D&D 5E Why I Am Starting to Prefer 4d6 Drop the Lowest Over the Default Array.

[FormerlyHemlock]

What's funny is that one of the reasons I don't like rolling is because of the chance of getting the super-high-stat character. They're kind of boring.

Taking your comment at face value:

Just stick the stat in a suboptimal place. Fezzig the Str 20 Int 13 half-orc wizard: is he more boring than a Str 10 Int 13 human wizard? I think not.

 

[MoonSong]

What's funny is that one of the reasons I don't like rolling is because of the chance of getting the super-high-stat character. They're kind of boring.

For the most part I don't base my flaws on stats because I come up with character concept first, everything else second. But ... if I have the concept of the absent-minded wizard who is brilliant but obtuse it's not going to work as well if my "low" stat is a 14 instead of an 8. I just don't go the extreme you seem to want.

Thanks to 4d6 drop 1 I currently have a character with Strength 14 Dexterity 18 Constitution 15 Intelligence 14 Wisdom 17 and Charisma 18, I have a hard time approaching her. She is too godly and resilient, perhaps even the most powerful in the party by stats. (Of course the barbarian has bigger strength and the wizard has higher int. But she has more charisma than the warlock and basically same wis and dex than the ranger and can match basically all of them in skills) If I wasn't on support, didn't go around without armor, passed every chance to get magical gear and didn't focus on simple weapons I'd overshadow everybody. Even then, the party wizard doesn't think twice before bringing friendly fire on me because I can take it and they in general feel free to ignore enemies coming at me, because I can take it.

 

[MoonSong]

Taking your comment at face value:

Just stick the stat in a suboptimal place. Fezzig the Str 20 Int 13 half-orc wizard: is he more boring than a Str 10 Int 13 human wizard? I think not.

But how do you make 14 18 15 14 15 16 interesting?

 

[Barolo]

But how do you make 14 18 15 14 15 16 interesting?

Play an unarmored half-orc storm sorcerer who favors frontlining using a knife charged with booming blade. Go full in with skills such as intimidation, survival and athletics. Grab the outlander background.

If you also want some roleplaying hints, make him believe he is a full blooded orc and that gruumsh favored him with his powers at birth, to be a force of nature, and that after seeing his whole tribe being exterminated on a conflict with rival orc tribes, he had this vision his people was doing everything wrong and you, only you, know the true way of gruumsh, the one-eyed!

So much fun you will thank me for years to come.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

But how do you make 14 18 15 14 15 16 interesting?

What's the difference?

Fezzig, Str 20 Dex 15 Con 15 Int 14 Wis 16 Cha 15, half-orc wizard.

So now he's got Int 14 instead of Int 13, and you'll probably play him as pretty chill and zen due to high Wisdom--his backstory now probably includes him being a well-liked loner among the other humans and half-orcs he grew up with, just because he was so much more mature than they were and didn't have much in common with them--but there's nothing about the new stats that makes him LESS interesting than the last iteration; and if you're looking for a combat challenge, he's still a worse-than-average wizard with a bunch of tertiary stats he has no real use for, mechanically. They're mostly important for how they shape the roleplaying personality--and high and low stats are equally good at shaping personality. (Mediocre stats in the 10-12 range are the worst at shaping personality.)

What I envision for this guy is something along the lines of, "I could'a been a contender--my Ma said I'd knock their socks off in the gladiatorial arena, y'know?--but that's just not me. I don't like destroying people. I like building them up. And that's what I love about magic--I love the flow of it, the feel, the mystery of discovering how it works and how to use it more efficiently. And I love Mending people's broken fishhooks and socks and blankets. I've been working on this new spell called Fabricate. If I can get the kinks out, I think I might be able to actually make real stuff with magic, ten times or maybe a hundred times as fast as you could do without it. That excites me, y'know? I didn't want to be a contender. I wanted to make a difference."

That's one way to make him interesting.

I'd probably find a regular human paladin with that personality interesting too. (Actually, it reminds me of one PC in particular, Cranduin the Lesser, who is notable for his listening skills and the way he strives to be of service to others, e.g. camp chores like washing dishes, getting up early to stoke the fire, cleaning mud off everyone's boots while they're asleep, etc. I find him interesting because he's so very different from me, and yet I feel like I would like to be more like that: "he that is greatest among you is the least and the servant of all.")

 

[Lanefan]

But how do you make 14 18 15 14 15 16 interesting?

Were it me, I might just go all ego all the time and let the entertainment come from the other party members giving me the business whenever I messed up.

Of course, it's just occurred to me you're probably listing the stats in the wrong order and not S-I-W-D-Co-Ch like they should be. I looked at those numbers and thought "Int 18 with the rest of those stats to back it up - that's an ego looking for a place to call home!"

But if it's Dex 18 - I'd go with uber-Thief - a Locke Lamora type who gets out of trouble only slightly less often than he gets into it, and who always pushes the limits just a bit beyond where they break. A smooth elegant con man (the Cha 16 would really work here!) who can still look after himself in a fight.

