3d6 in order: Which spread is best?

[Estralita]

Rolled a number of sets for Death House, trying to figure out which is the most playable:

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11

Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7

Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:7 Cha:11

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10

[Shaofoo]

I would say the last one, Dexterity can be used for nearly all melee builds save Barbarians, and all ranged combat. And Wisdom helps if you need a healer (Cleric or Druid).

[djreynolds]

Rolled a number of sets for Death House, trying to figure out which is the most playable:

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11

Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7

Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:7 Cha:11

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10

The real fun, is picking your race and class before hand. Try to randomly select a race/class with each one.

But I would dump them and just grab the standard array.

[Talamare]

There are 3 sets without even any 14s, and a set with 2 15s.... Pretty freaking obvious

[Dimcair]

There are 3 sets without even any 14s, and a set with 2 15s.... Pretty freaking obvious

That.


Also, it strikes me as weird that rolls under 8 are a thing, I haven't had to deal with that yet.

[Talamare]

That.


Also, it strikes me as weird that rolls under 8 are a thing, I haven't had to deal with that yet.

Because its not 4d6DL, its 3d6

[Ninja_Prawn]

There are 3 sets without even any 14s, and a set with 2 15s.... Pretty freaking obvious

I, for one, couldn't play a character with 4 Int. I'd pick set 2 and play a utility wizard.

[Talamare]

I, for one, couldn't play a character with 4 Int. I'd pick set 2 and play a utility wizard.

Depends on if you see 4 Int as Drooling Mentally Disabled Person... OR... I don't know math (and probably can't read), but I speak normally due to my normal Cha score

[Ninja_Prawn]

Depends on if you see 4 Int as Drooling Mentally Disabled Person... OR... I don't know math (and probably can't read), but I speak normally due to my normal Cha score

Yes, it does depend, and I kind of feel like the OP is asking for a straw poll on how we all see it, otherwise she'd just have picked set 4 right off the bat.

My interpretation is that 8 is unintelligent, probably can't read in a medieval setting, but otherwise normal. 6 and 7 would be 'special needs' in a modern setting, but still able to lead normal lives - and a commoner/farmer/peasant in D&D doesn't lead an intellectually challenging life, so the difference between Int 6 and Int 10 is "Oh, and Billy always has been a bit forgetful. Make sure you double-check the stable door before you go to bed". Int 4 and 5 is true learning disability territory. Probably functional, with help, but so far away from my own lived experience that I would feel wrong trying to play it. I couldn't believe a human with 3 Int or lower would be capable of getting themselves dressed, let alone adventuring.

[Talamare]

Yes, it does depend, and I kind of feel like the OP is asking for a straw poll on how we all see it, otherwise she'd just have picked set 4 right off the bat.

My interpretation is that 8 is unintelligent, probably can't read in a medieval setting, but otherwise normal. 6 and 7 would be 'special needs' in a modern setting, but still able to lead normal lives - and a commoner/farmer/peasant in D&D doesn't lead an intellectually challenging life, so the difference between Int 6 and Int 10 is "Oh, and Billy always has been a bit forgetful. Make sure you double-check the stable door before you go to bed". Int 4 and 5 is true learning disability territory. Probably functional, with help, but so far away from my own lived experience that I would feel wrong trying to play it. I couldn't believe a human with 3 Int or lower would be capable of getting themselves dressed, let alone adventuring.

I personally see it closer to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

but to each their own

[Arkhios]

If you get a bit creative, all of the sets can work well. Not everyone has to shoot fireballs from their butt when they begin their careers.
The following quotes are emphasized by me and suggestions afterwards.


Set 1: Str:12 Dex:7 Con:12 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11
Seems like a half-orc fighter to me. Not very good one, but passable at it. Probably won't wear heavier than Ring Mail, but with Shield and Defense Fighting style he'd be at AC 17 at first level. 4th level ASI would probably end up in strength, giving him access to chainmail. A nice boost to AC there. 6th level ASI could be used to increase Con to 14, which is alright for every martial. After that, you could as well bump strength to 20 and then some.
-> AC 17, HP 11, +3 to hit with longsword (1d8+1)


Set 2: Str:13 Dex:9 Con:10 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7
could be a Stout halfling fighter, could wear a chainmail with str 13, and maybe bick up Archery style, throwing javelins etc. and employing shield
-> AC 18, HP 10, +5 to hit with javelin (1d6+1)


Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:8 Cha:13
Aasimar dragon sorcerer. AC 13 is not that bad. And to be honest, what else does a sorcerer really need than charisma?
-> AC 13, HP 6, +3 to hit with spells, Save DC 11 (thus, Magic Missiles for everyone. Yay!)


Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:10 Int:4 Wis:16 Cha:10
Hill-Dwarf Land Druid perhaps. Actually, reminds me a lot of Pikel Bouldershoulder (from Cleric Quintet by R.A.Salvatore). Dumb as a bucket, but amiable for a dwarf. Jolly personality. Definitely not very good at speeches, but on the other hand, definitely sympathetic towards everyone else. As a point to consider, you don't have to speak well to be likable. Your personality is what matters more.
-> AC 16, HP 9, +4 to hit with scimitar (1d6+2) or +5 to hit with shillelagh (1d8+3), Save DC 13!

From the above suggestions, yes, Set 4 seems to be best of the four. The other three are not half-bad, however, and all could be usable.

[Dimcair]

See that is exactly why it is weird to me.

If you use a point-buy method you are not allowed (afaik) to have any one stat lower than 8. So for me a 3d6 is fine but if you roll under 8 I'd want to round it up.


The second issue is the much debated "does low int make you stupid" and I think it has been well argued (to me) that it doesn't. The examples often include monster manual creatures, where some stat-blocks of beasts have a higher int than humanoids but aren't automatically capable of speech etc. You don't have to play your character stupid. Maybe I wouldn't play him as a university professor (there are exceptions, personal experience, don't ask) but you are not a drooling moron. Maybe you suck at math, but there is also street smart, there is this weird concept of emotional intelligence etc.

[Ninja_Prawn]

See that is exactly why it is weird to me.

If you use a point-buy method you are not allowed (afaik) to have any one stat lower than 8. So for me a 3d6 is fine but if you roll under 8 I'd want to round it up.

That's why some people like rolling for stats: you can get numbers below 8. A character who has 8 or more across the board is not really bad at anything. Sure, they may be significantly weaker in one stat than some of their allies, but in the grand scheme of things, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with them. Rolling, especially on 3d6, gives people an opportunity to play someone with a true flaw (or two... or three...).


there is this weird concept of emotional intelligence etc.

In D&D, we call that 'Wisdom'.

[Dimcair]

In D&D, we call that 'Wisdom'.

I'd say we call that 'Charisma'.

But +2 to cockiness!

[Arkhios]

I'd say we call that 'Charisma'.

But +2 to cockiness!



Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.

Wisdom check might reflect an effort to read body language, understand someone's feelings, notice things about the environment, or care for an injured person. The Animal Handling, Insight, Medicine, Perception, and Survival skills reflect aptitude in certain kinds of Wisdom checks.

Strictly by RAW claiming that charisma counts as emotional intelligence seems ...interesting, to say the least ;)

[Ninja_Prawn]

Strictly by RAW claiming that charisma counts as emotional intelligence seems ...interesting, to say the least ;)

I agree, of course. From wikipedia:


Emotional intelligence (EI) or emotional quotient (EQ) is the capacity of individuals to recognize their own, and other people's emotions, to discriminate between different feelings and label them appropriately, and to use emotional information to guide thinking and behavior.

Now, it's possible that EI is something that combines elements of different skills and personality traits - that might be why it's so poorly regarded by the scientific community - but the core of it is recognising emotions and empathising with others. Both of those fall squarely under Wisdom.

[Dimcair]

Strictly by RAW claiming that charisma counts as emotional intelligence seems ...interesting, to say the least ;)

Uh true. Hm I'd venture to say reducing it strictly to one of the two may be wrong too, as the active part (using your gained knowledge, insight) is stat wise performed by Charisma (persuasion). Although I'll let you have the edge because emotional intelligence is not necessarily about applying said intelligence.
Besides having a 3 for int is directly between being an earthworm and being an Ape. So if we take intelligence as the 'being stupid' scale you are seriously, extremely disabled with a three.

Still cocky as **** doe^^


/edit: got ninjaed

/edit2: its kind of weird that way if you consider that with Wisdom you know how a person feels and you can see their motivations, but then actually being able to take advantage of that is Charisma. Kind of like that you can calculate in 2 sec that this giant rock will crush you with a force of XX but you are too dumb to use that intelligence to save yourself.

[Arkhios]

/edit2: its kind of weird that way if you consider that with Wisdom you know how a person feels and you can see their motivations, but then actually being able to take advantage of that is Charisma. Kind of like that you can calculate in 2 sec that this giant rock will crush you with a force of XX but you are too dumb to use that intelligence to save yourself.

I'd rule that if someone were to deduct something worthwhile from mannerisms in speech and such (via Insight), they'd get an actual advantage on their next Charisma (deception/intimidation/persuasion) check.

