D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Maxperson]

What about those that roll.
1. Do you really ever play less than a 14 post racial in your primary stat?

Yes, but it's rare.

2. Do you typically always play with 16+ in your primary stat?

Typically it's 15+

3. Do you almost always play place your 2nd highest stat either in con or whatever stat you need to help with ac?

No. My second highest, often my first highest will be in the stat that best helps me achieve my concept. For example, if I want to play a fighter who is a great leader of men and my two highest rolled stats are a 14 and a 17, I'll put the 17 into charisma. A 14 is not going to give me a great leader of men. Great leaders are rarer than 14s.

4. How often do you play with 9 or below in at least 1 stat?

60-70% of the time as an estimate, and that might even be a low estimate. With 6 rolled stats, 9's and lower are very common.

 

[Arial Black]

It is true that point buy won't allow you to play superman, or Forest Gump for that matter. But to say you "have access" to the ranges 3-18 is also disingenuous. You don't have access to any numbers at all. You are handed the numbers that luck gives you.

If that's what floats your boat, great. We shouldn't have to get a lawyer to construct the proper legalize to say that "with point buy I can build a character within known constraints of the game system to the vision that most closely fits my desired ...."

Well, you get the idea. I should correct that. You won't get the idea. You will never accept that for me, point buy lets me build a character whose attributes roughly match what I want. Because I accept that all games have constraints.

You prefer rolling. I prefer point buy. That's all.

We each have our preferences, true. But when we list the advantages and disadvantages of each method, we may state something as a fact about that method which is not actually true at all.

You stated that 'point-buy lets me create the concepts that I want'. This may very well be true, in that only you know what you want. But you stated this as if one of the advantages of point-buy is that it lets players who use that method create whatever concepts they want, and that is demonstrably not true.

And, no, it's not just about 'power-gaming' either!

I could walk into a bus station and be part of a crowd of 100 people. If those people were all statted up in D&D terms for Str/Con/Dex/Int/Wis/Cha, there would be an infinitesimally small chance of every single one adding up to the same point-buy! Yet every single one would have six stats of 3-18, because this is the basis of that bell curve: it models the population.

Every single one of those people, being an already existing 'character concept', is by definition a valid concept. But a tiny fraction is available through point-buy. They are all available through rolling!

So, if what I 'want' is to play one of those concepts, then the vast majority will never be available through point-buy.

Six stats, all ranging from 3 to 18. That's a lot of possibilities. Six stats ranging from 8 to 15 is a tiny fraction of that. Six stats from 8 to 15 which add up to exactly 27 points is a tiny fraction of that tiny fraction!

So the idea that, when comparing rolling to point-buy, it's the point-buy method that lets you play the concept you want? No! Point-buy is much, much more likely to prevent me from realising a concept!

"Oh, but it lets players play any concept they want as long as that concept adds up to 27 points" is the 'One True Scotsman' argument. It may be the more precise way of stating why you prefer point-buy, and it would at least be an actual advantage of point-buy: enforced balance. But that is not the same thing as 'point-buy lets players play the concept they want'.

 

[Oofta]

Well, yes and no. We each prefer our own methods, but that isn't all. There are all the reasons that go along with those preferences.

And we stated all of them ... oh 50 or 60 pages ago.

 

[Maxperson]

And we stated all of them ... oh 50 or 60 pages ago.

Nobody is forcing you to participate in the discussion.

 

[Oofta]

We each have our preferences, true. But when we list the advantages and disadvantages of each method, we may state something as a fact about that method which is not actually true at all.

You stated that 'point-buy lets me create the concepts that I want'. This may very well be true, in that only you know what you want. But you stated this as if one of the advantages of point-buy is that it lets players who use that method create whatever concepts they want, and that is demonstrably not true.

And, no, it's not just about 'power-gaming' either!

I could walk into a bus station and be part of a crowd of 100 people. If those people were all statted up in D&D terms for Str/Con/Dex/Int/Wis/Cha, there would be an infinitesimally small chance of every single one adding up to the same point-buy! Yet every single one would have six stats of 3-18, because this is the basis of that bell curve: it models the population.

Every single one of those people, being an already existing 'character concept', is by definition a valid concept. But a tiny fraction is available through point-buy. They are all available through rolling!

So, if what I 'want' is to play one of those concepts, then the vast majority will never be available through point-buy.

Six stats, all ranging from 3 to 18. That's a lot of possibilities. Six stats ranging from 8 to 15 is a tiny fraction of that. Six stats from 8 to 15 which add up to exactly 27 points is a tiny fraction of that tiny fraction!

So the idea that, when comparing rolling to point-buy, it's the point-buy method that lets you play the concept you want? No! Point-buy is much, much more likely to prevent me from realising a concept!

"Oh, but it lets players play any concept they want as long as that concept adds up to 27 points" is the 'One True Scotsman' argument. It may be the more precise way of stating why you prefer point-buy, and it would at least be an actual advantage of point-buy: enforced balance. But that is not the same thing as 'point-buy lets players play the concept they want'.

I like building characters within set constraints of the game. Since the end result is a character I want to play, I am building the character I want with point buy.

As I've stated this many, many times. You disagree. OK. Got it. You disagree with my personal definition of what it means to build the character I want. Which is ... just getting old.

Anyway I'm going to hit the (literal) trail in a bit.

