D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I'll grant Oofta tossed out 'to each his own' at the end, but I'm hear'n the 1TW from both of you, there...

I'm not saying there's one true way to play the game, but I see the word hero used waaaaaaay too often and inappropriately.

Newscaster: "He picked up the toddler walking by himself and took him into the store. He's a hero!"

People: "Everyone in the armed forces is a hero!"

And so on.

A hero is a hero because they were at serious risk and acted anyway. If there's not a serious risk, there's really not heroism going on. There was no risk going on with the toddler. Was he a good guy? Yep, but not a hero. The same with people who joined the armed forces and don't go to war. The guy dropping drones on people from the middle of Nebraska isn't a hero.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Oofta

Legend
Not by me you haven't, so there was no cause for to throw "one true way" into my teeth the way you did. I just tossed it back at you in a humorous manner is all.

So ...
It is your bad. It's extremely bad of you to think that there is one true way to play D&D. Give up on that idea and it won't bug you so much that you don't know it. Set yourself free!

Sure seems like a slam.

It may not have been meant that way, and I get it. Tone and intent doesn't always carry.

End of the day we simply have different preferences. I don't see any benefits and only negatives to rolling (that could not be easily duplicated with point buy or arrays). For the umpteenth time, that doesn't mean you're doing it wrong because you use an option I would not.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
End of the day we simply have different preferences. I don't see any benefits and only negatives to rolling (that could not be easily duplicated with point buy or arrays). For the umpteenth time, that doesn't mean you're doing it wrong because you use an option I would not.
Realism and lack of control(full or partial) are benefits that you can't get through point buy or arrays, but they are benefits that might seem like negatives to some.
 

Realism and lack of control(full or partial) are benefits that you can't get through point buy or arrays, but they are benefits that might seem like negatives to some.
Sure. 'Realism' is contrary to genre - not just in the indisputable magic-isn't-real sense, either - protagonists tend to be a /lot/ better than the average in genre (and rolling anything other than 3d6 in order acknowledges that, actually). Lack of control over the what character you end up playing undermines player agency.


I don't see any benefits and only negatives to rolling (that could not be easily duplicated with point buy or arrays).
The difference is in the subtle distinction between fairness & balance. Rolling reduces balance, while still being fair.
 
Last edited:

Oofta

Legend
Realism and lack of control(full or partial) are benefits that you can't get through point buy or arrays, but they are benefits that might seem like negatives to some.

I get that people like playing flawed characters. I know I do, it gives me something to hang my hat on when I'm roleplaying.

I'd just rather have the option to decide what that flaw is. And ... in some cases rolled characters are too good.
 

Oofta

Legend
The difference is in the subtle distinction between fairness & balance. Rolling avoids balance, while still being fair.

I value fairness on results. Random results are not fair.

Do you really think it would be fair if your salary for a new job was based on a die roll? If you got $3.00/hour and another person with same qualifications and history doing the same job was getting $18.00/hour?
 

I value fairness on results. Random results are not fair.
Results are not fair or unfair, how the result was achieved would be. Random results using unbiased methods are fair. That's why we call a die that consistently delivers a linear distribution a 'fair' die.

Like I alluded to earlier, it's 'fair' in the sense that drawing lots in The Crucible was fair. Everyone has the same chance of being stoned to death. Doesn't imply that stoning someone to death each year is a good idea.

I get that people like playing flawed characters. I know I do, it gives me something to hang my hat on when I'm roleplaying.

I'd just rather have the option to decide what that flaw is. And ... in some cases rolled characters are too good.
Sure, and if you like playing flawed characters it'd be nice to use a system that didn't randomly hand you someone with a low stat of 12. Or even one that (gasp) let you pick some sort of flaw, like a 'Disadvantage' or something, that was recognized & modeled within the system.
 
Last edited:

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I get that people like playing flawed characters. I know I do, it gives me something to hang my hat on when I'm roleplaying.

