Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
What I'm saying is that it's simply not true that stats don't have a significant impact on a characters effectiveness. You may not care if there are winners and losers in the random result lottery. You may think it's a benefit, a feature that is worth having. That for you having significantly more powerful characters than other members of the group adds to the fun. I don't.
I get that. So don't roll characters. I just wish you'd stop misrepresenting rolling while you do that is all.
I wrote a program a while back to simulate 100,000 characters using 4d6 drop lowest with 6 characters in the group.
- 2% of the groups had 1 character with at least 1 18 and another character with no stat above a 14.
1 in 50 isn't really something to be worried about. Especially if you don't have a bad DM, but instead has one that cares about fun.
Then just for the heck of it rolled up a group of 6. The lowest result was 11, 15, 9, 12, 10, 13. It's not horrible. But the highest? 12, 18, 16, 12, 12, 13.
Was this a statistical anomaly? It doesn't seem like it, more like a typical result. But you have one mediocre character and one character with a lot of strengths and no weaknesses. I'm not going to bother doing my fight analysis again, but I suspect that the former numbers will lose the sample fight against the hell hound by a few rounds while the latter will win by a few rounds. It's a significant difference.
A 12 in a non-prime stat is still a weakness. It's just not as great of a weakness as if you had -1.
Considering that one person has already misrepresented my statement as "thousands" and been corrected, you doing it doesn't help me to believe what you say.But of course, I'm probably just lying about numbers again. Because after all you've analyzed "thousands" of characters over the years.