Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7242516" data-attributes="member: 996">Which is essentially true - it gives you the greatest degrees of freedom in designing your character, so you can build to a specific concept, every time.&nbsp; You may not get the specific numbers you'd ideally want (right away, there will be ASIs later), but you can create the PC you want.Some concepts are out of bounds, of course, the straight-18 paragon, for instance, gets in the way of all good-at-a-particular-thing concepts.&nbsp; That array &amp; point-buy prevent such concepts entirely, actually keeps more valid concepts on the table - ultimately, it speaks to array being the best for balance, and point-buy the second-best (because it's more susceptible to optimization).&nbsp;Which is, indeed the current, bizarre, convoluted point of contention, and one to which there is no clear resolution.&nbsp; 3d6 has a strong history in D&amp;D tradition, and what 5e presents is reasonably consistent with it, without actually explicitly enshrining it.&nbsp; It's absurd to argue the 3d6 bellcurve isn't ingrained in D&amp;D, but neither is it tenable to argue it a one-true-way that brooks no variations.&nbsp;Rolling is also equally fair - everyone rolls using the same method and has the same chance of getting good, fair, or bad stats out of it.&nbsp;'Works best' only in the sense that that's how it was back then and nothing evokes the past like going back and doing it the same way.&nbsp; In the same sense, actually running 1e/2e/BECMI would be 'better' than styling 5e after it.&nbsp;The key is really when you do the envisioning.&nbsp; If you go into the process with a character concept already in mind, point-buy is better than array is better than random.&nbsp; If you go into the process blank and just hope something will come to you as you get started, random is better (because it might spark an idea, or give you an 'opportunity' to play a wildly over- or under- powered concept) than point-buy is better than array.&nbsp;No.&nbsp; The 3d6 bell curve is part of D&amp;D's history &amp; traditions, 5e still references it, in everything from the range of stats, to the straight-10s commoner, to the 4d6, keep the three highest default generation method.&nbsp; Yes, it's significant, no, it's not an absolute OTW.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7242516, member: 996"] Which is essentially true - it gives you the greatest degrees of freedom in designing your character, so you can build to a specific concept, every time. You may not get the specific numbers you'd ideally want (right away, there will be ASIs later), but you can create the PC you want. Some concepts are out of bounds, of course, the straight-18 paragon, for instance, gets in the way of all good-at-a-particular-thing concepts. That array & point-buy prevent such concepts entirely, actually keeps more valid concepts on the table - ultimately, it speaks to array being the best for balance, and point-buy the second-best (because it's more susceptible to optimization). Which is, indeed the current, bizarre, convoluted point of contention, and one to which there is no clear resolution. 3d6 has a strong history in D&D tradition, and what 5e presents is reasonably consistent with it, without actually explicitly enshrining it. It's absurd to argue the 3d6 bellcurve isn't ingrained in D&D, but neither is it tenable to argue it a one-true-way that brooks no variations. Rolling is also equally fair - everyone rolls using the same method and has the same chance of getting good, fair, or bad stats out of it. 'Works best' only in the sense that that's how it was back then and nothing evokes the past like going back and doing it the same way. In the same sense, actually running 1e/2e/BECMI would be 'better' than styling 5e after it. The key is really when you do the envisioning. If you go into the process with a character concept already in mind, point-buy is better than array is better than random. If you go into the process blank and just hope something will come to you as you get started, random is better (because it might spark an idea, or give you an 'opportunity' to play a wildly over- or under- powered concept) than point-buy is better than array. No. The 3d6 bell curve is part of D&D's history & traditions, 5e still references it, in everything from the range of stats, to the straight-10s commoner, to the 4d6, keep the [i]three[/i] highest default generation method. Yes, it's significant, no, it's not an absolute OTW. [/QUOTE]

Verification