[JumboWheat01]

Rolled a number of sets for Death House, trying to figure out which is the most playable:

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11

Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7

Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:7 Cha:11

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10

If I HAD to choose one of those... I wouldn't. They're all crap. Either not enough stats to really rate being more than an uppity commoner or good starting stats with horrible penalties. Set 4 is just begging for something to use one of those rare INT save spells against you, and there's nothing you can do about it. And none of those rolls even equal 60 points. The standard array is... 72, I believe. Sure this is both before racial mods, but nothing can really help those rolls at all.

[Arkhios]

If I HAD to choose one of those... I wouldn't. They're all crap. Either not enough stats to really rate being more than an uppity commoner or good starting stats with horrible penalties. Set 4 is just begging for something to use one of those rare INT save spells against you, and there's nothing you can do about it. And none of those rolls even equal 60 points. The standard array is... 72, I believe. Sure this is both before racial mods, but nothing can really help those rolls at all.

Regarding the bolded part, there's always the door. If you agreed to the terms of character creation, acknowledging there might be low rolls, then rolled those four sets, HAD to choose from them for your character, and still refused, you're giving a rather immature picture of yourself. If you can't play by the rules laid out for you, no one's forcing you to. You're free to leave. Simple as that.

And just for the sake of common sense, that something targeting you with spells probably can't read your character sheet...

[Talamare]

So someone with 4 Int and 15 Wis, would be on the lines of a "wise old man" archetype
He doesn't really know math or how things work, but he knows and understands people

As well due to his normal (10 Cha) he is able to speak normally, perhaps sometimes his phrases don't make immediate sense. However, people just believe he's speaking in metaphors.


In summary...

Yoda

[MaxWilson]

Rolled a number of sets for Death House, trying to figure out which is the most playable:

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11

Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7

Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:7 Cha:11

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10

Hahaha, that's awesome and sounds extremely fun. I think I'd pick #4 and play a brain-damaged Hunter Ranger/Assassin. Moon Druid would work just fine too.

[Tanarii]

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11
Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7Fighter for both. Probably Half-orc or Mountain Dwarf. You're going to need all those extra ASIs for Str bumps. You could even play them as an Eldritch Knight GISH, focusing on spells that don't have attack rolls or saves.


Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10Rogue-Cleric! Dip 2-3 levels of Rogue early on, rest Trickery Cleric. Shortbow, TWF Shortswords, Leather Armor, Stealth & Perception & Intuition. Remember Int 4 just means -3 to Int ability checks. You don't have to play him as braindead, just someone 15% worse than 'normal' at figuring things out and remembering things.

[PeteNutButter]

Set four looks like a pretty good monk. Starting w a 15 in your two best stats is as good as you get from point, but low con sucks. Take variant human bump them both to 16s and maybe take the TWF feat for a free 1 more AC. (You can always hold two weapons and still kick.) That's AC 17 with wizard hps. If you ki dodge when needed your AC and hps are like a blade singer without spells... lol

[MaxWilson]

Set four looks like a pretty good monk. Starting w a 15 in your two best stats is as good as you get from point, but low con sucks. Take variant human bump them both to 16s and maybe take the TWF feat for a free 1 more AC. (You can always hold two weapons and still kick.) That's AC 17 with wizard hps. If you ki dodge when needed your AC and hps are like a blade singer without spells... lol

You could try playing as a Long Death Monk, for whom Con is nearly irrelevant once you hit 11th level and get Mastery of Death. I don't know if this campaign is such that 11th level is a realistic factor though.

[Blas_de_Lezo]

Rolled a number of sets for Death House, trying to figure out which is the most playable:

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11

Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7

Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:7 Cha:11

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10

I would roll race randomly and a d4 for the set and make the most authentic character ever.

If not, with set 4 you can run a deadly wood elf fighter archery style with 2 levels of rogue. Dex 17 for longbow and Wis 16 for spotting enemies. At level 4 take Resilient (Dex) to increse your Dex to 18 and to improve your Reflexes saves, as your low HP will suffer if you eat a whole area effect (like fireball). Use your 35f speed and bonus action as rogue to always keep distance from enemies.

[8wGremlin]

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:17 (15) Con:8 Int:5(4) Wis:15 Cha:10


Play a Winged Feral Tiefling, you have fly, darkvision, and make an excellent ranger (hunter).

[Slipperychicken]

Depends on if you see 4 Int as Drooling Mentally Disabled Person... OR... I don't know math (and probably can't read), but I speak normally due to my normal Cha score

When you convert Intelligence to IQ via percentiles, it turns out that Int 4 is just under the IQ cutoff for intellectual disability. Formerly known as mental retardation, it now has requirements other than IQ, but an Int 4 character could easily meet those criteria. I may be able to dig up the math for this later today.