 

[Maxperson]

I like building characters within set constraints of the game.

So do I. It's great that we both get to do that.

 

[TwoSix]

Anyway I'm going to hit the (literal) trail in a bit.

I'm reasonably sure this thread has already hit the trail.

 

[Lanefan]

Just out of curiosity.

What about those that roll.
1. Do you really ever play less than a 14 post racial in your primary stat?

No. Then again, our rolling system pretty much guarantees a 14 or better somewhere.

2. Do you typically always play with 16+ in your primary stat?

Usually, unless the dice don't give me a 16+ to work with.

3. Do you almost always play place your 2nd highest stat either in con or whatever stat you need to help with ac?

This depends on a lot of things. First, is my 2nd-highest stat worth anything? (with 17-12-12-12-11-10 for example, put the 17 on primary and throw the rest in a blender...or a lake, whichever ) Second, does the class I have in mind somewhat force where the 2nd-best stat goes e.g. a 1e Illusionist that has in effect two primary stats? Third, what do the other four stats look like? Is it a sharp drop-off after the second one or are there one or more others that are still decent?

I'll vaguely default to throwing it onto Con unless something else presents itself, but something else quite often presents itself.

4. How often do you play with 9 or below in at least 1 stat?

That of course depends on whether the dice give me a low roll, but I'd guess it's at least half the time these days.

I'm betting that both point buyers and rollers answer almost all these questions the same. I bet rollers answer question 3 a bit differently. I bet that they are far more likely to use their 2nd highest stat on something that doesn't directly increase their combat effectiveness.

Depends on the character. If I'm rolling up a combat character then yes, the priorities are Str, Con, Dex, then whatever. For a wizard-type it'll usually be Int, Dex-or-Con, Con-or-Dex, Cha, Str, with Wis as the dump...though Cha becomes more important if I have a charmer in mind. For a Cleric it varies - a War Cleric needs 5 decent stats to really work well, with Int as the dump; a normal Cleric can get by without much Str or Dex but still needs Wis, Con and Cha (we use Cha modifiers when turning undead); while a Druid or Nature Cleric needs Wis, Dex, and then whatever. For a sneaky type it's Dex, Con, Cha-or-Int, then whatever, with the Cha-or-Int choice determined by whether I'm thinking of a "face" character or a puzzle-solver.

Lan-"all subject to variance depending on my mood while I'm rolling up the character"-efan

 

[Lanefan]

I like building characters within set constraints of the game.

We just have different constraints, is all. Yours are numerically and mechanically more constraining than mine, mine are nowhere near as predictable as yours nor as reliable at giving me access to a pre-conceived character idea. You prefer the reliability, I don't mind gambling. All is cool.

But underneath all that I think we agree that there have to be some constraints, and that within those constraints (whichever version) there's still a great big amount of room to move when it comes to generating fun and interesting characters.

Lanefan

 

[Tony Vargas]

Seriously who cares -- Point buy versus random rolling -- its all about preference and that has no basis in fact its pure opinion and that cannot be argued because ones opinion for themselves is never wrong and vice versa

Ironically, there's little but fact to work with. The statistics of random number distributions, especially those generated by six-sided dice are quite well known and objective. Array is a very clear, known quantity, point-build, likewise, just with more complexity.

Point buy can't possibly allow a player to play all the types of characters that they want.

All the types that are possible for that campaign. Random generation also can't let you play a character that's out of bounds for the campaign. That's just a limitation no all methods.

You quite literally cannot start with a stat lower than 8 or above 15 before racial bonuses. Rolling on the other hand does allow all possible character types within the D&D rules.

Frankly, if you're rolling for a range of 3-18, sure, that's all the possible character types for that method, and, if you're generating a range of 8-15, whether point-buy or random, it is, likewise, the full range of what's possible. It's a different range, but point-buy could be used for a broader range if that were desired.

Yes, I know. I was talking about the range of rolling. They stated that magic items were not in the math. To my knowledge they have not said the same thing about stat ranges from rolling. There's nothing to indicate that a higher than average roll is not a part of their calculation like a magic item, or that lower than average rolls are treated as anti-magic items. That's what I was wondering about.

Stop and think about it. How could the range possible with random generation be 'part of the calculation?' By definition, it's random, it won't be the same for everyone, or even every table. The only way to take it into account is to go with averages. You roll better than whatever average or expected value they built around, you're 'just better,' exactly like the guy with the magic item giving the same bonus.

That's the kind of game 5e is designed to be. Doesn't mean the DM can't use magic items and figure them into the challenges he designs, or use point-buy or array to have less variabilty to compensate for. But, out the box, 5e is meant to have a comparatively high degree of variability among the PCs, some are going to be 'just better' than others. That's part of the point, the classic feel that makes it D&D.

I like building characters within set constraints of the game.

All three types of character generation methods under serious consideration in this thread - random, point-buy, and array - do present the player with constraints. Array dictates exactly the numbers you begin with, the same for everyone, and you only get to arrange them as you wish. Random dictates exactly the numbers you begin with, potentially quite differently for each player at the table, and you may get to arrange them as you wish, point-buy dictates the number of 'points' you can spend on your character's stats and they're the same for everyone at the table.

Those are all constraints. Array puts the greatest constraints on the range of characters anyone might theoretically play, random (especially roll-in-order) puts the greatest constraints on exactly what each player actually has the option of playing.