D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Maxperson]

I don't know if the DM was just ignoring the rules or not. But in 5E there is no minimum, so you could roll everything well below a 10 and it would be a "valid" character.

Sure, technically it is valid. However, most DMs I've gamed with honor the spirit of the game, which is to have fun. They wouldn't let someone play truly crappy stats unless the person wanted to. That's not the same as re-rolling until you get great stats. It's just not letting the game be unfun for a player. Every once in a while, though, you get a bad DM who doesn't care about whether or not the players have fun. You should ditch a DM like that if he isn't willing to change.

 

[Oofta]

Sure, technically it is valid. However, most DMs I've gamed with honor the spirit of the game, which is to have fun. They wouldn't let someone play truly crappy stats unless the person wanted to. That's not the same as re-rolling until you get great stats. It's just not letting the game be unfun for a player. Every once in a while, though, you get a bad DM who doesn't care about whether or not the players have fun. You should ditch a DM like that if he isn't willing to change.

We did end up dropping out of the campaign fairly quickly for a number of reasons. Which was too bad, because he was a friend and otherwise a good guy.

I mostly just bring it up as a cautionary tale. You may think "rolling is fair" because every one does it. I, and at least one other person (my wife) would disagree. The results of rolling are not fair. So if someone joins your game and says "can I use point buy instead of rolling" before rolling and then rolls poorly and repeats the request to use point buy? Don't just laugh and say "You get to play that character because rolling is fair."

Some people may enjoy playing a character with overall stats worse than your average peasant while someone else on the team plays a Mary Sue. Just accept that it's not fun for everyone.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Some people may enjoy playing a character with overall stats worse than your average peasant while someone else on the team plays a Mary Sue. Just accept that it's not fun for everyone.

If things like race, class (and everything class currently grants), and stats weren't silo'd - that is, if you could take inferior stats but get more powers (like spells) or other perks (including 'plot cards' that leave your character seeming, to all intents, under-powered, but still allow you to have agency in the game), it'd be more practical for a table actually wanting that match-up. Not really something D&D has ever done, or could ever be on the horizon, but games like Hero and GURPS and others that have sub-systems for 'flaws' and more expansive point-build customization have gone there with some good results...

 

[jgsugden]

I like a system that is somewhat in the middle:

Roll 3d6 6 times. For each rest, replace the lowest roll with a 3. Then place them in any order.

Range is 6 to 15, with a 5 to 8 being very unlikely (1 in ~10).

If you don't get a 14 or 15, you can reroll (about 1 in 4 do not).

It gives you some variety, but nobody ends up with insane stats and the occasional character has a real interesting low stat.

An alternative system I also like is a bit convoluted, but basically 'role plays' the characters youth. You pick a race first. Then you roll 1d6 for each attribute to determine the basic tendencies of the adolescent child. Then you ask another player (filling the role of parents/guardians) to do a point buy option to select where the focus of schooling goes (numbers between 2 and 5). Then you select class and background. Then you roll 1d6 for each attribute and get to switch the lowest with anything other than the highest to reflect a focused natural development... convoluted, but you get PCs with a built in story for their youth.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

If things like race, class (and everything class currently grants), and stats weren't silo'd - that is, if you could take inferior stats but get more powers (like spells) or other perks (including 'plot cards' that leave your character seeming, to all intents, under-powered, but still allow you to have agency in the game), it'd be more practical for a table actually wanting that match-up. Not really something D&D has ever done, or could ever be on the horizon, but games like Hero and GURPS and others that have sub-systems for 'flaws' and more expansive point-build customization have gone there with some good results...

Do you really want Shadowrun?

..because that's how you get Shadowrun!!

(Full disclosure: I want Shadowrun)

 

[Tony Vargas]

Do you really want Shadowrun?

..because that's how you get Shadowrun!!

(Full disclosure: I want Shadowrun)

Not how I remember Shadowrun from the little I played.

 

[ccs]

I mostly just bring it up as a cautionary tale. You may think "rolling is fair" because every one does it. I, and at least one other person (my wife) would disagree. The results of rolling are not fair. So if someone joins your game and says "can I use point buy instead of rolling" before rolling and then rolls poorly and repeats the request to use point buy? Don't just laugh and say "You get to play that character because rolling is fair."

Absolutely they could use PB if they chose.
As I've said many 10s of pages ago:
Every player in my game gets to choose for themselves wich method they'll use for stat generation. They can use standard PB, they can use Standard Array, or they can use the 4d6K3 method. Wichever they prefer.
What they cannot do is:
Criticize another for thier choice,
Complain about someone else's stats,
Decide to re-roll, use some other method, or suicide thier character should their rolls not turn out as well as they'd hoped.
You roll the dice, you do so knowing & accepting that your gambling. If your not ok with that? Don't pick that method.

 

[Oofta]

Absolutely they could use PB if they chose.
As I've said many 10s of pages ago:
Every player in my game gets to choose for themselves wich method they'll use for stat generation. They can use standard PB, they can use Standard Array, or they can use the 4d6K3 method. Wichever they prefer.
What they cannot do is:
Criticize another for thier choice,
Complain about someone else's stats,
Decide to re-roll, use some other method, or suicide thier character should their rolls not turn out as well as they'd hoped.
You roll the dice, you do so knowing & accepting that your gambling. If your not ok with that? Don't pick that method.

I would be OK with that as long as it is straight 4d6 drop lowest for the random generation. Start allowing people rerolls or rolling up multiple characters and then we need to talk about increasing the numbers for the point buy.

 

[MoreDetonation]

Sometimes people just roll lucky. I had one player in my group roll stats right in front of me that were the best I had ever seen.

That said, when you have no penalties and two 18s, it's time to reroll in front of the DM.

 

[Maxperson]

We did end up dropping out of the campaign fairly quickly for a number of reasons. Which was too bad, because he was a friend and otherwise a good guy.

I mostly just bring it up as a cautionary tale. You may think "rolling is fair" because every one does it. I, and at least one other person (my wife) would disagree. The results of rolling are not fair. So if someone joins your game and says "can I use point buy instead of rolling" before rolling and then rolls poorly and repeats the request to use point buy? Don't just laugh and say "You get to play that character because rolling is fair."

Some people may enjoy playing a character with overall stats worse than your average peasant while someone else on the team plays a Mary Sue. Just accept that it's not fun for everyone.

It is fair. It's just not what you prefer. All it takes to be fair is for everyone to be on even footing for stat generation, and everyone is rolling dice equally. Something not required for fairness is results that are equitable. If I'm hiring for one spot and I interview 30 qualified applicants with no bias, that's fair for all of them, even if only one will be hired. Uneven results do not make the method unfair.