Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 7810059" data-attributes="member: 71699">It really depends so much on the exact ability scores and player choices. Most likely, that rogue ends up with +1 or +2 over the paladin. My previous campaign used 4d6k3 and overshadowing there was far more pronounced.Which CON features are you referring to, for paladin? Do you mean Aura of the Guardian where your hit points would be salient? I couldn't find any others (from PHB and Xanathar's).Looking at this objection, I feel like there could be another factor in play. My intent with allocate-as-rolled is that players won't have total fiat over class and race, or party balance. They must live with compromises and faults. Even so, it is up to each player what they choose: I think players with high-system mastery and an interest in optimising will not choose a sword bard unless they have the stats for it. Thus the situation one may fear in theory-crafting doesn't arise at the table. Say a player draws DEX 13 and CHA 14? They might choose to play a half-elf sword bard and do perfectly well with it. They won't be as strong as a points-buy character could have been, and that is by intent.We need to separate the arguments properly. The intent is a weaker party, relative to MM creatures. So if a poster here dislikes that then on the one hand I have no criticism for their choice in that regard, but on the other hand that is not my choice. Therefore this is not something we should argue. The other argument is overshadowing. Even a +2 overshadow is mild compared to that I have seen under 4d6k3. More importantly, in play the raw ability scores are only a fraction of character leverage over the narrative: wise choices and clever use of the resources at their disposal are telling. Does the paladin use her spells and buffs wisely, while the rogue is intemperate?</blockquote>

Verification