Discourage stat dumping

[HouseRules]

Measuring Stat Dumping?

Mean / Geomean.

Mean = ( STR + DEX + CON + INT + WIS + CHA ) / 6
Mean is the sum then divide.

Geomean = 6TH-ROOT ( STR * DEX * CON * INT * WIS * CHA )
Geometric Mean is the product then rooted.

Mean / Geomean >= 1 for all positive inputs.

If all inputs are equal, then Mean / Geomean is 1, otherwise it is greater than 1.

[ProsecutorGodot]

To some folks, a 10 in a score is also "dumping" the score.

Heaven forbid I roll stats, which apparently is better to avoid dumping, and manage two 10's. They've got to go somewhere and it's much easier for my paladin to have his "smarts" from his background proficiencies than to sacrifice my hit point max by taking it from CON.

I disagree with those who would label "putting a low number" and "putting nothing (or the lowest possible number)" as equivalent forms of dumping. It's not realistic for a character to have everything.

I guess my 13/18/18/18/18/12 Blood Hunter also "dumped" Charisma and Strength. It couldn't possibly be that he's a finesse weapon user with a personality like sandpaper.

Just poking fun at the notion that dumping can be altogether avoided. You're going to have to put a low stat somewhere, whether you choose it yourself or have it chosen for you.

The problem with knowledge checks for example is that either you succeed or you fail and still get the needed information somewhere else because the plot needs the players to have the crucial information.

I will say it's not always true that the information will be acquired out of necessity, more that acquiring that knowledge with a successful check would have circumvented the time/effort it would have taken to get it otherwise. You're probably right though, more commonly in the adventures I've played through is that history checks are either for fun (essentially a B story that is cool, but altogether unnecessary to the A story) or have little consequence of failure.

[Tanarii]

If all inputs are equal, then Mean / Geomean is 1, otherwise it is greater than 1.

For standard array I get ~1.022

For PB 15 / 15 / 15 / 8 / 8 / 8 I get ~1.050

For PB 13 / 13 / 13 / 12 / 12 / 12 I get ~1.0008

Looks like one effective measure of stat dumping to me.

I disagree with those who would label "putting a low number" and "putting nothing (or the lowest possible number)" as equivalent forms of dumping. It's not realistic for a character to have everything.

I agree they are not equivalent forms of dumping. But as we can see from the formula posited above, some folks mean "below the average score" with the further below the stronger the dumping. And for others (you?) it means using the lowest score possible in point buy.

Like many things in RPGs in general and D&D in particular, there isn't a consensus on what the term means.

[MaxWilson]

Just poking fun at the notion that dumping can be altogether avoided. You're going to have to put a low stat somewhere, whether you choose it yourself or have it chosen for you.

Sure. And yet, in a campaign full of Intellect Devourers, you aren't going to last long if you put it in Int. You will put a high stat in Int instead.

Surely that much is obvious?

Whether or not the DM ought to deliberately run a campaign full of Intellect Devourers... well, I wouldn't do that.

I reward high Int in other ways though, through the initiative system. The higher your Int, the more information you have when declaring your actions in combat. (You have a faster OODA loop.)

I will say it's not always true that the information will be acquired out of necessity, more that acquiring that knowledge with a successful check would have circumvented the time/effort it would have taken to get it otherwise. You're probably right though, more commonly in the adventures I've played through is that history checks are either for fun (essentially a B story that is cool, but altogether unnecessary to the A story) or have little consequence of failure.

In WotC adventures, yes, but then, WotC is bad at adventure writing. But if that history check lets you identify an early clue that subsequently lets you recognize and kill an Intellect Devourer before it can eat your brain, you got real value out of that "optional" information.

[Constructman]

What is the end result of 'not stat dumping' that people trying to discourage stat dumping want to see? It seems like some people want to push players to pick a 12 12 12 13 13 13 type array, while others are players just use 10 as the floor for stats. And obviously if you use rolls there is no 'stat dumping' to discourage, since you don't pick stats and thus can't choose to dump one. I see an awful lot of people just asserting that stat dumping is a Bad Thing, though no one has said why, or even clearly stated what they want players to do; 'don't stat dump' doesn't actually convey what you want players to do. Most of the suggestions here aren't actually going to discourage stat dumping, they're just tacking penalties onto characters that aren't worth lowering a main stat to avoid or engaging in bizarre worldbuilding where NPCs have magic stat detection abilities.

