Stats Below 8

[The Human Target]

My Ideal "Average Heroic Scores" Spread:

5, 7, 9, 12, 14, 16

I like the idea that heroes are pretty "swingy," though.

Isn't a five in any edition pretty much crippled in that stat?

 

[I'm A Banana]

Isn't a five in any edition pretty much crippled in that stat?

Well, when I do this, I ignore the general advice to make low stats functionally disabled.

I don't really think the game needs much of a mechanical place to say "Hey, your character is now like a kid with Down's Syndrome!". All the "5" means in this situation is that your skills and ability checks and attack rolls with that stat are at -3. That's a big hit, but it's not crippling in any respect. You're not disabled, you've just got a low stat. Sometimes you will suck. Oh well.

 

[Incendax]

If the player wants to portray a character that is somehow less competent than others then he could do that through roleplay without influencing his statistics. He should get no statistical benefit for reducing his stats below the average.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

If the player wants to portray a character that is somehow less competent than others then he could do that through roleplay without influencing his statistics. He should get no statistical benefit for reducing his stats below the average.

That was my point above. Just as IQ is a single number that conveys a kind of weighted average over a broad sweep of abilities (memory, geometric analysis, mathematical ability, etc.), a single ability score covers a number of things. For example, a high Dexterity canonically means one is both fast on one's feet and dextrous with ones hands; but that doesn't mean you could play someone as being a fast runner but occasionally a bit fumble fingered.

It comes down to a matter of trust between the player and the DM, that such self-penalizing roleplaying will not be the difference between life and death, unless that's what the player wants. So, if I want my Rogue to die a horrible but valiant death because slow foot speed keeps her from escaping the final mountain collapse, that's okay, but the DM better not push it on me unwilling.

 

[BobTheNob]

Let be honest in all of this. Are the players in question lowering their stats because they want to role play, then the DM can simply accommodate them in this venture, maybe even create custom backgrounds to suite.

Buts that not why the players are asking for this. They ask because they want to create broken builds.

 

[Dausuul]

Let be honest in all of this. Are the players in question lowering their stats because they want to role play, then the DM can simply accommodate them in this venture, maybe even create custom backgrounds to suite.

Buts that not why the players are asking for this. They ask because they want to create broken builds.

*shrug* I find it difficult to see how you manage a broken build with 2 extra points, in exchange for taking your 8 dump stat down to 4.

When people rolled for stats, there were several occasions when I saw people get really into roleplaying low (7 or less) stats. It led to some very entertaining characters. With point buy, I have never once seen a player volunteer to take a stat at 7 or less, or a second stat at less than 10--because it feels like shooting yourself in the foot for no reason, and mechanically that's just what it is. That's a massive psychological block. I have also never seen a player take an 8 stat and turn it into a major roleplaying hook, because 8 is not all that low. It doesn't feel like a salient trait.

Now, you can argue that players who want to roleplay characters with extra-low stats should just go ahead and shoot their characters in the foot, or roleplay an 8 as if it were a 5. In an ideal world, maybe they would. I don't see it happening, however. Like it or not, mechanics shape character--after one or two experiences starting off with a concept, trying to build a character to fit that concept, and discovering that the result is mechanically utter suck and can't actually do the cool things the player imagined doing, players quickly learn to fit their concepts to what the system will support.

Harsh diminishing returns would prevent serious abuse. In exchange for totally gimping yourself in one area, you get to raise a tertiary stat from 10 to 12. OMG BROKEN. (If necessary, make the diminishing returns even worse when dumping multiple stats.) And offering some mechanical incentive means people would actually do it now and then.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Harsh diminishing returns would prevent serious abuse.

I agree with the others that say you get ZERO returns. That prevents any abuse, serious or not. If the player is really altruistic and is looking for an RP excuse, then zero return is justified. If the player is actually a bonus-grabbing powergamer, then zero return is justified. You get no other stat boosts, no backgrounds, nothing. Nothing.

 

[Dausuul]

I agree with the others that say you get ZERO returns. That prevents any abuse, serious or not. If the player is really altruistic and is looking for an RP excuse, then zero return is justified. If the player is actually a bonus-grabbing powergamer, then zero return is justified. You get no other stat boosts, no backgrounds, nothing. Nothing.

