choices is all. I still see no loss of player agency.

Ironically, it's not actually possible with point build/array, but could, however unlikely, happen with random rolls.

I rolled straight 14's on one PC many years ago. That was the only time I did that, though.

 

[Maxperson]

So, you're idea of "realism" is to choose a chargen method that will nearly always result in characters that are better than the standard array. Is that correct?

The randomness is what is realism. The higher stats is because my players enjoy high stats, so I give it to them.

See, that's the *ahem* elephant in the room. Die roll methods will almost always result in higher value characters than standard array. For proof, I'd ask you to canvas your groups. Yup, there will be that one guy who has a lower than standard array, but, that's offset by the other nineteen characters that are all higher.

SOME die roll methods will, yes. The vast majority will not ALMOST ALWAYS result in higher values.

 

[Hussar]

No. Not really. Arrays don't allow for the same range of stats as rolled stats, do. Nor do they reflect a realistic array of stats.

What is a "realistic" array of stats?

How is "I'm not only stronger than everyone around me, but, I'm smarter too" realistic? After all, it's not that out of line to get a couple of high rolls.

And, considering that the baseline is the standard array, how is it realistic that the vast majority of adventurers in your method are better than the average, which is already better than the average person. Shouldn't a "realistic" method have much, much greater chances of being below average?

After all, there are LOTS of people who aren't all that strong or smart or charismatic. Yet, every PC is better than that. Usually quite significantly better than that (considering your chargen method is pretty generous). And you're still going to bang the "realistic" drum?

Realistic would be if half your PC's were below the 27 point buy value. But, I'll bet dollars to donuts that that's not true in your game.

 

[Oofta]

No. Not really. Arrays don't allow for the same range of stats as rolled stats, do. Nor do they reflect a realistic array of stats.

I just don't see that. Then again I don't think a character with a 3 stat in any ability would be a viable character and an 18 (before adjustments) is overkill.

If I wanted more variation I would just create different arrays, possibly based on a variant point buy system where all the numbers still added up the same.

Unless a goal of your character generation method is to have some PCs to be better (statistically speaking) than other PCs, I don't see the justification.

 

[Maxperson]

What is a "realistic" array of stats?

Random. People don't realistically all have the same numbers their 6 stats. That's highly unrealistic.

How is "I'm not only stronger than everyone around me, but, I'm smarter too" realistic? After all, it's not that out of line to get a couple of high rolls.

So it's your claim that no strong person in the real world is also smart? If the answer is no, then you are admitting that it is realistic for a few high rolls to model what can happen in a realistic manner. Similarly, a few bad rolls can make someone weak and mentally slow, which is also realistic. Neither type of person had a choice and chose to be strong and smart, or weak and stupid like an array allows.

 

[discosoc]

Rolling stats is fun when you roll well, but I've found that players seem to lose interest in their character if they don't have a good spread (especially if they have a really bad one). It's kind of like, if you're going to argue that random is fun, take the good with the bad. Don't suicide your character for the sake of being able to roll another one just because you don't like your CON score.

I went through that crap in high school. I was part of the problem, because I was one of those that loved my great stats and lost interest with the bad ones. I'd go so far as to roll a second character along with the first bad one, because I *knew* I was going to roleplay him as a brash idiot destined for a quick death.

I do think that in the hands of certain types of roleplayers, random can work. I just also think that for most others, they're simply hoping to get some 18's. The moment I finally opened my eyes to this was actually back when another player rolled an amazing stat spread (two 18's and a bunch of 15+), only to go about 5 levels rolling 1's and 2's on HP. It basically ruined the character for him, so I took it over and retcon'd him as someone who was genetically gifted, etc, yet had some terminal health issue that meant his time was numbered. All his actions had to measured in a balance between the potential he was supposed to have and the reality his body presented. It was a lot of fun, and luckily happened early enough in my RP hobby that I wasn't wasting away as an angry power gamer.

As a result, I'm usually pretty jaded about rolling stats these days, because I see a lot of people who claim to love it and feel like I'm looking at myself 20 years ago.

 

[Maxperson]

I just don't see that. Then again I don't think a character with a 3 stat in any ability would be a viable character and an 18 (before adjustments) is overkill.