If you're having lots of them, the difference between an 8 and 10 int is pretty low. You're talking about being able to take maybe one more hit before you go to zero int. If you're wanting players to have more than 10 in non-major stats, then it seems you should either just require them to use something like a 13-13-13-12-12-12 array in the first place, or increase the number of points so that they can afford the defensive stats.

Again, it looks like people are just saying 'stat dumping is bad! just kill the PCs and it will stop!' without any clear idea of what stats they actually want to see.

Again, what does everybody really want when they say "discourage stat dumping"? Especially given that the system itself encourages (or mandates) at least 1 low stat, and some stats getting jumped more than others due to which stats each class needs to function optimally?

[MaxWilson]

Again, what does everybody really want when they say "discourage stat dumping"? Especially given that the system itself encourages (or mandates) at least 1 low stat, and some stats getting jumped more than others due to which stats each class needs to function optimally?

I dunno, who is "everybody"? They aren't likely to all want the same things.

For my part, I'm happy that due to the initiative system I'm using, Int is valuable for anyone who likes complex, conditional tactics; and not valuable for anyone who wants to do the same thing in every combat ("I hit it again with my axe"). That feels like it's correctly modeling what intelligence is.

[ZorroGames]

I read a lot about valorize the abilities that the players are likely to dump during character creation: INT first, then STR and CHA and in some builds I also see WIS as the dump stat. I never seen CON or DEX dumped because they are too valuables and if someone wants to dump one of these two, I think he's already fairly penalized. I didn't find a way to valorize the remaining 4 abilities in a build that put them as the dump stat but maybe I can try to discourage players to dump them before all:
1. INT or WIS: apply the malus to character initiative;
2. STR: apply the malus to bonus HP derived from CON every level;
3. CHA: apply the malus to charisma skill check of every member of the party if the character is in the same room and if you roll for a random character to attack count that character as two (if you have 3 party members don't roll a 1d3, roll instead a 1d4).

You can use the malus only to mitigate the bonus to a minimum of 0 (a character with 10 DEX and 8 INT has Initiative 0) or you can choose to go all out and use the malus to impose a negative modifier (a character with 10 DEX and 8 INT has initiative -1).
What you think?

I think this is a bad idea for 5e. Just set minimum at 10 as suggested if it bothers you, my 8 CH ranger role-plays her archaeologist background off the 8.

[Constructman]

I dunno, who is "everybody"? They aren't likely to all want the same things.

For my part, I'm happy that due to the initiative system I'm using, Int is valuable for anyone who likes complex, conditional tactics; and not valuable for anyone who wants to do the same thing in every combat ("I hit it again with my axe"). That feels like it's correctly modeling what intelligence is.

So you're fine with Str and Cha dumps? Since those are also minor saves and not important to characters who don't need them for their class.

Is this thread really a big complaint about the lack of focus on Int?

[MaxWilson]

So you're fine with Str and Cha dumps?

Sure. 21st century humans dump Str all the time, and both Str and Cha have enough mechanical implications that dumping them is still interesting. A Str 6 Sharpshooter can still fight just fine with a rapier, but can't use a Vorpal Longsword very well, can't grapple well, and is subpar are getting out of grapples; a Cha 6 Druid with no social skill proficiencies will probably be unable e.g. to talk the sheriff into letting him have a word with the other PCs when they're in jail. And that's fine! The game is all about meaningful choices, and being bad at certain things is a choice. Besides, watching the druid player roleplay an awkward persuasion attempt is good fun for everybody at the table.

Since those are also minor saves and not important to characters who don't need them for their class.

Is this thread really a big complaint about the lack of focus on Int?

I dunno, I didn't start the thread and I don't really agree with the OP's goals or approach. My only complaint about vanilla PHB rules is that they fail to make high-Int non-wizards sufficiently interesting.

[Tanarii]

The problem with knowledge checks for example is that either you succeed or you fail and still get the needed information somewhere else because the plot needs the players to have the crucial information.
For investigation you have a similar problem.

Again, that's a DM problem, not a rules problem. The rules do not mandate that Int checks be used in a manner of "Knowledge checks" a la previous editions. They do not mandate their only use is gating specific information behind them, let alone that failing the check means they must fail to have consequences because plot.

[NatureKing]

The characters with low Int aren't around any more.

So everyone plays Strength dumping Wizards.

And ignoring the whole 'DM, what enemies will you provide us so that I can choose the optimum stats to counter you' conversation you're expecting to take place.

[Kyutaru]

So everyone plays Strength dumping Wizards.