And if the player is neither a pure roleplayer nor a pure bonus-grabbing powergamer, but a typical player who tries to balance roleplaying and mechanical concerns, they'll never touch this option, because anyone with reasonable concern for mechanics is going to recoil from an option whose sole mechanical effect is "You are gimped. Have a nice day." The instinct not to throw away something for absolutely nothing is very hard to overcome.

I have never met a player who had no concern for mechanics, and precious few who had no concern for roleplaying, and a whole lot who tried to balance the two. Unless my experience is a wild statistical anomaly, I fail to see why one should consider the extreme cases while ignoring the vast majority in the middle.

Have you ever seen a player voluntarily reduce a stat below 8 at chargen, when they didn't have to and got no benefit whatsoever? If not, why do you think anyone will? Of course, if you see no value to having the occasional character with an extra-low stat, it doesn't matter; as I said, however, I've several times seen low stats turn into great RP hooks.

 

[MrMyth]

And if the player is neither a pure roleplayer nor a pure bonus-grabbing powergamer, but a typical player who tries to balance roleplaying and mechanical concerns, they'll never touch this option, because anyone with reasonable concern for mechanics is going to recoil from an option whose sole mechanical effect is "You are gimped. Have a nice day." The instinct not to throw away something for absolutely nothing is very hard to overcome.

I have never met a player who had no concern for mechanics, and precious few who had no concern for roleplaying, and a whole lot who tried to balance the two. Unless my experience is a wild statistical anomaly, I fail to see why one should consider the extreme cases while ignoring the vast majority in the middle.

Have you ever seen a player voluntarily reduce a stat below 8 at chargen, when they didn't have to and got no benefit whatsoever?

Yes, actually, I've done just that in 4E. And honestly, the truth is that 4E actually makes the consequences small enough that one can get away with dropping stats to lower levels without feeling crippled by it. I've also played a Con 8 staff-wielding fighter in cloth armor, for a one-shot - and was able to make that a perfectly capable and effective character.

Since each defense draws from two ability scores, you can get away with, effectively, half your stats being low. Hitpoints no longer are so desperately tied to Con - a low Con means you have 4-6 less hp than most players, rather than 2-3 less hp per level.

Similarly, encumbrance simply isn't as brutal as it used to be, so a low Str score isn't the end of the world. Skills scale much more evenly, so even with a terrible stat, my skills based on it still can succeed if I roll high. And the presence of powers based on a variety of stats and feats like Melee Training means that I can have a low Str or Dex and can still make melee or ranged attacks if I really want to build a way to do so.

I can have my abysmally clumsy paladin with a Dex of 4, and do you know what I lose? Initiative. I'm a few points lower than I would be with a Dex of 8. But my AC in Plate is just fine. An average Int and a shield still keeps my Reflex from being completely terrible. And I was going to suck at Acrobatics and Stealth anyway.

You say it's hard to throw away something for nothing, right? But I'd say it is even harder to not take advantage of a free benefit. And if I'm already dumping my Charisma to 8, and I can drop it to 4 and gain +1 in my primary or secondary ability score? Yeah, I'm confident many players would make that trade in a heartbeat. I think such a system would see abuse by both powergamers and average players, and cause a lot more character problems than anything else.

If you want to be uncharismatic, then go for it. Having Charisma of 6 isn't going to mean you are somehow crippled or absolutely 'gimped' compared to Cha 8. Hence why, yes, it is perfectly easy to voluntarily take a lower score if you feel it would give you some RP opportunities. The truth is, having a already-bad stat be a few points worse has a pretty small impact on the game.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I suspect WotC made the point-buy scale specifically to give you the capability to buy things two ways... 16-16 or 18-14 in your top two stats (prior to the race bump). I would make sure to never do anything that would allow a player to point-buy an 18-16 prior to race bump. You basically are widening the gap between mega-optimal race/class synergy and moderate race/class decisions when you can have a player with a 20-18 adventuring next to a 16-16.

If you are a player for whom rolling stats is normal, this kind of thing probably doesn't bother you... but for those of us who always point-buy... you are going to find that one player far outshining the others in most ways.