Stat Spread, All+ or Big-

[Chalkarts]

When statting a character do you prefer to go with Big high and low, an 18 and a 7 or 8,
or do you prefer no negs but no Big bonus, like all 12-14s.

[Keravath]

I mostly prefer to have at least 16 in the primary stat and then mix and match the rest to fit the character concept. Usually I play AL which has a maximum of 15 and a minimum of 8 before racial adjustments.

[Pex]

I object to the notion that because I have an 18 I must have an 8. I have nothing against the possibility. I don't require an 18 or else. I don't object to having an 8 how dare the game. The two together should not be mandatory.

Edit: I also object to forbiddance of an 18 at 1st level or a mandatory 8.

[DeTess]

When statting a character do you prefer to go with Big high and low, an 18 and a 7 or 8,
or do you prefer no negs but no Big bonus, like all 12-14s.

If I have to pick between the extremes, I'd go for the 18+8 option, as a character that's all 12-14s generally feels rather weak in my experience.

[Dork_Forge]

I prefer to have no 8s, but if I have to use point buy or standard array and the character is a little MAD I'll take an 8 (typically in Strength because unless you're Str based it means exceedingly little).

[Eldariel]

I like to have at least one clear, big deficit except when the character is actually supposed to be a jack-of-all-trades. Generally though, this system punishes low stats pretty hard so it's hard to avoid low stats in anything but Str, Dex or Int (and Dex is always painful even on characters that can afford it). Still, I like having one clear drawback (4-6 range stat).

[CheddarChampion]

Somewhere in the middle like three 14's and 3 10's prior to racial boosts. After boosts something like one 16/14/14/12/10/10 or 16/15/14/10/10/10.

But if I had to choose between the proposed values I'd prefer the min-max on a SAD class and work the negative ability score into the character concept. A weak old bard, a rogue with no people skills, a frail cleric dedicated to a good that saved their life...

[Mad_Saulot]

Really all DnD should be 4d6 drop the lowest assign results at will, only COMMUNISTS demand point buy or averages.

[bid]

You can make a buman 14 14 14 14 14 11 with point buy. You can guess how often players pick that choice.

If you look at actual characters, you will see most stat spreads are close to 16 16 14 12 8 8.


Players will roll because they hope to do better than buman.

[Sigreid]

I have been rolling for so long I have equal amounts of fun regardless. Latest is a Triton that will work out to have 12,12,14,12,14,16. Thinking bard/rogue for the supreme skill monkey.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I tend to only take one or two big scores and then even out the rest whenever I play point buy. If I leave an 8 anywhere, it's because the stat is virtually useless to me (it's Strength 9/10).

Otherwise I like middling stats. They make proficiency bonuses stand out more in my eyes, which in turn makes the skills I choose feel like impactful roleplaying decisions.

It's purely a "feel" thing, really.

[Hruken]

Really all DnD should be 4d6 drop the lowest assign results at will, only COMMUNISTS demand point buy or averages.

Dropping low? Assign at will? Sounds like you are projecting there comrade. 3d6, in order. Embrace the random.

Seriously though, I usually prefer no negatives, but it isn't a huge deal.

[Anymage]

If you're in a party, it's usually better to be really good at your specialty and let other people be really good at theirs. A group of generalists will have a lot of overlap and lots of people scrabbling to do the same thing. And while a generalist can fill gaps in a group of specialists, they'll sit out whenever a specialist's niche comes up. Which is a long winded way of saying that you want at least one sixteen instead of a bunch of 12-14 stats.

I also like the idea of at least one 8. First for pure roleplay reasons. That 8 gives you a minor flaw that isn't necessarily debilitating, which is an interesting character hook. It also encourages you to step aside and give the spotlight over to someone who has an edge in certain tasks, and spotlight sharing is a good habit to have in RPGs.

[HappyDaze]

I only allow standard array, so every character has a 15 and an 8 before racial adjustments.

[Blood of Gaea]

I'd easily go for the 18 and 7-8, I wouldn't want a spread stat spread unless I was doing something like a buff only caster or a Fighter/Rogue Archer that can easily handle a lower to-hit.

[Tanarii]

The first option doesn't even make sense unless you roll. In which case you can also pretty easily end up with "a 14 and four 9 or less", "3 15+ and nothing below a 12", "all 10-12", and various other foibles of random generation.

Edit: I looked at my old AL chars (many of which never left Tier 1), and turns out a I had an almost universal preference for 14 14 13 12 12 8 for +2/+1 races, and 15 14 13 12 10 8 for Vumans and Half-elves.

