What is the standard ability score set? Are most games playing too high?

[FunkBGR]

15,14,13,12,10,8

I'm a busy DM, and so I've run DUNGEON modules almost exclusively.

In my experience, a higher point-buy causes most players to think about the "self" before the "group", and that's what causes them to fail/suck in DUNGEON. A lower point-buy has almost always always caused them to be more concerned about encounters, and look for assistance from the group. It's promoted more tactical play than 'I'm the hero"

YMMV obviously, but that's what I've noticed.

 

[stonehill_troll]

For me, high stat characters creates several problems that I have seen first hand when DMing and from reading the boards here and on WOTC D&D boards.

1. They can more easily take on and defeat monsters and encounters of the appropriate CR/ECL - - which leads to gaining xp faster and therefore leveling faster

2. Combat goes much faster, so much that the monsters rarely get to use more than one special ability

3. Not much tactical flavor if combat goes too fast (no time for flanking, AOO, last ditch dashes by cleric to save tank with last minute cure....)

4. To challenge them you often have to throw more and/or higher CR/ECL monsters encounters at them
- - combat may last longer, but even more so leads to PCs gaining xp faster and therefore leveling even faster (I see many DMs complaining their PCs are leveling too fast)

5. Magic, start going over the suggested baseline of magic for the PCs level, only further compounds the problems. You have to carefully watch the magic items you place in your adventures.
- - now you have high-stat PCs with uber magic items, now you really got to work on increasing or raising the monsters CR/ECL to really challenge them


I would much rather run a 25 PB (or 28 PB tops) game,
- - using the monsters straight out of the book
- - even monsters just one CR lower are a challenge, and more often get a chance to use their different abilities
- - with longer battles, different classes have more opportunities to use different abilities and shine in their right
- - slower xp gain and slower leveling, gives players more time to game-play with their current class abilities...
- - have ample leeway to create and place interesting (not specifically the big six) magic items
- - I as the DM have more time to focus on other story/adventure details, besides trying to determine the right CR/ECL of monsters necessary to challenge the party
- - and lets me run a more grim and gritty medival fantasy campaign, which I find much more enjoyed to run - versus - the Super Friends meet King Arthur

 

[Desdichado]

I'd wager--completely speculatively--that the "standard" array is actually quite a bit lower than "standard" across the gaming community. In our games, we're much more likely to do point buy in the 28-30 range it seems. If we roll, it seems we have enough failsafes in that we cluster around that same point too. Almost all of us also GM, and when I run, I like to use the standard array and let everyone apply three +1 ability ups of their choice at character creation. I think that's more or less equivalent to a 28 point buy, but much easier and simpler to do.

 

[Voadam]

My point buy games are always 32+. I like my heroes heroic.

I use 25 point buys in all my games, as I recall.

I'm flexible as a player. See Sir Merrick and Garn in my sig for characters in both these DMs campaigns.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Do stats make a character heroic?

Possibly, depending on what one means by heroic. It can indicate moral virtues such as altruism or courage. It can also refer to achievements, capabilities or great competence. If the latter then in an rpg clearly better numbers = better capabilities = more heroic.

 

[WayneLigon]

I feel that good stats generally make up for magic items a great deal; if the party fighter has a 13 strength, I'll like stick a +1 sword in the treasure fairly early. If he has an 18 strength, it might be fifth or sixth level before they run across such an item. He'll be doing fairly well with a +4 melee and damage bonus for quite some time.

Generally, I'll use a 32 or 36 point buy, or let people roll best-3-of-4-arrange as they wish; if they roll under what they could have gotten with the point buy then they still get the option of the point buy.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I use:

Action Dice
Maximum Hit Points
32 character Point Built

Still had a few player deaths in Shackled City.

1st death: Mage misses fortitude save from assassin's death attack.

2nd death: Magister from AU gets hit by 50+ points of cold damage. Freezes to death.

3rd death: Cleric willingly enters a sphere of anhillation (Goodman Game's module of Iron Heretic.) Stupidity on player's party. Pure stupidity.

4th death: Ritual Warrior from AU gets hit by same 50+ points of cold damage as #2 and misses Fortitude save for death by massive damage rule.

5th death: scout who misses a saving throw versus Destruction spell.

In most cases, it's not the nibbles and 'thousand cuts', it's the save or die.

 

[Reynard]

My first lovew will always be 4d6 DTL, in order and make a character from the results (reroll of whole set allowed if the net modifier is negative).

People actually get creative -- both mechanically and otherwise -- when they are forced to work with a given set. Of course, I also like minimum requirements -- one of the coolest PCs I ever DMed for was one where the player wanted to play a druid, didn't roll well enough, so created a character that always wanted to be a druid...

I know, I know -- it goes totally against the whole player empowerment inherent in D&D.

 

[Desdichado]

My first lovew will always be 4d6 DTL, in order and make a character from the results (reroll of whole set allowed if the net modifier is negative).

People actually get creative -- both mechanically and otherwise -- when they are forced to work with a given set. Of course, I also like minimum requirements -- one of the coolest PCs I ever DMed for was one where the player wanted to play a druid, didn't roll well enough, so created a character that always wanted to be a druid...

I know, I know -- it goes totally against the whole player empowerment inherent in D&D.

I 100% agree that it forces players to get creative. It also tends to be frustrating for players too, though--and being creative to overcome artificial limitations imposed by the DM's interpretation of the system isn't typically something that's fun for players to get creative about.

If that floats your boat, great--but I find that distinctly unfun myself.

 

[Reynard]

I 100% agree that it forces players to get creative. It also tends to be frustrating for players too, though--and being creative to overcome artificial limitations imposed by the DM's interpretation of the system isn't typically something that's fun for players to get creative about.

If that floats your boat, great--but I find that distinctly unfun myself.

Artificial, how? I mean, moreso than any other element of the game>

Interpretation? Not in previous editions, anyway -- and many of the limitations were there for a reason, and made the game better, IMO.

Would it be unfun if you rolled all 18s?