It's not even flawed. It's realistic or uncontrolled(partially of fully). That can result in a flawed character, or one with no flaws, at least with regard to stats. I find it fun to play what I get, though as you pointed out earlier, there are ways to modify that so that horrible stats can't happen.

One group I play with uses a minimum of 76 points rolled. So an average of 13, 13, 13, 13, 12, 12. We don't get to keep re-rolling until we get there, though. Suppose I roll 16, 12 7, 12, 14, 13. That's 74 points. At that point I would roll 1d6 twice and add one to the stat rolled, so if I ended up with a 1 and 5, the 16 would go to 17 and the 14 to a 15.

How I run my games is with that minimum, but instead of 4d6-lowest on all 6 stats, you get 3d6 for 2, 4d6-lowest for 2, and 5d6-two lowest for two and you can swap any pair. It gives a bit more control, while still maintaining enough random to be unpredictable.

I'd just rather have the option to decide what that flaw is. And ... in some cases rolled characters are too good.
I get it, but it's just not for me.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Sure. 'Realism' is contrary to genre - not just in the indisputable magic-isn't-real sense, either - protagonists tend to be a /lot/ better than the average in genre (and rolling anything other than 3d6 in order acknowledges that, actually). Lack of control over the what character you end up playing undermines player agency.
I disagree. The game is rife with realism. Swords have edges. Spears are pointed and can be thrown. Humans breath, eat and swim. And on and on. Realism doesn't have to mirror reality in order to be realism. It's more of a sliding scale and I like a bit more than the game gives me by default.

As for for player agency, rolling doesn't undermine it at all, or if it does, so do arrays and point buy. True player agency would be just picking whatever stats you want and any limitation whatsoever would undermine that. If rolling is how the game is played, then rolled stats become part of framework for player agency in that game.
 

Oofta

Legend
It's not even flawed. It's realistic or uncontrolled(partially of fully). That can result in a flawed character, or one with no flaws, at least with regard to stats. I find it fun to play what I get, though as you pointed out earlier, there are ways to modify that so that horrible stats can't happen.

One group I play with uses a minimum of 76 points rolled. So an average of 13, 13, 13, 13, 12, 12. We don't get to keep re-rolling until we get there, though. Suppose I roll 16, 12 7, 12, 14, 13. That's 74 points. At that point I would roll 1d6 twice and add one to the stat rolled, so if I ended up with a 1 and 5, the 16 would go to 17 and the 14 to a 15.

How I run my games is with that minimum, but instead of 4d6-lowest on all 6 stats, you get 3d6 for 2, 4d6-lowest for 2, and 5d6-two lowest for two and you can swap any pair. It gives a bit more control, while still maintaining enough random to be unpredictable.

I get it, but it's just not for me.

I get tired of saying this so just a blanket caveat from now on: what you do is OK for you.

If I wanted random, but fair results I could just roll for which stat array I used and then (if I really wanted random) roll for which number went to which ability. Would that not satisfy the whole "I want random stats"?

It seems like any system that allows for assignment of numbers to abilities is going to end up with similar results - your high numbers will go into abilities you value for your build while low numbers will go to abilities you don't value.

Unless of course all numbers are all the same (which is statistically unlikely with most methods).
 

ccs

41st lv DM
If you really want to dissuade cheaters, try letting the players pick their own stats. Unless you have particularly brazen players, or they're just sociopaths, they're not going to give themselves anything crazy. Why? Because they'll have to own up to it; they can't just say "Oh yea, the dice GAVE me these 2 18s". Even if they do give themselves 2 18s (unlikely), they'll give themselves at least 2 super low dump stats because they feel guilty.

I'll do it. I'll give myself 6 18s (+ racial bonuses - I'm thinking regular Human, that way I'll have straight 19s). :)
I'll play the worlds mightiest mortal: thR0ULYYPY.jpg
 




I disagree.
I was agreeing with you. You said the things you saw as benefits could be seen as negatives to some, I was just illustrating that you were correct in that assessment.

