D&D General Weapon Mastery - Yea or Nay?

[payn]

So on the subject of rolling for scores as opposed to point buy (standard array), I think that one aspect of it is being missed.

Talking about the results is somewhat interesting (average of 3d6 is 10, 4d6k1 is 12.25, standard array is 12). But there is another issue inherent in the "old-timey" way of rolling for abilities that I want to address.

It is considered standard practice in 5e to design your character. In other words, you think about the type of character you want, and then build it so that it matches what you want. In order to do this, it is an absolute requirement that the player is allowed to assign their ability scores.

Back in the old days (give me a second to borrow a beard to tug on) .... that wasn't the case. In other words, it wasn't just that the abilities were determined randomly by rolling- it was the each ability was determined randomly.

In other words, 3d6 (or 4d6k1 or something similar) was rolled for each ability, in order. One major advantage of that is that it kept people from just playing a character that was already in their head- the rolls would "reveal" the character, and that would then channel your thoughts into what the character would be.

I am not asserting that this is good or bad- I love designing characters in 5e. But I also love the serendipity of sitting down and rolling abilities, and then trying to make sense of what I rolled as a character. Both methods (design and serendipity) are a lot of fun, but they are definitely different kinds of fun.

The random roll is easier to take when the differences between top and bottom are not so far apart. For example, in Traveller an 8 in strength is a mod of 0, and a 15+ is mod of 3. In 5E, a strength of 8 has a -1 mod, and a strength of 16 has a mod of 3. Not only is the spread larger at creation with D&D, but it can expand up to +5.

One can get by easier in the former than the latter. YMMV.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Thought puzzle. Assume you're making characters at 1st level, 3d6 6 times, rearrange to taste.

Before you roll stats, would you rather:

A) Instead get to roll 5d6 drop 2 for each stat.
B) Roll normally, but also receive a rare or very rare magic item, rolled from a 1d100 table with no consumables or boring items.

Depends on the system. With TSR-era D&D, option A is a no-brainer. You can always find magic items, but it's really hard to increase ability scores.

Slightly closer call with 5e, but I'd still go with the ability to 5d6k2 twice. Ability scores really matter.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Thought puzzle. Assume you're making characters at 1st level, 3d6 6 times, rearrange to taste.

Before you roll stats, would you rather:

A) Instead get to roll 5d6 drop 2 for each stat.
B) Roll normally, but also receive a rare or very rare magic item, rolled from a 1d100 table with no consumables or boring items.

I assume there is an implicit goal of maximizing your character's effectiveness?

Because my answer would be that this campaign sounds too Monty Haul.

 

[TwoSix]

I assume there is an implicit goal of maximizing your character's effectiveness?

Because my answer would be that this campaign sounds too Monty Haul.

The goal would be whatever sounds more fun to you as a player.

 

[Distracted DM]

You mean beside the general 5e principle that "Thou shalt not be forced to commit to character choices?"

That's probably worth a discussion thread in and of itself.

 

[billd91]

So yeah, you can call 3d6 “punitive,” but it’s just honest randomness.

"Honest" randomness? So's a 1d20, a 1d6, and so is 4d6k1. They're ALL equally random, they just have different distributions. And, since at least 1979, the distribution for 4d6k1 has been pretty dominant for generating adventurers. And yes, because it skews a bit higher with its mean and lower probabilities at the lower end. But then adventurers are generally facing challenges skewing a bit toward the higher end of a fantasy setting than your average Joe NPC.

 

[Stalker0]

I am not asserting that this is good or bad- I love designing characters in 5e. But I also love the serendipity of sitting down and rolling abilities, and then trying to make sense of what I rolled as a character. Both methods (design and serendipity) are a lot of fun, but they are definitely different kinds of fun.

I generally find the newer method is best for newer players. They often have that one idea that's bursting to the top that they want to play, and so want to find something that lets them craft that ideal as much as possible.

When your a seasoned vet with a dozen characters under your belt...you've "been there done that". And so I do think there is a lovely challenge to being handed some stats and having to craft a whacky concept.

 

[CreamCloud0]

gritty:
16,16,14,12,10,8

do you actually consider (what is close enough to basically be) the standard array+mods to be restrictive enough to be defined as 'gritty'?

if i had to provide what i'd define as a 'gritty array' (again, including mods) it'd probably end up looking something like:
14(+2), 11(+0), 10(+0), 9(-1), 8(-1), 6(-2).

y'know, an array that's meant to make things tough.

(i realize this isn't something most people would find enjoyable to play but the point isn't to appeal to 'most people', it's to appeal to people who want a challenge)

 

[Horwath]

do you actually consider (what is close enough to basically be) the standard array+mods to be restrictive enough to be defined as 'gritty'?

there is not ASIs later at all, so it is gritty.

if i had to provide what i'd define as a 'gritty array' (again, including mods) it'd probably end up looking something like:
14(+2), 11(+0), 10(+0), 9(-1), 8(-1), 6(-2).

this is worse that commoner.
why would you play a commoner?
in d&d world, you would not survive 3rd level with this array

y'know, an array that's meant to make things tough.

(i realize this isn't something most people would find enjoyable to play but the point isn't to appeal to 'most people', it's to appeal to people who want a challenge)

 

[CreamCloud0]

there is not ASIs later at all, so it is gritty.

this is worse that commoner.
why would you play a commoner?
in d&d world, you would not survive 3rd level with this array

okay i admit that was my mistake, i read the part about 'no extra ASI at char gen' and saw you had added them directly to the array but ended up missing the part about no ASI from feats or level up either, in that context where the character's aren't gaining stats it's more understandable why you would label it that way.