Heroic array

[Spacehamster]

So know some people use point buy, some the standard array and yet some others roll. I love rolling mostly for the chance of a great array, but it also has the downside that one char gets really powerful while somebody else pretty much becomes the party gimp.

So my solution that I plan to use our next game is the heroic array for a more powerful guy right off the bat: 16/15/14/13/12/10, know me(when playing) and my players will appreciate this since its MC friendly and slightly more powerful than the standard array yet you still have to spend at least 1-2 ASI's on stat increases.

Do you guys think this is a decent array for when you want your pcs to feel bit more heroic from the get go?

[Aaron Underhand]

So know some people use point buy, some the standard array and yet some others roll. I love rolling mostly for the chance of a great array, but it also has the downside that one char gets really powerful while somebody else pretty much becomes the party gimp.

So my solution that I plan to use our next game is the heroic array for a more powerful guy right off the bat: 16/15/14/13/12/10, know me(when playing) and my players will appreciate this since its MC friendly and slightly more powerful than the standard array yet you still have to spend at least 1-2 ASI's on stat increases.

Do you guys think this is a decent array for when you want your pcs to feel bit more heroic from the get go?

I think this is an admirable solution. It allows characters to start with an 18 primary stat which allows more feats in the game increasing flavour and fun IMO.

My own solution is to use points buy, and give all characters an additional ASI at first level.

[hymer]

Do you guys think this is a decent array for when you want your pcs to feel bit more heroic from the get go?

I've used a very similar solution in a current campaign, but I've made eight different arrays for people to choose from. One of the reasons was that some players actually like to have an eight in something. It helps define a character when something is below average. But on the other hand, I didn't want to force all players to have at least one eight. And then I thought about the difference between needing one good score and two and three, and... Well, I ended up with eight variations the players can choose from.

In case you're curious about the exact arrays, thy're here (http://nanmehtar.wikispaces.com/Stat+Arrays).

[NecessaryWeevil]

I'm a hardcore point-buy fan, so I'm going to suggest another alternative: if you want them to be more powerful, simply allocate a larger point budget.

[Spacehamster]

I'm a hardcore point-buy fan, so I'm going to suggest another alternative: if you want them to be more powerful, simply allocate a larger point budget.

Its 27 points normally right? Never remember since I have a sheet with all combinations possible for the normal amount of points. :P
Maybe 35 points and 16 as max buy with 15-16 costing 3 points?

[Specter]

As a DM who used this, I tell you it's fine. Just be aware that the mid-levels (4 to 12) will bea lot more front-loaded.

[Spiritchaser]

So know some people use point buy, some the standard array and yet some others roll. I love rolling mostly for the chance of a great array, but it also has the downside that one char gets really powerful while somebody else pretty much becomes the party gimp.

So my solution that I plan to use our next game is the heroic array for a more powerful guy right off the bat: 16/15/14/13/12/10, know me(when playing) and my players will appreciate this since its MC friendly and slightly more powerful than the standard array yet you still have to spend at least 1-2 ASI's on stat increases.

Do you guys think this is a decent array for when you want your pcs to feel bit more heroic from the get go?

I've tried heroic arrays before, no problems to report but one consequence of note is that some otherwise tricky MCs (Dex sorcadin, life cleric-lore bard) or unusual race class combos become more appealing.

This isn't a bad thing... but it is probably worth mentioning

Strength hexblades would probably also get diabolical

[KorvinStarmast]

For point buy:

Go to 30 points.
Make 16 cost 11

Might work out fine.

[Breashios]

Just opinion, but that array looks a tad strong to me. Without any real weaknesses, you as DM, might find the party always make their saves or score enough damage to drop the opposition long before they otherwise might.

I ran a random 3d6 straight down, with a few points to improve the stats they desired and got three players who rolled incredible right in front of me. 17s and an 18, and a bunch of 14 to 16s. So, we played a heroic campaign. I think I did a good job resisting the temptation to up the enemy powers too much, but what I found is the combats go very quickly compared to regular stat builds.

This is pretty much my only complaint. Combat usually only lasts 2 to 3 rounds, unless I spread out the reinforcements. Even then it is usually just an exercise in learning what resources to use when.