Lan-"or I could trade you those stats for whatever I next roll up, if you want something more pathetic ordinary"-efan

 

[MoonSong]

Were it me, I might just go all ego all the time and let the entertainment come from the other party members giving me the business whenever I messed up.

Of course, it's just occurred to me you're probably listing the stats in the wrong order and not S-I-W-D-Co-Ch like they should be. I looked at those numbers and thought "Int 18 with the rest of those stats to back it up - that's an ego looking for a place to call home!"

But if it's Dex 18 - I'd go with uber-Thief - a Locke Lamora type who gets out of trouble only slightly less often than he gets into it, and who always pushes the limits just a bit beyond where they break. A smooth elegant con man (the Cha 16 would really work here!) who can still look after himself in a fight.

Lan-"or I could trade you those stats for whatever I next roll up, if you want something more pathetic ordinary"-efan

Those are not in any particular order. Place them wherever you want. Like I said, a character that perfect is hard to relate to -for me-. Weaknesses are as important as strengths, there is no room for being, dizzy, distracted, clumsy, dorky, or flighty with this array.

 

[FrogReaver]

But how do you make 14 18 15 14 15 16 interesting?

You make him constantly be the party drunk!

 

[Ratskinner]

3E did a lot to create the min/max super character phenomenon. I'm not big on it, wasn't big on 3rd or 3.5, but I understand plenty of players loved them. To each their own.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

I can assure you that minlmax characters were common before 3e.

Sent from my LG-TP450 using EN World mobile app

 

[Soul Stigma]

I can assure you that minlmax characters were common before 3e.

Sent from my LG-TP450 using EN World mobile app

I didn't say it did everything to create them. I said "a lot".


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[ccs]

But how do you make 14 18 15 14 15 16 interesting?

I'd make this character interesting in the same way I'd make any other character interesting. I'd write up an actual character, not just a bunch of modifiers. I'd factor in why/how those stats came to be, how they effect the character. As well as race, class, & what I'm currently doing.
And if I had an idea that seemed to suggest that some stat be lower? Then I'd just ask the DM if I could just make my ___ x instead of what I'd rolled. (I did that with my 1/2ling warlock. Even putting the lowest # I'd rolled into her str, it still felt too high. Afterall, she's a 12 year old 1/2ling - she's just NOT as strong as an adult. So we set her str at 7 & kept the original score as what she'll eventually grow into if she reaches adulthood)

Those are not in any particular order. Place them wherever you want. Like I said, a character that perfect is hard to relate to -for me-. Weaknesses are as important as strengths, there is no room for being, dizzy, distracted, clumsy, dorky, or flighty with this array.

Sure there is. I can look at that & easily see a 1st lv character who's been suddenly been transformed. Potion? Gifts from the gods/your patron? Built? Spirit stuck into a new body?
Just because I have +s doesn't mean I can't come up with flaws/quirks/personality traits that'll make a character interesting.
(Take my 1/2ling warlock for ex. She hasa few +s on her Wis. These +s though don't do anything to curb her curiosity. A truly wise character probably wouldn't do some of the things she has. They just sometimes allow a bonus when it comes to making the saving throws her actions often necessitate.... If she survives long enough her actions will eventually modify to more closely reflect her actual score. )

 

[Lanefan]

Those are not in any particular order. Place them wherever you want. Like I said, a character that perfect is hard to relate to -for me-. Weaknesses are as important as strengths, there is no room for being, dizzy, distracted, clumsy, dorky, or flighty with this array.

Sure you could be distracted. I know some people in real life - who, were they D&D characters, would probably have rather impressive stat arrays - that have the attention span of a chicken.

You can also do flighty...or flirty...or hopelessly romantic...or a wannabe dictator...or a person who can't do anything without having 5 layers of bureaucracy attached to it, all in triplicate...or a pacifist...the list goes on. In fact, I think you've got more options than you might realize.

Lan-"though my main suggestion - and this goes for pretty much every character, not just this one - is that whatever you do, take it just a bit over the top"-efan

 

[S'mon]

I'm pretty sure I'm remembering that right. It stood out last time I browsed the RC because I thought you were able to reduce any ability. I might have to reread to refresh my memory though.

In BX and Mentzer D&D you can only reduce class Primes, STR INT & WIS as I recall, not even DEX -
because OD&D had no Thieves so DEX originally not a Prime. You can only raise the Prime for your class. CON & CHA cannot be altered.

 

[cbwjm]

In BX and Mentzer D&D you can only reduce class Primes, STR INT & WIS as I recall, not even DEX -
because OD&D had no Thieves so DEX originally not a Prime. You can only raise the Prime for your class. CON & CHA cannot be altered.

