Base Stats

[Ranting Fool]

Having a slight argument at the moment, so I thought I'd ask the opinion of the Playground.

1: How important to a characters power level are their base stats (Mean more than enough to cast the basic level of spell) due to the high number of items to increase stats.

Is having 18 Str so much better than 14 Str to make the character noticeably more powerful.

2: What level range does it just not matter anymore.

I said something along the lines of "If I did allow the leadership feat then the cohort would have lower stats then you (Been using the stat point buying system rather then roll) as last time I let someone have leadership their cohort was often more awesome then the player"

"High stats don't make a huge difference after the first few levels, you're just being mean because I won't go to the shop for you"

"Errr didn't you complain about how having the highest starting points listed in the DMG 1 wasn't enough for you..."

[Duke of URL]

A difference of +2 on a key modifier is pretty big, all throughout the life of a character. In general, it represents a 10% improvement in abilities keyed off that attribute, because one would expect the challenges to somewhat keep pace with the abilities. That is, if a level 10 character was tackling level 1 challenges, then the +2 difference wouldn't matter much, if at all.

[Darth Stabber]

To piggy back off duke of url's post. As you level up you gain lot's of other bonuses to various rolls, and this lowers the percieved utility of your base stats, but since, as duke stated, challenges increase at roughly the same rate, that little bit is important, but you also have to maintain a stable of other improvements to stay competitive.

Example:
at lvl1 a difficult hide roll might be dc15, if you have 12 dex and max ranks you have 50/50 shot. If you have 16dex and max ranks you have a more friendly 60/40

At lvl10 a difficult hide roll might be dc30. The same two guys have 13ranks and bonuses from items and such of 7. They end up with the same odds as before (50/50 and 60/40) thanks to the hogher dexterity in the second case.

[Blisstake]

Depends on what kind of optimal play he's talking about. If you're playing a high level wizard, for example, who spams summon spells, while using Rope Trick whenever his spells become even remotely close to depleting, then your statistics really won't be that important, assuming you can meet the minimum required for spellcasting.

[nedz]

There are several feats which require certain stats, though most are just 13. Not having these can make a large difference.

[navar100]

It's not a crime against humanity for a 1st level character to have an 18. The character doesn't absolutely need one, but neither is the player a better player for having an 8. If stats truly don't matter, then why be apoplectic when colloquial you sees an 18? Why assume the player can't roleplay, is compensating for something, or other negative connotations.?

At character creation I don't demand an 18. However, in return I refuse to be commanded to have an 8. I also dislike being forced to have an 8 if I do happen to have an 18.

In any case, the ability score array does matter. At some point a character mathematically fails to function. While what constitutes a "decent" array is subjective to the individual, it still needs to be at least decent.

[MukkTB]

Some classes are more stat dependent than others some play styles are more stat dependent than others. Mostly the low tier stuff needs good stats to even try to compete. The high tier classes have things like summoning and party buffing that aren't so dependent on stats they can fall back on. I'm not sure how to describe the play style. With poorer overall stats it pays to be less aggressive and think things through more carefully.

[Dayzgone]

I think you should met my friends " Bulls Strength (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/bullsStrength.htm)and Cats Grace (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/catsGrace.htm)”

Overall I would say higher base stats are very important to how a character functions. Or at least till about lvl 15. Its around there that stats start to fall apart

[Emperor Tippy]

At lower levels they are a significant deal. At higher levels your casting stat matters because of bonus spells and saves but every caster is maximizing that anyways so it doesn't really change anything.

You can give everyone straight 18's for starting stats and it won't noticeably mess up the balance too much after about level 5 or so. It's maybe an extra 60 points of HP at level 20 (assuming a base of 12) and maybe an extra 4 points of AC. The bonus skills are more important but again it's nothing game breaking.

The power up also tends to favor the non casters disproportionately, which isn't a bad thing.

[eggs]

For a Spellcaster, the one thing that really matters is how many rounds there are tools to play. A high casting stat isn't usually incredibly important - Solid Fog is just as solid with 16 intelligence as with 36, polymorph is just as morphic, enervation enervates just as hard, dispel works just as well. So once the spellcaster gets 6 or so "real" spells per day, the mainstat stops being so important. Even if we discount level 1 spells due to their common saves and often-single target effects, by level 5, a character's stats stop being so important to their daily endurance. The one stipulation is that the caster has to have a high enough mainstat to cast their level-appropriate spells. Provided even stunted ability enhancement progression (+2 item by ECL 7, +4 item by ECL 11, +6 by 15), a Wizard or Cleric with 12 mainstat will have the resources to be effective, just with less emphasis on debuffs than a higher-statted character. This is a bit less true for limited casters, like Beguilers and Dread Necromancers, who are somewhat shoehorned into Save v. X effects, but in general, stats don't matter all that much for magic users.

For noncasters, base stats become more important (barring access to polymorph effects). Just hashing out some really rough numbers using side-by-side strength comparisons of low-op weapon focus fighters against average monster AC/HPs by level, it looks like in terms of straight damage output, an 18 Strength Fighter will take at least a round less to kill monsters until level 9, at which point the various attack/damage bonuses and increasing monster HP water the strength bonus down enough that the two fighters begin to take just as long to kill things (though variance is still going to favor the higher-strength fighter). That's the same breakeven for 22 Strength (though low levels look much better for the higher-strength build).

Looking at a stronger build, like a charge-focused Frenzied Berserker, the average time it takes to kill a level appropriate monster with 15 and 22 strength breaks even at ECL 7.

So overall, I'd say base stats don't matter so much, and by ECL 10, there shouldn't be an appreciable difference between comparable builds, regardless of initial rolls. (Though there are exceptions for things like casters with singlemindedly save-or-X spell selections, Strength check-focused Fighters, and builds specifically devoted to frequent application of one particular stat.)

But qualifier I should mention is that for noncasters at very low levels, the primary attack modifier is the single most important factor in a character's default damage output. It takes a while for that to be eclipsed, and for that period, the difference between 22 strength and 15 is enormous - the difference between auto-killing every monster that comes into reach and struggling for several rounds, hoping not to get too many unlucky rolls in a row. It would be disingenuous to point out the relative higher-level parity without referencing the 22-Strength character's much greater likelihood of surviving until those higher levels. And even for casters, going into even one fight without providing spell support will greatly increase the odds of character death. So high base stats are still very important to high-level characters, just not at the time when they are high-level characters.

[nedz]

Many of my best characters have had a 6. It just adds better contrast to the high scores. Its quite fun to be realy good at some things, and suck at others. Though YMMV I guess.