D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Lanefan]

To get the desired blend of randomness and play-ability you would want to modify and scale the point-buy system (so it acts more like "insurance" on certain abilities. Start with [3 3 3 3 3 3] and 30 points. The point table would need to get further curved to balance the probabilities:
(3=0 pt, 4=x, 5=.5 pt, 6=1 pt, 7=1.5 pt, 8=2 pt, 9=3 pt, 10=4 pt, 11=5 pt, 12=6pt, 13=8pt, 14=10 pt, 15=13 pt)
Then roll "4d6 keep 3" (in-order, no cheating) and keep either the roll or the point-buy score.

This should give reasonable average scores according to my simulation:
[11 11 11 11 11 11] gives an average stat value of 12.9 (avg. char, no bad stats and a random chance of something good)

Er...I'm really missing something here.

How can 11-11-11-11-11-11 give an average of anything other than 11.0?

[15 15 10 3 3 3] give an avg stat value of 13.3 (2 very good stats, 13% of improving each very good stat and chance of really bad stat)

And again. 15-15-10-3-3-3 gives an average of 8.2, which is rather awful no matter how it's arrived at.

So we can keep the averages close to normal. Chance of 16/17/18 are same as regular 4d6 keep 3 (but on only have one chance, since it is in-order rolling). Can guarantee 2 good stats for particular character concept. Randomness may bring interesting 'character' to the character -- especially since you can't re-order the stats.

Using 3d6 instead of 4d6 keep 3 drops the averages scores by about 1 (12-12.2) - so you would want to boost the buy points to bring the averages back to the 13 range.

Are your averages supposed to be what the combined rolling/point-buy gives you in the end? In that case, I can only assume they make sense; that's too much math for me.

Note that an average of 12.0 to 12.2 is right around where 4d6x1 (12.24) and array (12.00) put you anyway, so maybe the 3d6 model would be a more direct replacement.

Lanefan

 

[Eric Olson]

Er...I'm really missing something here.

How can 11-11-11-11-11-11 give an average of anything other than 11.0?

And again. 15-15-10-3-3-3 gives an average of 8.2, which is rather awful no matter how it's arrived at.

Are your averages supposed to be what the combined rolling/point-buy gives you in the end? In that case, I can only assume they make sense; that's too much math for me.

Note that an average of 12.0 to 12.2 is right around where 4d6x1 (12.24) and array (12.00) put you anyway, so maybe the 3d6 model would be a more direct replacement.

Lanefan

Sorry if that was not clear. Your assumption was correct (these are based on the combined rolling and point-buy insurance)
max( 3 , 4d6x1) averages 12.24 and max( 3, 3d6 ) averages 10.50 (these are just straight rolls)
max(10, 4d6x1) averages 12.63 and max( 3, 3d6 ) averages 11.46
max(11, 4d6x1) averages 12.90 and max(11,3d6 ) averages 11.96
max(15, 4d6x1) averages 15.20 and max(11, 3d6 ) averages 15.07

(I wrote some code that enumerated all possible rolls to calculate the numbers - if anyone want it)

I was trying to get the averages over 6 abilities to be close to the PHB point buy average of 12.5 (or slightly less if you min/max). I also think that forcing the ordering of the rolls provides some balance when compared to the slightly lower average std point-buy system. (one flaw of this method, as modeled here, is the slightly higher average for the min/max choice vs the all middle choice -- would have to be tweaked by adjusting the point-buy curve more) .

I've lived the feelings on both sides of the roll vs buy arguments in this thread! I hoping to find something in the middle that provides some of the advantages of both. Instead of "plan character -> point buy" or "roll -> develop character" this lets you "plan character -> buy/roll -> further develop character".

 

[Tony Vargas]

Maybe it was the era. We played that way from 1984 to about 1992 or so. Backgrounds were still random(Central Casting for the win), and stats were still random and in order, but we started picking our race.

Yeah, I think I can blame youth or the times - I had only just discovered Champions! a year or two before, the first generation of RPGs had pretty much all been random generation of some sort, even the more innovative ones, so that mind-set had been pretty firmly established for a decade...

 

[Lanefan]

Sorry if that was not clear. Your assumption was correct (these are based on the combined rolling and point-buy insurance)
max( 3 , 4d6x1) averages 12.24 and max( 3, 3d6 ) averages 10.50 (these are just straight rolls)
max(10, 4d6x1) averages 12.63 and max( 3, 3d6 ) averages 11.46
max(11, 4d6x1) averages 12.90 and max(11,3d6 ) averages 11.96
max(15, 4d6x1) averages 15.20 and max(11, 3d6 ) averages 15.07

(I wrote some code that enumerated all possible rolls to calculate the numbers - if anyone want it)

Ah. That makes more sense.