And here is why: At normal ability scores one or two PCs might be held or have to take a circuitous route to the enemy, giving the battle a little more tactical feel and suspense as they struggle with making saving throws or ability checks during the encounter. When those scores are higher, often the PCs act freely throughout the encounter, their spell DCs are harder for their opponents to overcome, they hit more often and do more damage. While that may be what you are after, the result is quicker and after a while less satisfying engagements for the players. (At first it is as fun as wow!) If you up the enemy power to account for this it just becomes a race to kill each other, not necessarily a more tactical game. If you up the numbers, it sometimes becomes a slog.

Just for the fun factor alone I'd recommend more flexible array choices or point buy, but slightly lower than what you are considering above. Even an extra +2 on the standard array will allow a player to make a strong character or one without a major weakness.

[Provo]

Sounds fun.

I would suggest making the high number 17 instead of 16. Otherwise some players will feel more restricted in their races.

For instance, the ONLY way for a Druid to start with 18 in WIS is with a variant human with observant or Resiliant feat (or use Firbolg race from Volo's)

[Knaight]

Just opinion, but that array looks a tad strong to me. Without any real weaknesses, you as DM, might find the party always make their saves or score enough damage to drop the opposition long before they otherwise might.

The biggest weakness that tends to show up is an 8, and a 10 only gives a +1 bonus by comparison. That's not enough to get anywhere near always making a save, and as far as damage goes that usually comes down primarily to the single best attribute - which is only a 16.

The big weaknesses tend to be built into the classes and reflect level more than ability score anyways, particularly near break points - a level 5 Fighter with 12 Strength/Dex is a whole lot nastier than a level 4 Fighter with 18 Strength/Dex.

[Malifice]

I personally think 5E supports (and plays best) with lower stats.

It encourages ASI over Feats as one advances, and keeps monsters relevant longer.

[Spacehamster]

Another elegant solution(that were in the play test version before release) that is damn nice and sad they removed it is; + ability scores from the class you pick, this lets a race without bonus to STR play a STR based class without being garbage at start for example.

Fighter choose between having +1 in CON/DEX/STR.
Ranger: DEX, CON, WIS
Warlock: STR, DEX, CHA

and so on. :)

[Provo]

I personally think 5E supports (and plays best) with lower stats.

It encourages ASI over Feats as one advances, and keeps monsters relevant longer.


How fun is it seriously to not get your character defining feat until level 12 when you have your attack stat maxed? -.-

Completely agree with Malifice. As fun as it feels to have an awesome starting array, 5E works very well with the stats in place.

...and Spacehamster, you could just get the feat before lvl 12 if it is so character defining. It is just one of many trade-offs in character creation and development. If we didn't have significant opportunity costs than it wouldn't be fun to build a character.

[Spacehamster]

Completely agree with Malifice. As fun as it feels to have an awesome starting array, 5E works very well with the stats in place.

...and Spacehamster, you could just get the feat before lvl 12 if it is so character defining. It is just one of many trade-offs in character creation and development. If we didn't have significant opportunity costs than it wouldn't be fun to build a character.

Hmm seem to remember in 3.5 you got feats AND asi's and it were still damn fun? ;)

[MintyThe1st]

Personally, I use an array that looks like this:
18 16 14 12 10 8

My DMs are fine with it, and I encourage my own players to use it. Then again, we enjoy high fantasy games. My own setting having Celestials and Fiends interacting with the party regularly. Fighting threats of apocalyptic proportions.

[Asmotherion]

Our Array goes:

18/16/14/12/10/10

Basically, no minuses, a guaranteed 18 (that can become 20 with Racial Modifiers) and easy acces to multiclass. One can also have a Decent AC either via Dex or having the Str to wear Heavy Armor, and then a Good Con Score. Saves are also decent, or at the very least have no minuses.

Our group does not like to ASI, and we prefear to have our stats from the start, and instead use ASI for Feats.

[ZorroGames]

Nothing requires you to use ASIs instead of feats. It seems like another slightly unique character building choice IMDOGO.

In My Dusty Old Grognard Opinion = IMDOGO.

[Zanthy1]

I use point buy, and have increased the point pool to 30 and made a 16 cost 11. However, the group I currently play with rulls 4d6, drop the lowest and reroll all 1s. Then you can move up to 3 points from stats to another. Example, I have a 17 str and a 13 int. As a barbarian, I might take 3 from int, making it a 10, and getting that 20 in str. This happens at 1st level, so its very front heavy. The upside is it allows more feats at later levels (or multiclass options), the downside is the encounters are upscaled.

