Stats Below 8

[AbdulAlhazred]

I just don't really want to see endless characters with a 4 in one stat or another. The old AD&D days where you now and then saw a REALLY low stat was OK because it was pretty rare. If it were part of the normal point buy procedure in 4e then you'd almost surely be seeing 4's or whatever left and right. Not EVERYONE would take them, but it is easy to imagine a party with 5 characters each sporting an improbably low score of one sort or another.

Which is why I think integrating those kind of stat changes into point buy won't work well, it will get overused. Giving a character some other slight reward OTOH at least satisfies their urge to get something in return for the cost they pay, small as it is. They can justify that to themselves, which encourages someone to now and then give it a try.

The other thing with ultra-low scores I've always found is that making a character with that kind of disadvantage seems fun and all at first, but most players eventually get tired of playing the 4 INT guy that can't contribute the slightest to any intellectual exercise in any plausible way. I mean 4 INT, can you even talk? I'd say you won't be saying much! It also gets pretty implausible when you end up with things like 4 INT 18 WIS, what's that all about? You can sort of hypothesize your 'Forrest Gump' character, but it certainly doesn't correspond well to anyone that could exist in the real world, and is thus hard to RP in any sustained way.

 

[Aegeri]

Also don't forget that having wider margins within a party with various ability scores starts to throw the - already immensely shaky - maths about how skill challenges off. When you have someone so incompetent they can't even pass the easy check on a skill challenge, you can have quite a problem.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

The proper role of an Int 4 Fighter in a skill challenge that requires Intelligence is to walk over to a pointed-at corner and sit quietly until the others have finished decoding the runes. Thumb twiddling is optional, provided that one's Dex score isn't also below 8.

The proper role of a Str 4 Wizard in a skill challenge that requires Strength is to be hauled up a cliff while swaddled securely in a rug. Arcane muttering is acceptable, provided it does not generate sufficient heat to set the rug aflame.

The proper role of an Int 4 Wizard is comic relief at the tail end of a marathon session in which at least one TPK brought about an unwanted grim atmosphere.

(If it's not clear, this is a response to Aegeri, just above, regarding the math of skill challenges.)

 

[DMZ2112]

I find that using a scaling point-buy (with ability score points that become more expensive as they get higher) mitigates the effect of using dump stats to boost prime requisites, but the default system in the PHB is not severe enough.

In my own games I encourage rolling but also accept one-for-one point buy because I think players ought to be able to play characters with whatever stats they like. My players know they can expect haughty disdain if they start min/maxing.

Personally, I prefer rolling.

What I really don't understand about D&D4 ability scores is why they're still on a 3-18 scale if you aren't supposed to roll 3d6 or take stats below 8. Wouldn't it make more sense to normalize to 10-20?

 

[Cyronax]

Personally, I prefer rolling.

What I really don't understand about D&D4 ability scores is why they're still on a 3-18 scale if you aren't supposed to roll 3d6 or take stats below 8. Wouldn't it make more sense to normalize to 10-20?

4e's math could have been divorced from the old scale based on things like level bonuses and the enforced balance of the system. The old scale has probably been kept due to the legacy of what a certain number means as a concept of weaknesses/strength. Saying that your character has an 18 at something means nearly the same thing in 4e as it did in previous editions.

 

[Xris Robin]

Having an INT of 4 our less means you aren't a party member, you're the party pet. Most beasts have an INT of 2, with magical beasts having 4 or 5.

If a displacer beast is smarter than you, you are not a character. Try flipping through the MM and looking for monsters with stats below 8.

 

[DMZ2112]

4e's math could have been divorced from the old scale based on things like level bonuses and the enforced balance of the system. The old scale has probably been kept due to the legacy of what a certain number means as a concept of weaknesses/strength. Saying that your character has an 18 at something means nearly the same thing in 4e as it did in previous editions.

You're right of course. I just often wonder why some sacred cows made the cut when others didn't.

 

[Dungeoneer]

You're right of course. I just often wonder why some sacred cows made the cut when others didn't.

Mathematically it is kind of silly. But I think the issue is that experienced players kind of no what to expect from the 8-18 scale. Without having played 4e before, they know that you probably want an 18 in your primary stat, 8 is a dump stat, etc. They also know how modifiers work.

Actually at a glance, 4e stat numbers look pretty much identical to 3x and 2e stat numbers, even though underneath the hood they do some very different things. But I imagine that that innate familiarity is why they kept the scale the same.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Mathematically it is kind of silly. But I think the issue is that experienced players kind of no what to expect from the 8-18 scale. Without having played 4e before, they know that you probably want an 18 in your primary stat, 8 is a dump stat, etc. They also know how modifiers work.

Actually at a glance, 4e stat numbers look pretty much identical to 3x and 2e stat numbers, even though underneath the hood they do some very different things. But I imagine that that innate familiarity is why they kept the scale the same.

Yeah, if the game was designed from scratch today it would probably be different, but I really don't see any strong reason to change it. The existing system works fine and it isn't as if it is enormously obtuse. Nothing really wrong with tradition.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Also don't forget that having wider margins within a party with various ability scores starts to throw the - already immensely shaky - maths about how skill challenges off. When you have someone so incompetent they can't even pass the easy check on a skill challenge, you can have quite a problem.

I posit that this is not a problem with "low ability scores" per se, but rather a problem with the mechanics of the Skill Challenge.

People can't just "sit out" combat, they shouldn't be able to just "sit out" other challenges.