Average/Expected Ability Scores?

[Amaril]

My group is just about to start up a new game, our first in 5e--none of us have any real experience with the system (I've played one session with another group). Our DM allowed us to do the standard single 4d6b3 array for ability scores, and said that if we didn't like the result, we could use point-buy or the standard array. I ended up going for point-buy, and came up with a final set of 16, 15, 12, 12, 10, 10, after racial and feat mods (I went with variant human and took Observant).

This seems a little low to me compared to 3.5e and Pathfinder, were I always got the sense that a character without at least one stat of 18 was subpar. I don't know if that used to be the case, but is it now? Do the lower standard scores and point-buy caps indicate a general expectation of lower ability scores?

[Demonic Spoon]

27 point buy is the standard in 5e, and is about what you would get from 4d6b3 on average.

In my experience it was common to see ~30+ point buy in 3.X games, and there was no restriction on the max a stat can start at like there is in 5e. The only way to start with an 18 in a stat in 5e is to roll for stats and get lucky.

[Longcat]

The standard seems to be 27 PointBuy, which results in balanced characters. I strongly recommend your group to use the point buy, as otherwise, lucky rolls will create insurmountable gaps in character effectiveness which may severely diminish an affected player's enjoyment of the game. Ability scores are expected to be lower than 3.5/Pathfinder, with an expected starting value of 16-17 in your primary abilities (including racial bonus) and a hard cap of 20.

[Amaril]

Yeah, I'm aware of the hard cap at 20. I'm not too concerned about people rolling high and getting unbalanced characters, since our DM is also imposing a limit of no more than two stats higher than 15 and nothing higher than 18 to start (so no playing non-human and using your +2 on a rolled 18). Hopefully it'll work out okay, I guess we'll see.

Ignoring balance between party members, though, are the stats I listed earlier balanced for the general assumptions of the game? As in, will I be outmatched against normal enemies pulled from the MM?

[Eslin]

Yeah, I'm aware of the hard cap at 20. I'm not too concerned about people rolling high and getting unbalanced characters, since our DM is also imposing a limit of no more than two stats higher than 15 and nothing higher than 18 to start (so no playing non-human and using your +2 on a rolled 18). Hopefully it'll work out okay, I guess we'll see.

Ignoring balance between party members, though, are the stats I listed earlier balanced for the general assumptions of the game? As in, will I be outmatched against normal enemies pulled from the MM?

I'd honestly limit it to 17. Two stats higher than 15 is no big deal, since most classes only really care about two stats - this isn't 3.5, no class cares about having tertiary intelligence or anything, but as is it's normally impossible to start with a bonus higher than +3 - I DM'd 3.5 and I usually went with 36 or so point buy, but 5e works a little differently and keeping their primary stats reasonably low makes for interesting character building choices - do I want sharpshooter or +2 dexterity?

Having a 16 or two allows you to keep up fine with MM creatures, though I'd encourage your DM to find a way to make characters care about tertiary stats - most classes can partially or completely dump intelligence, charisma and strength or dexterity.