[Malifice]

An option I have been toying with is to use point buy, but then reduce every player characters stats by 2 points after character creation and racial mods etc.

Instead of a range of 8 to 17, you have a range of 6 to 15.

I would then change the ASI class feature to be +2 to 1 ability score, and + 1 to two others. Half feats increase to +2 to one ability score or +1 to 2 ability scores).

Fighters and rogues get a bit of a bump due to the extra ASI, And all of the money feats like Lucky, GWM, Sharp shooter, PAM etc get devalued heavily because they don't increase stats.

[Provo]

An option I have been toying with is to use point buy, but then reduce every player characters stats by 2 points after character creation and racial mods etc.

Instead of a range of 8 to 17, you have a range of 6 to 15.

I would then change the ASI class feature to be +2 to 1 ability score, and + 1 to two others. Half feats increase to +2 to one ability score or +1 to 2 ability scores).

Fighters and rogues get a bit of a bump due to the extra ASI, And all of the money feats like Lucky, GWM, Sharp shooter, PAM etc get devalued heavily because they don't increase stats.

That sounds pretty fun. It would certainly not fit in every game type (and doesn't at all do what OP wants from his games). You are clearly weaker at the start and your character will never surpass the original system unless you are a fighter. I would probably couple this with the gritty realism variant rules.

[Knaight]

An option I have been toying with is to use point buy, but then reduce every player characters stats by 2 points after character creation and racial mods etc.

Instead of a range of 8 to 17, you have a range of 6 to 15.

I would then change the ASI class feature to be +2 to 1 ability score, and + 1 to two others. Half feats increase to +2 to one ability score or +1 to 2 ability scores).

Fighters and rogues get a bit of a bump due to the extra ASI, And all of the money feats like Lucky, GWM, Sharp shooter, PAM etc get devalued heavily because they don't increase stats.

That's not a bad idea - half feats have a tendency to be pretty disappointing, and it gets a bit more scaling. On the other hand, it also seems a bit convoluted - just shifting the point by cost table by 2 while keeping the same point buy does basically the same thing and is much less messy.

[Toadkiller]

I’ve given everyone a “non-combat” feat at first level. They could pick from all those ones that don’t directly impact combat and thus are less frequently picked. We will see.

[90sMusic]

I like the standard array.

You are already "heroic" and leagues better than other people or creatures you encounter starting out. You're just being meta and wanting more than the standard array because it's called "standard". Players simply don't need to start with those extra stats.

The argument that it "frees up" ASIs for more feats to get more "flavor" is also rubbish. If you want feats to flavor your character you can take them anyway, you don't have to max out your ability scores first. Most feats are far stronger than another +1 at a handful of things anyway. Remember that because everything happens on a d20, every +1 just increases your chances of succeeding by 5% of the total. That's it. It's your own choice to opt for that 5% as opposed to any of the great feats out there.

The game is intended to be played around the standard array or using the 27 point buy which can also give you the standard array if you spent the points in that way. When you start giving more than that, it starts messing with balance quite a bit.

Starting with 18 of a score instead of 16 in your primary offensive ability score is the equivalent of starting the game with a +1 weapon because you're getting an extra 1 to hit and damage that you otherwise shouldn't have, in addition to the benefits to the skills.

It sounds like you just like players to be overpowered and enjoy when your random rolls result in an overpowered character, but don't like the risk associated with it. That is the only reason rolling for ability scores is even a thing, because unless you get really lucky or really unlucky, you tend to end up pretty average anyway. But the probability of being stronger than normal is the same as being weaker than normal. It's a risk you take for greater reward.

Simply bypassing that risk and taking the benefits anyway is the sort of modifications that cause problems with the game.

Now you're free to run your game however you want. Some folks like starting at level 1, some like starting at level 3. Some like standard array, some like giving more scores. Some even let you start with magical items.

I've played in "mythic" campaigns in pathfinder where you had heaps of extra powers and abilities that normal heroes don't have, but you don't just "have them" for no reason, the whole point is that you are facing far more challenging encounters and mythic bosses that are a lot stronger than usual.