[SodaQueen]

Depends on the character. I generally like having at least one dump stat; helps keep things interesting. But some characters are a bit more well rounded than others.

In 5e I feel point buy is the way to go but I like rolling in Pathfinder/3.5 (usually with some variation; roll 4d6 7 times drop lowest d6 and result is the most common)

[strangebloke]

In general, well rounded characters are better defensively (because they have higher saves) but specialist characters are better offensively. Also in general, defensive stats are more important in smaller parties since one party member going down can mean a TPK pretty quickly.

So I would say that well-rounded characters perform better in smaller parties, overall.

But stat distribution is only one small part of being well-rounded. A cleric with all points in CON and WIS will still be better rounded than a monk with 14s in every stat.

[GlenSmash!]

My current character has 16, 14, 14, 14, 9, 8 and I find them a bit too well rounded. I'm going for 16, 16, 14, 8, 8, 8 on my next character to see if a another weakness would make things a little more fun.

[KorvinStarmast]

I object to the notion that because I have an 18 I must have an 8. I have nothing against the possibility. I don't require an 18 or else. I don't object to having an 8 how dare the game. The two together should not be mandatory.

Edit: I also object to forbiddance of an 18 at 1st level or a mandatory 8. This. :smallcool:
Really all DnD should be 4d6 drop the lowest assign results at will, only COMMUNISTS demand point buy or averages. You forgot the blue text, I think, and rolling is the default method in the Character creation section of the PHB. But I also like that there are options. Nothing wrong with options. (One thing we did waaaaay back when was use the AD&D 1e variation where you rolled 3d6 12 times and then picked the best 6. Worked fine for that system)

You can make a buman 14 14 14 14 14 11 with point buy. You can guess how often players pick that choice.

Great for trying to multiclass into ... everything. :)

I made a mountain dwarf paladin.

14 10 14 10 10 14 => 16 10 16 10 10 14.
Nice start.

[Teaguethebean]

12,12,14,12,14,16. Thinking bard/rogue for the supreme skill monkey.

Gonna need a 13 dex to be a rogue multi my dude

[Sigreid]

Gonna need a 13 dex to be a rogue multi my dude

Yep. I can swap dex and wis without problem.

[Mad_Saulot]

My players actually wanted to point buy, they could have rolled if they wanted, they could even have gone with my "Heroic Stat Set" which is 18,16,14,12,10,8

But no...theyre *shudders*...... sensible (the horror)

[Ogre Mage]

With point buy, I aim for one stat at 16. Two 16's if I can. That often means having one stat with a penalty, which I am okay with. For instance, with a dwarven light domain cleric on 27 point buy I would do the follow spread --

STR 10 (2 points)
DEX 14 (7 points)
CON 16 (7 points, +2 dwarf)
INT 8 (0 points)
WIS 16 (9 points, +1 hill dwarf)
CHA 10 (2 points)

For a half-elf lore bard --

STR 8 (0 points)
DEX 16 (9 points, +1 half-elf)
CON 14 (5 points, +1 half-elf)
INT 10 (2 points)
WIS 12 (4 points)
CHA 16 (7 points, +2 half-elf)

In general I try to avoid having more than one stat at a penalty, although two stats at a penalty happens occasionally. Three at a penalty is a bridge too far for me.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

When I rolled a 7, 8 and 18 and the DM told me that I can reroll because the sum of my stats was low I said I prefer to not roll again.

An 18 says that you can take more feats. More feats mean more unique options. More unique options means more fun.

A weakness is an option to RP which I also happily take :)

[Chalkarts]

I made a point buy character with 2 7s.
He was a child so I decided having 7s in his str/con would represent being an easily tossed child.
I like playing with a flaw as well.
But I've also made a monk that was straight average in every way, just to see how it would go. He was surprisingly fun.

[Farkon]

Can't go wrong with big numbers on your primary attribute.

My group hasn't done anything but point buy and I'm fine with that because my luck stat is only an 8.

[16bearswutIdo]

My last character was 6/17/18/6/18/18 due to insanely good rolls.

That character was a ****ing blast to RP. I liek big numbur.

[Pex]

When I rolled a 7, 8 and 18 and the DM told me that I can reroll because the sum of my stats was low I said I prefer to not roll again.

An 18 says that you can take more feats. More feats mean more unique options. More unique options means more fun.

A weakness is an option to RP which I also happily take :)

Agreed. Rolling 18 X X X X 8 is not bad. If I roll 18 X X X 9 8 I start to cringe. I'm looking to get that 9 into a 10 with a spare racial +1 if the X's are good enough. 18 X X X 8 8 or 18 X X X 8 7 I'm more inclined to reroll if allowed. If it's 18 17 15 15 8 7 yeah I'll keep it, but it really depends on those Xs. 18 X X 8 8 8 I'm rerolling.

[LordCdrMilitant]

When statting a character do you prefer to go with Big high and low, an 18 and a 7 or 8,
or do you prefer no negs but no Big bonus, like all 12-14s.

I almost always go like 2 high, 3 medium, 1 low or something [after racial modifiers].

I don't have my players roll for stats, and usually assume points buy when conducting theoretical builds, because:
Every new scheme of rolling I'm introduced to just seems increasingly tailored to result in progressively higher stats [and of course, drastically increased chances of getting at least one 16+]. The justification is that "playing a character with poorer stats sucks", to which my current answer is "under points buy, nobody has bad stats if they don't want to". I feel like the level of rolls, re-rolls, drops, and petitions to the GM for adjustments might as well just equate to picking stats yourself, and points buy is that with limits and costs.
I actually tried that out one time, and the resulting freely-picked stats were like points buy statblocks in distribution but almost always with at least one 16+ stat and usually somewhat higher in total PBE value than 27 [low 30's IIRC]. Interestingly, it also usually had a lower low stat than most rolled characters I see, it seems my players generally feel that they also have to be bad at something. I also found that when one of my groups generated characters out of supervision, the statlines rolled looked really similar to the "average ideal statline" I had compiled.

Anyway, the general conclusion that I've come to is that rolling is effectively like the players picking their own stats freely, so there's no reason to not use points buy except for power gaming.
Perhaps that's the wrong takeaway, and the right takeaway is that my players will have more fun with better statlines than points buy gives them.

I forgot what the ideal line that I came to was, but it was something like 16+/15/14/12/10/8 [which should translate into (18 or 20)/16/14/12/10/8 after racial mods]

[Pixel_Kitsune]

My group goes for a few tweaks to the standard rolling that gives a bit more power but allows luck and interesting quirks.

Roll 4d6, reroll 1s, keep best 3 results (Guarunteeing 6-18, usually 10+).

Arrange as desired.

If after the first four rolls you don't feel you have a high enough number for your main stat you may declare the last two numbers to be an 18 and a 6. Basically guarunteeing you get a max stat in exchange for taking a low point.

So I've had one character that I left alone because I rolled 16, 17, 12, 14 and thought it was fine and kept rolling (10 and 13). 1/2 Elf
Hexblade/Crown Paladin Str 13, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 19

Another had 14, 12, 13, 10. So went ahead and took 18 and 7. Elf
Sorcerer Str 7, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 18

[Vegan Squirrel]

I find it's easiest to just go with the standard array, but rolling for stats would be my second choice. I have mixed feelings on this question. On the one hand, I prefer balance between the stats—I'd rather have two 14s than an 18. On the other hand, I feel like characters should have weaknesses as a matter of verisimilitude and to make role-playing more interesting. The standard array gives you all of that, with plenty of high stats to cover the needs of flexible character concepts. And in the end, I don't see much difference between a 16 and an 18, or between an 8 and a 10, etc. I wouldn't mind seeing the occasional 6, though.

[Avonar]

Hell, I've had times when I've deliberately asked for a lower stat. A character with a few highs then the rest in the 10-12 region is much less interesting than with highs and then say 6-8 in something. I like a character to have a flaw, it opens up RP opportunities more than a bunch of middling stats as well as helping to set the party dynamic.

The most fun I have ever had was with a 5 charisma character. He went over well with everyone else as well.

[Zhorn]

When I DM, if a player rolls they need to get two things for the roll to count:
One score of 15 or greater
Sum of the modifiers cannot be negative

As a player, I personally like to have a nice curve or ramp for the values when I roll, with at least one weak stat.
I'm not going to complain if I roll super good on everything, but I like to have areas where the other members of the party are going to be better suited at something than I am.


The most fun I have ever had was with a 5 charisma character.
^ I'm with you on that one. Last group I played in my EK fighter had the interpersonal skills of a potato, and all our charismatic PCs had the intelligence/wisdom of a broom and dustpan. Made for some great roleplay interactions with the NPCs when arranging quests.

[Ogre Mage]

I almost always go like 2 high, 3 medium, 1 low or something [after racial modifiers].

That is my preference also.