>Everyone uses the standard array for stats
>One smartass wants to roll dice
>DM says it's fine
>The asshole manages to get some crazy numbers like 18 and 21 and proceeds to break the shit out of the game with a special snowflake Aasimar Cleric
Why do i still play this shit?
A. on average you get worse stats by rolling than picking arrays
B. picking arrays is for pussies
i have never met a dm who doesn't allow players to pick between rolling and choosing arrays. that is weirdly controlling. you should dm yourself if you want to tell players what they can and can't do.
don't expect people to be happy with you.
follow >>45365984. game isn't very fun if you have one overpowered asshole who beats out everyone else at their specialties. have him use point buy like everyone else, as it was a system intended to keep parties balanced. or have everyone roll.
it should've been a glaring issue from the start but from your story it seems like you've reasonably progressed in the campaign already, so it'll be harder to get that one player to reroll because in his eyes he got it fair and square.
4d6 drop the lowest die. Highest you can get is an 18.
How are they breaking the game, exactly? Gonna have to give more specific examples. Contrary to people's complaints, having a higher starting stat in 5e doesn't really raise the stakes all that much. A 20 at start is at most 10% more likely to get an attack or spell across. You're still as limited in raw output, proficiency bonus, and lack of versatility as everyone else.
>21 in a stat
That's impossible. You legally cannot raise a stat above 20 in 5e.
Also, fuck your GM for letting that player use a different Ability Score method than everyone else. Either everybody rolls or nobody rolls.
most (if not all) specifically state that said stat cannot be raised above 20 by the increase. only way to go above 20 is items that set your score, ex. giants' belts setting STR as high as 29 iirc
So his save DC is 1 greater than every other caster's save DCs, and even if he boosts it up at 4th level it'll be at most 2 greater than everyone else's and only if they don't also boost their main stats. Same for his spell attack rolls. I'm still not sure how he's using that to break the game.
> The DM let a player make their character with a different method than everyone else
> this threw off the game's balance
> fuck this game
I don't even play 5th, but that's retarded.
I've got a That Retard GM, but it's an old story.
>Playing 3.0, which just came out.
>We're investigating the house of this guy who died in mysterious and obviously magical circumstances.
>Split up to look.
>I, playing a rogue, get the bedroom, search it. Find some weird magical sigil behind his bed.
>Having no Spellcraft or Knowledge:arcana, I unsurprisingly had no idea what it was.
>So I call the wizard in over, point to the thing on the wall, and ask him what it was.
>DM announces to the wizard's player "Make a spot check"
Which sparked off a long, long stupid argument.
>someone wants to roll for stats instead of point buy
>DM gives it the okay
>they get a modifier that's slightly better than OP
>OP starts a thread whining about it
>current has no sense of treasure balance
>gives out equivalent of +20 weapon to some, +1 to another
>realizes this and will wipe all gear from party
>repeats same mistake over
>complains that his games never last because we get frustrated
>never accepts that this has an effect on the game
Fuck it, I will run forever from now on because fuck that mess. Hell, last game he secretly gave one WoD player +75 xp at chargen because he took a lower generation background and it made sense to him, followed by strangling xp to anyone above 10th generation because he considered thinbloods to be a weak point in the lore.
>DM makes hard and super tedious dungeon
>we slog through it with minimal complaining
>XP gets awarded
>it looks low
>low enough for the calculation to be questioned
>DM shows his maths
>Trap CR is completely wrong, with multiple effects not being treated as separate traps
>point this out
>DM insists that he's right
>ask if he really thinks that (for example) a trap that dishes out 97 Energy Drains ought to be considered no more dangerous than one that delivers a single Energy Drain
>DM says that it seems silly but the Pathfinder designers are idiots so that must be what they had in mind
Other players told me that they agreed but that I should have kept my mouth shut. Honestly more angry at them, so fuck that game.
You should point out to him that pathfinder is the same group that has a full powered will-o-whisp, a wraith and a horde of minions that can force fear checks every few rounds if they need to for a 4th to 6th level party of 4.
Or earlier in the adventure, an ambush encounter involving 4 lvl 1 orc fighters and 4 lvl 2 ratfolk rogues that flank characters at range if they occupy the same square that happens at night and targets 2nd/3rd level party who are assumed to be out of spells, under equipped and out of armor and separated.
>B. picking arrays is for pussies
Or DM's who give a shit about balancing encounters.
I don't let my players roll for stats, even if they want to.
It sounds to me like, if the group was united enough to have a gentleman's agreement to use arrays, because it makes the game better, then you should be united enough to talk to the guy and say "look, we play under certain unwritten assumptions, and you play along or we won't play with you."
The majority of the table united is stronger than the DM or the That Guy player.
>Or earlier in the adventure, an ambush encounter involving 4 lvl 1 orc fighters and 4 lvl 2 ratfolk rogues that flank characters at range if they occupy the same square that happens at night and targets 2nd/3rd level party who are assumed to be out of spells, under equipped and out of armor and separated.
So that's what Wick did in-between shitting out badly researched pseudo-historical games.
>preventing ability score variance has something to do with encounter balance
>it makes the game better
>assuming the DM or other players in OP's situation actually gave a fuck what method was used for stats
Standard array is the laziest option possible for people who don't even care enough to use point buy.
>Living in fantasy world where ability score variance doesn't impact encounter balance
Rolling stats is for grognards who put nostalgia above gameplay. Outside of one-shots, or battle-royale arena-games where half the fun is rolling in with a stack of character-sheet half-an-inch thick, I really can't think of a game where I'd have my players use rolling over literally any other method.
>greentext'd what I said and posted a smug image but didn't didn't give any reasoning for your stance
Bobby has +1 more charisma than Jimmy and little Gaben has -2 wisdom? Holy fucking shit better rewrite this whole encounter and switch out all these monsters with different monsters and make sure not to give the party any items that could *potentially* be used by Bobby because holy fuck that overpowered little bastard already has a +1.
>Bobby has +1 more charisma than Jimmy and little Gaben has -2 wisdom? Holy fucking shit better rewrite this whole encounter and switch out all these monsters with different monsters and make sure not to give the party any items that could *potentially* be used by Bobby because holy fuck that overpowered little bastard already has a +1.
More like "Aw fuck, 5e game balance is clearly based on all 'feat or stat-bump' choices before mid-late level being difficult, because you are having to chose between bringing your primary atack stat closer to 20 softcap or getting a cool ability, and this chucklehead can take feats consequence free all day from day 1, and has a +2 hit/damage swing for a the first half of assumed play, and has a 2+ feat advantage for the rest. All the while all of the monsters are built and encounter balanced under the assumption that he doesn't. This is really game disrupting."
You can't honestly pretend like, in a game where the highest point-buy/array starting stat is 16 (before mods,) balance isn't disrupted when someone rolls a nat-18 and puts it in their primary. It's also bad for the rest of the party, because it forces the DM to up the ante to challenge captain higher-tier, which puts everyone else at a higher risk of revolving-door-character-death, which leads to a lack of character investment and player attrition... or at the very least shitty role-playing.
I can think of literally no reason to allow rolling for stats in a game that I intend to run seriously. One-shots, beer and pretzil games, or joke-campaigns, sure, but not a serious campaign.
To be honest, if we weren't looking at ability score numbers, you wouldn't even be able to tell.
So he does 1 more point of damage and hits slightly more often, big whoop. That's not even a noticeable difference in practice.
I know that feel bro. My DM doesn't even do Trap exp which is fucking retarded. His traps are 1hko and we keep finding ways to avoid them yet he refuses to give us exp for them. I'm really considering just giving pathfinder a hiatus because this guy is fucking cheating. 20 touch AC skeletal champion. TWENTY TOUCH AC! This fucking skeleton is a tag professional! And he says 'hurr durr custom enemy'
>Hell, last game he secretly gave one WoD player +75 xp at chargen because he took a lower generation background and it made sense to him
I've been there.
We were underage, just getting into RPGs and reading rules in a rush rather than thinking them over.
The train of thought went something like
>oh look you can buy background to be lower gen
>oh look another place in the book says that lower gen characters have more points to buy things with
>WE TOTALLY CAN LOOP THOSE
Then it went by the way of typical gaia type "cool-ass vampires". Of gen, IIRC, FIVE.
You're waaay exaggerating the imbalance caused by having more feats (few of them stack in any meaningful way and generally add breadth and versatility rather than actual additional power) and the need for DMs to "rebalance" because someone has an extra +1 compared to the rest.
I use 2d6 + 4 as the rolling option for my 5e games. Puts the minimum at a 6, and the max at a 16.
A bit lower on average compared to pointbuy, but a higher possible maximum, and you can manage to get an 18 if you're playing a race with a +2 mod.
My players are rather insistent on rolling, so I find minimizing the impact is the best way to go about it while still allowing them to have their fun.
Its been a long time but I used to do 4d4+2 for a range of 6-18. Honestly though these days I just have players do array, I know its lazy but no one can complain about feeling underpowered.
Sounds like we have verry different players
>Just roll your stats you pussy.
I'm Forever DM dude. Reading comprehension.
>I can think of literally no reason to allow rolling for stats in a game that I intend to run seriously.
>I really can't think of a game where I'd have my players use rolling over literally any other method.
>I don't let my players roll for stats, even if they want to.
And people are overstating the effects of those, too, especially at low levels. Oh boy, you get an extra 1d4 + 3 or 1d6 + 3 as a bonus action (Polearm Master, Crossbow Expert), something TWF fighters are doing at 1st level anyway, or you can try for a GWM or Sharpshooter shot for that sweet +10 but whoops, at low levels that means you're hitting at +0 for melee or +2 for ranged (or maybe +1 and +3 in the case of rolled stats), and combat doesn't last long enough for the overall higher average damage to mean shit half the time when you don't hit with any of them.
Like yeah, woo, a feat at level 1 or 4 with a +1 higher bonus than others is great, but the power difference is nowhere near significant in the starting levels of play to truly overshadow other members of your party. It's all down to theorycrafting that people on /tg/ like to bitch about that doesn't actually rear its head in play.
>Game set in 17th century eruope, but monsters and magic are real
>"its low magic though"
>"it will be like darkest dungeon"
>Not allowed to be a gunslinger
>Not allowed to use guns at all, because apparently they are broken
>Not allowed to use the occult classes because apparently they are broken
>Roll for stats, 4d6 drop the lowest reroll 1s,2s,and 3s If you roll four of a kind don't drop one
>Part is an Inquisitor(me), a Cleric, a Brawler, and a Rogue
>Not allowed to have magic items
>DM makes us fight monsters that are over our CR and doesn't take the fact that we basically have no magic items into account
>lvl 1 we are fighting incorporeal creatures without any magic items
>DMPC swoops in and saves us
>Get to town, ask about surrounding area, there are no farms every building is made out of stone, and captain of the guard is a lvl 20 paladin with a fucking griffin mount.
>Told to go do a thing in the mountains, which are apparently a 2 day walk from northern Germany
>Get attacked by a demon on the road, have to be saved by DMPC who is apparently following us
>Get to mountains, have to fight a wizard
>DMPC saves us a third time, demands we give him our reward for our quest
>We dont get any experience because the DMPC saved us.
I think it was the worst DM I have ever had. Also none of the npcs had names or where just like bob and jim.
Removing magic items and casters removes last shreds of CR balance in D&D.
You COULD run a game with no magic at all, but you'd need to carefully balance everything by hand.
Which this guy obviously didn't.
>lvl 1 we are fighting incorporeal creatures without any magic items
It would not be if he was not giving us opponents that were a stronger than us and b impossible to kill without them. It was also something we were told at the start, like a heads up that we arnt getting magic items.
As a DM Im really sorry to hear you had to go through that
As a player, fuck. Im really sorry you had to go through all that
I think the thing that saddened me most was that I really liked the idea of the setting. The idea of being an agent of the catholic church fighting monsters seemed fun, but Jesus Christ was the dm bad.
I had to skim over the details but a lot of it really came from him being inexperience. When I asked him about guns he said that gunslingers are just to strong, his evidence was that he played with a guy that did a lot of damage as a gunslinger like that means much in pathfinder. When I asked him bout the occult classes he didn't know they existed, but was adamant that they were overpowered in 3ed. When I asked him about the surrounding I was looking for anything out of place, considering we just got attacked by shades or something. At that point he showed he just didnt understand how towns worked in reality.
At least I got a good story out of it all.
>>greentext'd what I said and posted a smug image but didn't didn't give any reasoning for your stance
Mate you did the exact same thing in the post he was replying to. Hell, you did so with even less reasoning
The series is: Vikings (800-1100 AD)
Charlemagne's Paladins (768-814 AD)
A Mighty Fortress (1550-1650 AD)
Celts (600 BC - 550 AD ?)
Age of Heroes (2200-279 BC)
The Glory of Rome (750 BC - 500 AD)
The Crusades (1095-1192 AD)
Masque of the Red Death and Other Tales is 'Gothic Earth', which is 1890-1899 AD x Ravenloft, and sort of related to the HR series.
Those "specific exceptions" are what he means by a soft cap, m8.
Items like the tomes and manuals allow you to ramp above 20, and you can find them multiple times to a hard cap of 30. (Of course, being rare and highly valued magical items that can only be used like once every 100 years, finding a single one is an adventure and finding five is the journey of a lifetime.) At 30, nothing in the multiverse can raise your stats higher.
That's not the domain of adventurers. Become a god if you want to do that.
All you got to do is start a cult, fight off the assassins of all the other gods, find a portfolio to claim, and then hope Overgod Ao is in the mood to give you a pass and not delete you from existence.
I had one of my GMs talk me into playing not-Han instead of the character I already finished. After I agreed to do it, he made a series of detailed and specific requests which of Han's skills could (should) be changed in order to take other skills. Short answer - all of them. I just did what the real Han would do and completely ignored the suggestion. It was a boring conversation anyway.
>Nothing goes higher than 20
>except for specific exceptions
That is the definition of a soft cap. It's "soft" because exceptions can exceed it. The barbarian's 20th level feature, and some magic items mean that the limit of ability score 20 is a soft cap.
In contrast, a "hard" cap is a limit which cannot be exceeded by any means (or which provides no benefit if exceeded). In 5e, the limit of ability score 30 has no exceptions. If any exceptions were published, then it would stop being a hard cap.
>tfw you will never punch through mountains with your fists.
Clearly we need an OPM game.
>not using superior 20 point buy for everything D&D related
>have a group in which everyone GMs once in a while
>everyone besides me rolls mainly in WoD because any tardo can pick up Storyteller
>one friend wants to GM a vampire game
>I send him a rulebook pdf and ask him if he'll manage to prepare in two weeks(he never GMed WoD before and I doubt that he ever read any rulebooks)
>"Nah man, it's fine, we'll play this friday"
>I can feel the trainwreck approaching but whatever
>friday, we start the game
>intro basically clears our characters backround and turns them into blank slates(my characters restaurant gets torchet, someones family gets wiped out, etc.)
>then prince requests our presence(later I found out that every campaing that he runs starts with prince requesting our presence)
>we are transported into some cave in the woods, because vampires live in woods away from civilisation
>prince gives us a briefing, entire encounter involves a great deal of "you are teleported away" and "a strange force is keeping you in place, you can't move"
>basically we have to go to some fucking jungle and ivestigate because sabat is there doing something bad
>they teleport us to said jungle
>two vampire zombies atack us right away
>I have to run combat instead of GM, but it's fine since Storyteller is easy as fuck
>he picked up on that one discipline that he thought was realy cool(that one with shadow tantacles or some edgy shit) which he used extensivley
>apparently vampire zombies were really fucking strong because their dicepoll for every test ranged from 10 to 11
>we killed them anyway because he got bored of combat and revealed to us that drinking their blood kills them instantly
Not possible in 5e, as others have pointed out. The book says that the cap is 20 multiple times, so there's no excuse.
I'd be real curious to see what his scores were. Chances are, he got a low scores or two in there as well. So while you and your buddies have pretty even builds, he has one with a few strong points and a few weaknesses.
Even if he somehow got all 18s and 20s, he still wouldn't be that broken. Melee classes with decent strength/dexterity are still going to out-melee him, other spellcasters have different spells, and even other clerics are only going to be off by a +1 or a +2, which isn't a big deal at all, especially as you level due to proficiency bonuses and the stat cap mixed with getting +2 to a stat (or +1 and +1 to two stats) every four levels.
Plus, it sounds like any one of you could have chosen to roll instead of taking standard array. It'd be one thing if the DM said "everyone must take Standard Array" but then allowed this dude to pull in a character that rolled a bunch of 18s and 20s. From the sounds of it, everyone made their choice, and now you have to live with your choices.
>then we get to an ancient ziggurat
>it's a dungeon
>suddenly campaing turns into dungeon crawler
>dungeon crawler in fucking WoD
>it's not even a good dungeon crawler, it's basicaly walking through empty corridors and doing perception checks for traps
>halfway through, after 30 minutes of walking around empty fucking corridors he tells us, with shit eating grin on his face, "I hope that you were drawing your own map, because I sure won't help you get out of there"
>after another ~30 minutes we walk into some shitty as room with sword on a pedestal or some shit
>I grab the sword, hoping that this hell is finally going to end
>"It's a trap, you are teleported in front of ziggurat"
>we get inside agin, starting from scratch
>another hour of sweet corridor exploran, he finaly gets bored
>we enter some room, agin, there's one guy
>it turns out he's an antediluvian, he kills all of us
one hour for intro, one hour of fighting with vampire zombies, two fucking hours of walking around corridors and doing perception checks.
All he managed to pick up from 150 pages of rulebook was one discipline and antediluvians
>We roll as usual
>Some guy refuses to use physical dice and rolls everything on his dice rolling app.
>Coincidentally has never rolled a character without at least a 17 and nothing below a 10.
>Next time he makes a character we force him to use physical dice for stat generation.
>Rolls a 16 as highest stat and bitches endlessly about his 7 charisma.
Reminds me of the time we wanted visit a dwarven stronghold. So we decoded to fly to the entrance.
Ridiculous winds forced us to land and walk through a narrow ravine. Which opened up right before the stronghold.
It opened up because the DM wanted us to fight a bunch of wolves (which is why we couldn't fly.) Our druid tried to talk to them, and discovered they were attacking us because they were hungry. So hungry that they couldn't possibly let us get food for them. Couldn't be done.
So we spider climbed a cliff wall and started raining attacks on the wolves (12 dire wolves, 2 fifth level characters.) Which is when the dwarves ran out to rescue us. Because that's the scene he had in his head, qmd he'd be damned if flight, druids, or ranged tactics would keep him from showing it to us.
He also bad with towns.
Its my first time DMing and I have a really disruptive player in my party.
What do you think about the idea of me making enemies turn super saiyan every time he disrupts gameplay?
I have never played a table top game in my life yet I bought dice for them
>What do you think about the idea of me making enemies turn super saiyan every time he disrupts gameplay?
That's a bad idea.
When dealing with a player who is disruptive (in a way that the group's not enjoying - the comedian is fine if everyone laughs at the jokes), step one is to talk to them. Start off by saying that you'd like to discuss that last session. Bring up one example of disruptive behaviour. Say that when the player did that, you felt they weren't really engaged in the game. Ask if there's anything you could do to make things more enjoyable for the player. If they bring something up and it's reasonable, say that you'll do your best and ask the player to be patient. If the player says they're having a good time, say that you're glad to hear that because you want to make sure everyone is enjoying the game.
With a lot of people, that's enough. If things continue, then the next time you bring it up you can simply say that (whatever they're doing) is diminishing your enjoyment of the game and ask them to cut it out.
BACK IN MY DAY, WE ONLY GOT 3D6 DOWN THE LINE!
YOU KIDS DON'T KNOW HOW GOOD YOU HAVE IT
Also, I usually just let players reroll a single stat with a d20. The fear of rolling 5 or lower usually keeps people from trying it, and they're overall happier with their scores.
>So hungry that they couldn't possibly let us get food for them.
Well to be honest that's pretty reasonable unless you literally had food on you right at that moment. They'd probably assume you're lying and just wanted to run away.