Here is what is going to happen though. If you give your players these extra scores at the start, you're either going to keep the encounters and CRs about the same, in which case the characters will be too strong for them, or you will have to manually adjust all your encounters to make fights more challenging and difficult and you may end up making it too difficult, but for the sake of argument lets say you get the balance just right, all it means is their extra ability scores ultimately don't even matter because giving them the extra power then balancing it out with more challenging enemies is a net neutral effect and they aren't actually any better for the trouble, but you're having to do a lot more work on your end.

If you are used to running high end campaigns at level 15+ maybe this is in your area of expertise and it wouldn't be such a big deal, but otherwise I wouldn't recommend it because as I said you'll end up making the game too easy and it will be boring, you'll make the game too challenging and people will be dying more often, or you'll get it just right and nothing really changes except your work load. It just isn't worth fooling with unless you're willing to go all the way.

[Spiritchaser]

I like the standard array.

You are already "heroic" and leagues better than other people or creatures you encounter starting out. You're just being meta and wanting more than the standard array because it's called "standard". Players simply don't need to start with those extra stats.



Obviously the game is most comfortable with standard array, and yes you're already heroic, but... some MAD characters just work more smoothly with more.

I've found that different stats makes different builds more optimal, I don't find that the actual difficulty of play varies much, even without much input on my part.

This is probably table specific, but the players themselves are selecting their approach. If they can chew more, they just bite off more.

I think really the most important thing: the players need to end up being similar "enough" in power that everyone contributes, non standard arrays can challenge that a bit, but a DM has lots of tools to balance things and it's a pretty big target to hit.

[Biggstick]

Simply copy-pasted from my own Character creation document that I give to Players at my table.

---
Ability Score Generation. Players will use Improved Standard Array (8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16), or 34 point buy. Minimum score is an 8, maximum bought score is a 16. No rolling for ability scores.

8 - 0
9 - 1
10 - 2
11 - 3
12 - 4
13 - 5
14 - 7
15 - 9
16 - 12

Standard Racial Ability Score bonuses. Races other than Mountain Dwarf, Human Variant, and Half Elf have three +1's instead of their natural ability score bonuses that can be placed into any ability score. Any racial negative scores such as Orcs minus to Intelligence is ignored. They can be spread out to three different ability scores, or stacked to a maximum of +2 in one ability score and +1 in another ability score. This is to exemplify that not every Gnome is intelligent just as not every Dragonborn is strong. Any race can be just as good as the next race at something they want to excel at. If you’d like to play a Mountain Dwarf or Half Elf, you can use the three +1’s instead of what’s given in the book. Humans will use stat bonuses provided by the PHB.
---

I'd like to draw attention to DM's who have a 16 cost 11 points. Take a look again at the progression of costs, and see if you see a pattern. Alright, I'll give it to you. 8-13 all have a modifier of -1, 0, or +1. 14 has a modifier of +2, as does 15. To me, this would imply that 14 and 15 cost an additional point because they are a +2 modifier. This would lead me to conclude that 16 should cost 12 instead of 11.

Overall, my Players love it. They can start as any race and have an 18 in their primary stat. As others before have stated, it really opens up the RP potential, in having things like Orc Wizards, or Tiefling Rogues, Dwarf Bards, etc. Being able to afford to grab feats they've never considered before like Inspiring Leader, Keen Mind, Ritual Caster, etc. It makes for a more interesting game in which Players who want pointbuy/standard array get what they want, those who roll get a little bit more power then expected in a pointbuy game, and I as the DM don't have to worry about power discrepancy between Players.

[Citan]

For point buy:

Go to 30 points.
Make 16 cost 11

Might work out fine.
Thats what I do for my games and it works out fine so I'd second this. ;)

Although it may not feel heroic enough, so then maybe you could push it to 32.

[Slipperychicken]

You are already "heroic" and leagues better than other people or creatures you encounter starting out. You're just being meta and wanting more than the standard array because it's called "standard". Players simply don't need to start with those extra stats.

I've got to second this one.

Also, numbers don't make characters heroic. Heroes are made by their struggles and their treatment of others. If your PC is a bland amoral prick who preys upon the weak and grovels before the strong, then starting the game with a high stat isn't going to make him a person worthy of praise or recognition.

[90sMusic]

Obviously the game is most comfortable with standard array, and yes you're already heroic, but... some MAD characters just work more smoothly with more.