The game is rife with realism. Swords have edges.
They also have points, but can't do piercing damage.
Spears are pointed and can be thrown.
But don't have reach.

It's more of a sliding scale and I like a bit more than the game gives me by default.
Meh. More of the same 'benefits/negatives.' You can see it as a 'sliding scale,' I see it as a double-standard. ;P

As for for player agency, rolling doesn't undermine it at all, or if it does, so do arrays and point buy. True player agency would be just picking whatever stats you want and any limitation whatsoever would undermine that.
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/.)

If I wanted random, but fair results I could just roll for which stat array I used and then (if I really wanted random) roll for which number went to which ability. Would that not satisfy the whole "I want random stats"?
No. It doesn't give the chance of having outright better or worse stats than the next guy, overall.


Unless of course all numbers are all the same (which is statistically unlikely with most methods).
Ironically, it's not actually possible with point build/array, but could, however unlikely, happen with random rolls.
 

Hussar

Legend
It's not even flawed. It's realistic or uncontrolled(partially of fully). That can result in a flawed character, or one with no flaws, at least with regard to stats. I find it fun to play what I get, though as you pointed out earlier, there are ways to modify that so that horrible stats can't happen.

One group I play with uses a minimum of 76 points rolled. So an average of 13, 13, 13, 13, 12, 12. We don't get to keep re-rolling until we get there, though. Suppose I roll 16, 12 7, 12, 14, 13. That's 74 points. At that point I would roll 1d6 twice and add one to the stat rolled, so if I ended up with a 1 and 5, the 16 would go to 17 and the 14 to a 15.

How I run my games is with that minimum, but instead of 4d6-lowest on all 6 stats, you get 3d6 for 2, 4d6-lowest for 2, and 5d6-two lowest for two and you can swap any pair. It gives a bit more control, while still maintaining enough random to be unpredictable.

I get it, but it's just not for me.

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?

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.

And this is "realism"?

Look, I get that people like random generation. Fair enough. But, at least be upfront about it. People are randomly generating their characters so they can get higher powered characters.
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I get tired of saying this so just a blanket caveat from now on: what you do is OK for you.

If I wanted random, but fair results I could just roll for which stat array I used and then (if I really wanted random) roll for which number went to which ability. Would that not satisfy the whole "I want random stats"?

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.
 

See, that's the *ahem* elephant in the room.
XP for daring to go there. ;)

I simply would not want to play in a game where that is a stated (or implicit) goal. I just don't see the point.
Sometimes you get to play the 'flawed character' whose not as good as everyone else (though, really, you can always roll up a fighter ;P ), sometimes you get to play das ubercharacter. It's a kind of variety you can't get in a balanced game, but it's not being unfair to anyone who signs up for it. It's very appealing, much like gambling, really.

But, like gambling, not appealing to everyone.
 

PeelSeel2

Explorer
In the original edition of D&D rolling stats meant you could see how good your character was vs other characters with hardly any bonuses. The average of 3d6 is somewhere from 8-12. Between AD&D and Basic D&D a stat discrepancy started appearing. AD&D had an esoteric progression rewarding high stats, and Basic D&D leavened the curve with a 3d6 from -3 to +3. In Basic D&D, the curve worked; just straight roll no racial or other bonuses. 2e Ad&D maintained the esoteric curve that rewarded high stats. Come third edition, they applied a linear progression to a curved roll with potential of -4 to +4 with racial and other bonuses on top of that. Fourth and Fifth edition has kept the linear curve. Rolling dice does not work with that. Hence the value of the predetermined stats with racial bonuses. Everyone is balanced. Basic D&D had a balance due to a statistics curve. If you play 5th, 4th, 3rd, and roll stats, you are going to have some swing. If you play 5th, 4th, 3rd with set basic stats, the curve will be leavened, and it will be less 'swingy'. Plus the added bonus with some players in that everyone starts off the same.
 

Epic Threats

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top