Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 3077167" data-attributes="member: 1757">Actually, the comparison works fine with the rogue. A high-Str rogue is MUCH more effective in combat; high Con makes the rogue much more durable. Count those in for at LEAST one level's worth of sneak attack (1/2d6). High Int gives enough skill points to count a level's worth, especially with improved mods from skill-associated stats.Really, the comparison works for all non-primary spellcasting classes. It works for comparing odd-level to (odd+1)-level spellcasters as well, as noted earlier. As to the "historical" argument stated earlier: I would suggest that history cuts both ways. As a long-time (A)D&D DM, I have long disliked the consequences of drastically disparate ability score arrays in my player groups. In fact, I ended up increasing the power of the wish spell in one game simply to allow the PCs who had slogged up to high levels in the shadow of one especially steroidal barbarian PC (Str 18/00, Dex 16, Con 17, Int 14, Wis 14, Cha 16; yes, he rolled all these in front of me on 4d6 drop one, same as the other PCs) to raise their ability scores to comparable levels by about 20th-21st character level. I thus see (A)D&D's history of randomly rolled ability scores as demonstrating a weak point in need of improvement, which I think point buy resolves nicely.That said, I fully understand that YMMV. If you *like* the randomness of rolled ability score generation, then you like it, and thus it is fun. QED. I do think that for DMs concerned about PC-to-PC balance, point buy is a superior option.</blockquote>

Verification