I was trying to get the averages over 6 abilities to be close to the PHB point buy average of 12.5 (or slightly less if you min/max).

The point-buy average can cover quite a range - anywhere from 11.50 to 12.50, with a direct correlation between similarity or "blandness" of stats and higher average. This range is very close to your second option listed above.

I've lived the feelings on both sides of the roll vs buy arguments in this thread! I hoping to find something in the middle that provides some of the advantages of both. Instead of "plan character -> point buy" or "roll -> develop character" this lets you "plan character -> buy/roll -> further develop character".

You might be on to something here. It'll just take some fine-tuning of the numbers.

Lanefan

 

[Satyrn]

Then with the moon druid, I never rolled for subclass because another player is playing a land druid and I didn't want to step on his toes.. I had actually rerolled for a new class but then the druid's player said "Hey, if you play the shapeshifting druid, that's cool with me."

Just to add to this, [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION]:

It turns out a moon druid doesn't appeal to me. I can't find a hook for this character's personality that appeals to me. So I just built my character from concept. I kept one aspect from the druid - the knight background - because it's a good fit with the party's two nobles, with one of them heing a paladin in plate.

And I found an amusing thing in the noble background's personality/ideals/bonds/flaws: I selected all these things about being noble and respectful towards both those above and below my station, and then bang! the flaw is "Secretly, I believe I'm better than everyone else."

Somehow, that inspired me to create a smarmy, suckup of a knight in shining armor (Like Stifler from American Pie, or Whitey from Leave it to Beaver). But not a fighter.

In order to get the heavy armor proficiency, and to show the outward sign of being a hero of the common people and a servant for the greater good, I started with a level of Life Cleric. The rest is all enchanter wizard.

To wear the plate effectively, I need a 15 strength.
To multiclass from cleric I need a 13 wisdom.
To be effective as a wizard (especially with the save or suck enchantment stuff) I need as high an Intelligence as I can get.
Then there's the everpresent need for Constitution.

But I can essentially dump Dex since I'll be wearing plate.
And the Charisma is meant to be low because he's only supposed to be charming when working his magic.

This seems like a MAD concept, right? I feel I made it work just fine with the Standard Array.

I don't really know what an enchanter needs with a 20 AC (plate and shield), but I've got it.

 

[Lanefan]

I just built my character from concept. I kept one aspect from the druid - the knight background - because it's a good fit with the party's two nobles, with one of them heing a paladin in plate.

And I found an amusing thing in the noble background's personality/ideals/bonds/flaws: I selected all these things about being noble and respectful towards both those above and below my station, and then bang! the flaw is "Secretly, I believe I'm better than everyone else."

Nice!

I don't really know what an enchanter needs with a 20 AC (plate and shield), but I've got it.

I take it that 5e doesn't have problems with wizards casting in armour, unlike 1e?

 

[Satyrn]

Nice!

Thank you.

I take it that 5e doesn't have problems with wizards casting in armour, unlike 1e?

. . . how do you not know that?

 

[Caliban]

. . . how do you not know that?

Lanefan doesn't play 5e. They just pop in from time to time confirm that we are still doing it wrong.

 

[Oofta]

So just out of curiosity and because of some of the conversations, I wrote a quick app that generated 6 ability scores using 4d6 drop lowest and then ran that through a loop a million times and figured out the average*.

The result? Average array: 15, 14, 12, 11, 10, 8

Which you could get with a 25 point buy. So I stand by my claim from a few pages back, on average rolling 4d6 gives you lower overall ability scores. Which doesn't necessarily mean anything other than I have too much time on my hands.

*EDIT: in case it's not clear, I generated an array and then sorted descending, so the 15 is the average of the high numbers for a set of 6 numbers, 8 is the average low.

 

[Yardiff]

Point buy/Standard Array is what the game is balanced around. All of the classes, all of the monsters, spell effects, everything, is all balanced on the assumption of that method of building your character and it makes a huge difference if you deviate from that, for the worse.

Where does it say this? If you can link please.

Only in AL and Possibly conventions does it tell you a specific way to create a character and that is Standard Array.

If this assumption is true why does the PHB have 4d6 drop lowest as the first stat creation method?

Still waiting on a reply, from anyone, on this statement.