Since your post notification came through while I was at my PC, I decided to check the RC it is exactly as you say. I had totally forgotten that Dex couldn't be lowered and I thought it was only Cha not Con & Cha that couldn't be lowered. I guess the Dex thing really should have been updated to allow it to be reduced since thieves were now one of the 4 but it wasn't.

 

[Wulffolk]

Previous to the point buy and standard array in 3e, it was most common in earlier editions to just plain cheat. All the meaningful bonuses required a 17 or 18, or a bare minimum 16.

It was amazing how many character's were "rolled" back then with an 18/?? STR or multiple 16+ stats. Being a Paladin usually required that kind of "luck". Most often players just kept rolling sets of stats until they liked one.

Since 3e, with the more standardized ability bonuses spread from 12 on up, and the inclusion of Ability Score Increases, it became less vital to start off with GOD-stats. If anything rolling for stats has been even more forgiving since 3e than it ever was in earlier editions.

I wonder what percentage of people that prefer point buy started with 3e or later, vs what percentage of those that prefer rolling started with earlier editions.

 

[Zardnaar]

Previous to the point buy and standard array in 3e, it was most common in earlier editions to just plain cheat. All the meaningful bonuses required a 17 or 18, or a bare minimum 16.

It was amazing how many character's were "rolled" back then with an 18/?? STR or multiple 16+ stats. Being a Paladin usually required that kind of "luck". Most often players just kept rolling sets of stats until they liked one.

Since 3e, with the more standardized ability bonuses spread from 12 on up, and the inclusion of Ability Score Increases, it became less vital to start off with GOD-stats. If anything rolling for stats has been even more forgiving since 3e than it ever was in earlier editions.

I wonder what percentage of people that prefer point buy started with 3e or later, vs what percentage of those that prefer rolling started with earlier editions.

There were other ways of rolling like Method V. Using that you often rolled 7,8,9 d6 keep best 3. The Paladin got to roll 9d6 for charisma in the 1E UA.

Its kind of fun and method 5 was for humans only since demihumans had racial packages and could MC.

2E PHB had 6 ways to do scores.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Those are not in any particular order. Place them wherever you want. Like I said, a character that perfect is hard to relate to -for me-. Weaknesses are as important as strengths, there is no room for being, dizzy, distracted, clumsy, dorky, or flighty with this array.

Plenty of room though for being bloodthirsty, egomaniacal, pacifist, vengeful, duty-bound, kind, or dedicated to noblesse oblige.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Since 3e, with the more standardized ability bonuses spread from 12 on up, and the inclusion of Ability Score Increases, it became less vital to start off with GOD-stats. If anything rolling for stats has been even more forgiving since 3e than it ever was in earlier editions.

I wonder what percentage of people that prefer point buy started with 3e or later, vs what percentage of those that prefer rolling started with earlier editions.

I was a horrible munchkin and enabler of munchkins back in AD&D (2nd edition) days--I used to bribe my brother to do my chores for me by offering him stat boosts to his characters--but the thing in between then and now which has, more than anything else, shaped my attitude towards stat rolling is the fact that I became a fan of XCOM: UFO Defense. I discovered that no matter how uber Manfred Geisler's stats are compared to Rudy Semmelweiss's stats, Rudy can still be an MVP tossing heavy explosives at the bad guys or running a motion tracker, and Manfred can still miss that crucial shot and accidentally kill a civilian. And they are both going to die, sooner or later, probably due to enemy mind control or a Blaster Bomb, and be replaced by Tony Valencio and Martin Shlock. Everybody dies or retires eventually--journey before destination.

The 5E ruleset helps though. It's a lot more forgiving of non-uber stat rolls than AD&D was.

 

[RotGrub]

Funny, I'd say labeling people you've never met as "problem players" based on a simple playstyle preference is a good way to identify a problem DM.

Yes, it works both ways. Some playstyles don't belong together at all.

 

[RotGrub]

Why is it so horrible to want to play a hero? Or to have options on what class to play while still feeling like you are contributing to the team? Especially in a game that will last a year or more? Because the issue is not "competition" it's being overshadowed by other characters 99% of the time and never feeling like you're pulling your own weight.

I could have fun playing a campaign as the second string washouts - if the other players are in the same boat. D&D is a collaborative team game. So much like how I wouldn't feel very useful if I were on the same basketball team as LeBron James, I don't want to play "Pudgy the Wimp" on the same team as "Super Dave".

The problem with your argument is that a few stat bonuses (+/-5% to 15%) isn't substantial enough to be noticed, at least not in the manner that your analogy suggests. It certainly isn't 99% at all. +1, +2, +3 are not equal to 99%.

In addition, a character is more than his stat bonuses. Characters should be persons first and foremost, interacting and role playing have little to do with rolling dice. So for a large percentage of the time during the game those bonuses are not going to overshadow the game.

On a side note, I know one DM who would give players like yourself all 18s in their main stats. The idea was that they would learn from the other players that stats mean very little if anything to the games enjoyment. They also would realize the hard-way that the game spotlight isn't attained through stats.