I've found that different stats makes different builds more optimal, I don't find that the actual difficulty of play varies much, even without much input on my part.

This is probably table specific, but the players themselves are selecting their approach. If they can chew more, they just bite off more.

I think really the most important thing: the players need to end up being similar "enough" in power that everyone contributes, non standard arrays can challenge that a bit, but a DM has lots of tools to balance things and it's a pretty big target to hit.

MAD characters are supposed to choose which ability scores they want. You can specialize in a specific area or spread yourself out. Each choice has pros and cons and is part of building a good character.

To bypass that challenge/restriction and giving MAD characters all these extra points to excel in every area throws balance off in their favor yet again because they aren't intended to excel in every area at once.

That paladin may give his entire party +5 to all their saves, but it is costing him accuracy and damage and hitpoints to do so. Or he would be more strength oriented to deal more damage and be more accurate but his save bonuses for the party will never be as high.

That is by design. That is the whole point.

[Malifice]

Ability scores start at 7.

Costs 1 for 1 till you hit 12, then 2 points for 13, and 3 more for 14.

Meaning a 14 costs 10 points (and the only way to hit 16 at 1st level is Vuman with a half feat, or Demihuman with +2).

From there you can bump the ASI class feature to grant a stronger benefit. +2 to two scores, or +1 to four perhaps.

[Knaight]

MAD characters are supposed to choose which ability scores they want. You can specialize in a specific area or spread yourself out. Each choice has pros and cons and is part of building a good character.

That's the theory. In practice, SAD* characters have a tendency to just be better.

*Plus constitution, which is useful for everyone.

[Spiritchaser]

MAD characters are supposed to choose which ability scores they want. You can specialize in a specific area or spread yourself out. Each choice has pros and cons and is part of building a good character.

To bypass that challenge/restriction and giving MAD characters all these extra points to excel in every area throws balance off in their favor yet again because they aren't intended to excel in every area at once.



Giving more points just changes the optimal choices.

Changing absolute power levels has very little impact, it’s quite easy for a DM to address, and to be honest, I don’t even think you have to.

Having more points does provide more room for an optimal build to be stronger than a weak one. That’s a real problem that requires consideration, but I wouldn’t call it at all hard to manage.

[Oramac]

I like the standard array.

You are already "heroic" and leagues better than other people or creatures you encounter starting out. You're just being meta and wanting more than the standard array because it's called "standard". Players simply don't need to start with those extra stats.

I have a character concept for a single-class Mastermind Rogue I want to play that requires AT LEAST 4 feats. Preferably six. All non-combat.

On the off chance that the character makes it into tier 3 or 4 play, he's definitely going to feel the difference between having a 18-20 dex vs a 16 dex. Same for the other stats. Sure, the character isn't combat-centric, but eventually combat will happen. Same with making Charisma checks. Social encounters will happen. And having low stats will gimp the character. No if's, and's, or but's about it.

Is it playable? Of course. Is it fun? Probably not. Missing attacks and failing saves against high-CR baddies, or failing a Persuasion or Deception check against those same baddies, is simply not fun.

TL;DR: Generally, standard array and the like is fine. For some character concepts, however, higher starting stats are needed.

[Citan]

I have a character concept for a single-class Mastermind Rogue I want to play that requires AT LEAST 4 feats. Preferably six. All non-combat.

On the off chance that the character makes it into tier 3 or 4 play, he's definitely going to feel the difference between having a 18-20 dex vs a 16 dex. Same for the other stats. Sure, the character isn't combat-centric, but eventually combat will happen. Same with making Charisma checks. Social encounters will happen. And having low stats will gimp the character. No if's, and's, or but's about it.

Is it playable? Of course. Is it fun? Probably not. Missing attacks and failing saves against high-CR baddies, or failing a Persuasion or Deception check against those same baddies, is simply not fun.

TL;DR: Generally, standard array and the like is fine. For some character concepts, however, higher starting stats are needed.
Or, you could ask your DM for a feat as a reward for quests. From what little I remember it's even one suggestion made in DMG.

Unless it's one of those AL games (never played it, not really took interest into it, so no idea about how much leeway a DM has for those things) the DM is the all-powerful so if it's okay with him* there you go. ;)

* I see no strong reason to refuse since it also gives him some adventure material, especially if you are asking non-combat feats.