[Tanarii]

When you convert Intelligence to IQ via percentiles, it turns out that Int 4 is just under the IQ cutoff for intellectual disability. Formerly known as mental retardation, it now has requirements other than IQ, but an Int 4 character could easily meet those criteria. I may be able to dig up the math for this later today.
Yeah. On a 3d6 roll:
Int 3-4 is IQ 55-70
Int 5-7 is 70-85
int 8-10 is 85-100
Int 11-13 is 100-115
Int 14-16 is 115-130
Int 17-18 is 130-145

Another way of looking at it, is Int 3 is -4 (-20%) to Int checks. Int 18 is +20% to Int checks. You're only 20% worse than the human average at memory and figuring things out with a 3, vs 20% better than the human average up for an 18.

So Int 3-4 is definitely trouble doing things Int related, but IQ 50-69 is still only considered mildly mentally retarded. Some quotes on mildy retarded from online sources:
"Educable, can learn to care for oneself, employable in routinized jobs but require supervision. Might live alone but do best in supervised settings. Immature but with adequate social adjustment, usually no obvious physical anomalies."
"Approximately 85% of the mentally retarded population is in the mildly retarded category. Their IQ score ranges from 50-75, and they can often acquire academic skills up to the 6th grade level. They can become fairly self-sufficient and in some cases live independently, with community and social support."
"Many children with mild retardation are not identified until they enter school and sometimes not until the second or third grade, when more difficult academic work is required. Most students with mild mental retardation master academic skills up to about the sixth-grade level and are able to learn job skills well enough to support themselves independently or semi-independently. Some adults who have been identified with mild mental retardation develop excellent social and communication skills and once they leave school are no longer recognized as having a disability."

[Thrudd]

3-18 is the possible range of scores according to the rules, therefore it is possible for an adventurer to function with a 3 in any ability. 3 is within the "normal" range for adventurers, so 3 or 4 int is not unplayable. If it were, it would not be an option that players could end up with. Low int means the character is not good at certain things, but it does not mean you need to portray them as mentally challenged. The IQ score comparison is not necessarily accurate in the context of the game, since the low score should still represent a person that is intelligent enough to be an independent, functional member of society as well as learn skills like weapon combat, thievery, and even forms of magic which use less intellectual methods of access. Unlike AD&D, which said that less than 5 int can only be a fighter, 5e has no restrictions.

I would pick set 2 or set 4. Set 2 would be an gnome fighter/magic user. Rock Gnome will boost the int bonus and get rid of the Con penalty, and make it possible to multiclass as a wizard, or just go eldritch knight.

Set 4 is probably best as a thief - leave it as human or pick a race like Wood elf that boosts both dexterity and Wisdom. Druid could be good, here, too, with a racial boost to wisdom. Either way, it should be a character that pretty much stays out of frontal combat (unless you go circle of the moon, then you can fight a few times a day as a bear or whatever).

[Gtdead]

Set 4 is the best. If your group is evil you can roleplay a cleric as a crazy w40k Dawn of War Cultist ^^

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JrtFazaS7g

[Occasional Sage]

Rolled a number of sets for Death House, trying to figure out which is the most playable:

Set 1: Str:10 Dex:7 Con:11 Int:11 Wis:8 Cha:11

Set 2: Str:13 Dex:7 Con:9 Int:12 Wis:10 Cha:7

Set 3: Str:9 Dex:10 Con:10 Int:10 Wis:7 Cha:11

Set 4: Str:5 Dex:15 Con:8 Int:4 Wis:15 Cha:10

My first thought is to take set three, for a half-orc Dex Fighter.


Yes, it does depend, and I kind of feel like the OP is asking for a straw poll on how we all see it, otherwise she'd just have picked set 4 right off the bat.

My interpretation is that 8 is unintelligent, probably can't read in a medieval setting, but otherwise normal. 6 and 7 would be 'special needs' in a modern setting, but still able to lead normal lives - and a commoner/farmer/peasant in D&D doesn't lead an intellectually challenging life, so the difference between Int 6 and Int 10 is "Oh, and Billy always has been a bit forgetful. Make sure you double-check the stable door before you go to bed". Int 4 and 5 is true learning disability territory. Probably functional, with help, but so far away from my own lived experience that I would feel wrong trying to play it. I couldn't believe a human with 3 Int or lower would be capable of getting themselves dressed, let alone adventuring.

I did once play a massively-unbalanced character not out of place in Mice and Men. Chuck was massively huge and utterly terrifying in any sort of combat, but mentally somewhere around two or three. Another PC (everybody called him "Leash" to his vast annoyance) would suggest games to play with new friends, most of which had names which included "squishy". It was difficult being infinitely cheerful, then utterly defeated, then something else, with little obvious prompting the change.