While extremely rare, I have seen a viable PC with a 3 in an ability, and a bit of overkill doesn't matter a whole heck of a lot.

If I wanted more variation I would just create different arrays, possibly based on a variant point buy system where all the numbers still added up the same.

Which is fine, but still doesn't represent the realism that random chance offers.

Unless a goal of your character generation method is to have some PCs to be better (statistically speaking) than other PCs, I don't see the justification.

PCs variance mattering much is largely smoke and mirrors. A smart fighter doesn't get a whole lot out of intelligence, nor does a strong wizard. The few extra pluses also don't prevent other PCs from being amazing at the game.

 

[Maxperson]

A few of you guys here like to abuse the laugh button. You need to re-read the ToS. If it happens again, I will report it.

 

[ccs]

I've been playing D&D and other RPGs for 25 years starting with 2e. Sure I rolled stats, and rolled them for various other games as well. You know why I prefer point buy? 1. it saves time. 2. you don't have to make stupid rules for people to get good rolls. 3. everyone can play what they want to play, because there will be no way they won't be locked out of a class for not having stats (Paladins were the worst). 4. You don't get overpowered characters. 5. No need to roll 6 characters because the 1st 5 were s#itty. 6. you really won't need a session 0, because it only takes a few mins to make a character.

1) Saving time - not concerned about this. There's no set amount of stuff we've got to accomplish in any given session.

2) I have no such stupid rules. My rule on rolling is simple. You keep what you roll & you play the result in good faith because you chose to gamble. If you're not OK with that? Use PB or Standard Array.

3) Not possible in 5e. There are no stat restrictions to classes. And the stat restrictions in 1e/2e were there to enforce things like flavor, rarity, & elite status.

4) I'm the DM, you let ME worry about those supposedly OP characters. It'll turn out alright.

5) S#itty characters occur regardless of the stats they have.

6) You should always have a session zero. How much of it you devote to stat generation is variable.

Just because something is tradition, doesn't always make it good. Which is why all of you "rollers" are using special house rules for your rolling and not a single one of you are rolling straight 3d6 and take the result which is what it's supposed to be.

1st: Not the rule here in 5e. Read your PHB. Page 13 specifically. Top left column, first several paragraphs.

2nd: We rolled 3d6 straight between Christmas 1980 through about the summer of '82. After that we'd drifted into 1e. And there's been multiple methods listed in books ever since. I think we've tried all of them + some more.
Somewhere between '86-'89 though we settled on 4d6/drop lowest/keep what you roll & arrange. Don't know when exactly, but it was before 2e came out it's the method that stuck & pleased the most people.

I have literally sar at a table, asked everyone what they were playing and made a character in 10 mins and was ready to play with point buy on multiple occasions. It's just simple.

So? Every experienced gamer has done that with their preferred generation system.

 

[neogod22]

1) Saving time - not concerned about this. There's no set amount of stuff we've got to accomplish in any given session.

2) I have no such stupid rules. My rule on rolling is simple. You keep what you roll & you play the result in good faith because you chose to gamble. If you're not OK with that? Use PB or Standard Array.

3) Not possible in 5e. There are no stat restrictions to classes. And the stat restrictions in 1e/2e were there to enforce things like flavor, rarity, & elite status.

4) I'm the DM, you let ME worry about those supposedly OP characters. It'll turn out alright.

5) S#itty characters occur regardless of the stats they have.

6) You should always have a session zero. How much of it you devote to stat generation is variable.



1st: Not the rule here in 5e. Read your PHB. Page 13 specifically. Top left column, first several paragraphs.

2nd: We rolled 3d6 straight between Christmas 1980 through about the summer of '82. After that we'd drifted into 1e. And there's been multiple methods listed in books ever since. I think we've tried all of them + some more.
Somewhere between '86-'89 though we settled on 4d6/drop lowest/keep what you roll & arrange. Don't know when exactly, but it was before 2e came out it's the method that stuck & pleased the most people.




So? Every experienced gamer has done that with their preferred generation system.

Do you people just quote me for a response? Good for you. Someone already said that. You're late to the party.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk