Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bartmanhomer 11-02-05, 07:18 PM	How would you compare the ability score rating: *(1)-Weakling **(2)-Below Average ***(3)-Average ****(4)-Above Average *****(5)-Highly Dangerous ******(6)-Powerful! Run For Your Life You could comment and tell me why! Ebony (Female Human LV 1 Rogue/LV 1 Paladin): Str: 15, Dex: 17, Con: 17, Int: 15, Wis: 15, Cha: 15
20goingon1232 11-02-05, 07:42 PM	Depends on your nethod of rolling. If it was traditional 3d6, then this is obviously a 6 on the scale. If it was 32 pt buy, then it is about 4-5-ish. For 4d6-L, it would be about 4.
Amphetryon 11-02-05, 08:37 PM	If it was 32 pt buy, then it is about 4-5-ish. Um, care to explain how 15 17 17 15 15 15 is 32 points?
20goingon1232 11-02-05, 08:40 PM	Um, care to explain how 15 17 17 15 15 15 is 32 points? What he is comparing it to. Technically, 32 pt BUY is not ROLLING either.
Amphetryon 11-02-05, 08:47 PM	What he is comparing it to. Technically, 32 pt BUY is not ROLLING either. The OP didn't say anything about the stat generation method. These could have been numbers drawn by the DM out of a hat. I'm still curious how the posted numbers could be derived via 32 point buy, let alone how they could be anything other than a 7 on the OP's scale by that generation method.
Seeker of Truth 11-02-05, 08:53 PM	Those stats I'd rate a 6 ... maybe a 5 if a very generous rolling system was used. As a side note this character should really look into being middle aged. If it's feasable it would turn all those odd numbered stats into even ones.
DDogwood 11-03-05, 12:13 PM	The OP didn't say anything about the stat generation method. These could have been numbers drawn by the DM out of a hat. I'm still curious how the posted numbers could be derived via 32 point buy, let alone how they could be anything other than a 7 on the OP's scale by that generation method. I think that when 20goingon1232 said "depends on your method of rolling", he actually meant "it depends on what method of rolling you're comparing it to". Bartmanhomer, the stats you gave are very powerful compared to "typical" D&D stats... but they are meaningless out of context. If everyone in your party has those stats, then the answer is (3) Average. If everyone in your party has straight 18s, then it is (1) or (2). If you rolled these on 4d6, then you are (5), depending on what you plan to do with the character. I would say that swapping the Dex and Cha scores would be worthwhile... a +1 on all saves forever is worth more in the long run. They are also all odd numbers, which is great for versatility but is sub-optimal, especially if Int is your dump-stat. A paladin/rogue can be very cool, depending on what classes you take. A Wizard/Rogue with similar stats would be more powerful in the long run, and a Monk 2 with similar stats would be more powerful in the short run.
20goingon1232 11-03-05, 05:53 PM	The OP didn't say anything about the stat generation method. These could have been numbers drawn by the DM out of a hat. I'm still curious how the posted numbers could be derived via 32 point buy, let alone how they could be anything other than a 7 on the OP's scale by that generation method. Precisely my point. What is it being compared to. As for the rest, if you didn't get it, then that is not my problem. DDogwood - That is correct. However, the chap may have another reason to be so pitbull-like in mind.
Bartmanhomer 11-04-05, 04:38 PM	I think that when 20goingon1232 said "depends on your method of rolling", he actually meant "it depends on what method of rolling you're comparing it to". Bartmanhomer, the stats you gave are very powerful compared to "typical" D&D stats... but they are meaningless out of context. If everyone in your party has those stats, then the answer is (3) Average. If everyone in your party has straight 18s, then it is (1) or (2). If you rolled these on 4d6, then you are (5), depending on what you plan to do with the character. I would say that swapping the Dex and Cha scores would be worthwhile... a +1 on all saves forever is worth more in the long run. They are also all odd numbers, which is great for versatility but is sub-optimal, especially if Int is your dump-stat. A paladin/rogue can be very cool, depending on what classes you take. A Wizard/Rogue with similar stats would be more powerful in the long run, and a Monk 2 with similar stats would be more powerful in the short run. Really, Wow Thanks! :D
Bartmanhomer 11-04-05, 04:47 PM	What about this stats: Alex (Male Human NG Wizard LV 1/Cleric LV 1): Str: 13, Dex: 13, Con: 13, Int: 15, Wis: 15, Cha: 17
imneuromancer 11-04-05, 05:12 PM	Considering the stats are a 58 point buy (8+13+13+8+8+8), I would consider these stats somewhere between 5 and 6. Practically a +1 or +2 LA monster equivalent. The only thing making them a STRONG 6 is that there isn't an 18 in the bunch, and the choice of DEX and CON as the highest stats for a rogue/paladin is not 100% optimal. Also, the various 15s instead of just 14s is not optimal. So let's say you were to take off the 15s and make them all 14s? The character would still be a (6+13+13+6+6+6) 50 point character, optimal. Uh... yeah, WOW.
Bartmanhomer 11-05-05, 10:21 AM	Cool, man! :D
Bartmanhomer 11-05-05, 10:42 AM	Ebony (Female Human LV 1 Rogue/LV 1 Paladin): Str: 15, Dex: 17, Con: 17, Int: 15, Wis: 15, Cha: 15 In my opinion I'll rated a four because she got good stats for dex. and con., and for the str., int., wis., and cha. are also good but not that high comparing the dex. and con. She is hard to beat and she could be a little threat of inflicting damage but not that serious. So I'll give it a four for above-average! :D
Caelic 11-05-05, 11:15 AM	If a stat average approaching 16--with a point array more than double what's considered "average"--is merely "above average," I'm not sure I want to know what you would consider "extremely powerful."
Bartmanhomer 11-05-05, 12:16 PM	Is still a good rating to see how you judge it. I would consider maybe a five but........I really think Ebony ability score is more likely a four, regardless of what method of rolling or point score array.
Caelic 11-05-05, 01:38 PM	You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it seems to me that rating a 58-point buy as "above average" (when 32 is generally considered "above average," and 28 is considered "average,") means that "extremely powerful" would have to start off with all stats at 18 or above. Anyhoo--not my campaign, not my concern.
Bartmanhomer 11-06-05, 01:08 PM	Ok. Whatever you say Caelic. :)
Bartmanhomer 11-06-05, 01:16 PM	What about this stats: Alex (Male Human NG Wizard LV 1/Cleric LV 1): Str: 13, Dex: 13, Con: 13, Int: 15, Wis: 15, Cha: 17 I still need an opinion for this stats. :D
Blade2718 11-06-05, 01:48 PM	2. The highest stat isn't in either primary casting stat or Con. Total stat values are fairly impressive, but in terms of actual allocation...it leaves something to be desired.
20goingon1232 11-06-05, 03:28 PM	I still need an opinion for this stats. :D Try this one: Str: 13 Dex: 15 Con: 13 Int: 17 Wis: 15 Cha: 13 Although that array is very different from the one you posted in the original post.
Bartmanhomer 11-08-05, 12:50 PM	2. The highest stat isn't in either primary casting stat or Con. Total stat values are fairly impressive, but in terms of actual allocation...it leaves something to be desired. Oh, ok. Thanks Blade2718.
Bartmanhomer 11-08-05, 07:05 PM	Try this one: Str: 13 Dex: 15 Con: 13 Int: 17 Wis: 15 Cha: 13 Although that array is very different from the one you posted in the original post. Hmmm........I'll give this ability score rating a 3!
Caelic 11-08-05, 07:09 PM	Not to be a wet blanket or anything, but what does this have to do with optimization?
PhoenixInferno 11-09-05, 01:57 AM	Good scores. The rogue's distribution is OK, the Wiz/Clr less so. What are you trying to accomplish here though?
Bartmanhomer 11-09-05, 07:02 PM	Just saying in general.