And ignoring the whole 'DM, what enemies will you provide us so that I can choose the optimum stats to counter you' conversation you're expecting to take place.

Just hope they aren't ignoring encumbrance and thinking they have enough strength for a heavy crossbow and a bunch of magical gear. The crossbow alone is 18 lbs and five times your 8 strength puts your light load at 40 max using the variant encumbrance rule. Strength dumpers get pampered when they don't use this rule.

[Witty Username]

In practice variant encumbrance has little bearing on the strength of wizards. My table doesn't use it but we when through the math, and my strength 5 wizard wouldn't have noticed.
Strength of fighters yes, 65 lbs for full plate is a mess on a str 15 fighter. longsword + shield 9 lbs, greatsword 6 lbs. It makes str characters less good at what they are supposed to be good at.
Dex fighters with str 8-10, light armor is 13 lbs., a rapier and shield is another 8, for a total of 21 lbs. a heavy crossbow is out( if str 8) but it seems there is some agreement that hand crossbow is superior because of the bonus action attack and that is 3 lbs, and a longbow is 2 lbs.
(dex fighter) 24 - 40 = 16
(str fighter) 75 - 71 = 4

Variant Encumbrance isn't really the distribution for discouraging people to dumb str, it messes with the strength builds ability to function without dumping other stats.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Variant Encumbrance isn't really the distribution for discouraging people to dumb str, it messes with the strength builds ability to function without dumping other stats.

And clerics get screwed hard, as do dwarves (they lose a racial feature with no recompense).

Meanwhile, rogues and DEX fighters are laughing all the way to the bank.

[Pex]

If you're having lots of them, the difference between an 8 and 10 int is pretty low. You're talking about being able to take maybe one more hit before you go to zero int. If you're wanting players to have more than 10 in non-major stats, then it seems you should either just require them to use something like a 13-13-13-12-12-12 array in the first place, or increase the number of points so that they can afford the defensive stats.

Again, it looks like people are just saying 'stat dumping is bad! just kill the PCs and it will stop!' without any clear idea of what stats they actually want to see.

It's not about the actual numbers but Stormwind Fallacy. They think those who dump stats only care about how to be the most powerful at whatever and not about the story or roleplay. A DM who doesn't think that doesn't care how a player allocates his ability scores to want to discourage anything.

[Witty Username]

Building on that point, If you think stat dumping is a problem and your player brings up concerns like "my strength based fighter needs high strength to function" making them need other stats to function won't solve that problem.

[GreyBlack]

And clerics get screwed hard, as do dwarves (they lose a racial feature with no recompense).

Soooooo... continuing the D&D tradition on Dwarves, eh?

[NatureKing]

Just hope they aren't ignoring encumbrance and thinking they have enough strength for a heavy crossbow and a bunch of magical gear. The crossbow alone is 18 lbs and five times your 8 strength puts your light load at 40 max using the variant encumbrance rule. Strength dumpers get pampered when they don't use this rule.

What Mind Flayer facing Wizards still use Crossbows, especially when there is variant encumbrance to further penalize investment in strength?

[Witty Username]

I used a light crossbow for levels 1-4, before cantrip damage caught up. Haven't seen a mind flayer though.

[NatureKing]

Yep. A 5lb Crossbow (that doesn't add Str) to damage simply because it takes 12.5% of your light encumbrance (while using a variant rule) , that is useful for only levels 1-4 is definitely a reason to not dump strength.

Next argument.

[Pex]

A minor reason for a wizard or sorcerer not to have 8 strength, though campaign dependent on commonality, is 10 ft pits in dungeons.If you don't have 10 Strength a flavor text becomes an obstacle. The party has to spend real world time thinking of a way to get you across and in game time to do it, which may or may not matter, but both start to become annoying the second time it happens. Alternatively the spellcaster has to cast a spell to get across which is a waste of spell use. 10 Strength you're golden. Any pit larger than 10 ft is meant to be a party obstacle despite the strength warriors can still get across 20 ft pits eventually.

[Tanarii]

A minor reason for a wizard or sorcerer not to have 8 strength, though campaign dependent on commonality, is 10 ft pits in dungeons.If you don't have 10 Strength a flavor text becomes an obstacle.

Especially since now the DM now has to decide how to handle a character that wants to jump 2 extra feet. And no matter what their decision the lack of rules and resulting table variation will drive at least one player at each table insane.

Having Insanity on your hands is a terrible price to pay just because you want an 8 in your Strength score.

[ProsecutorGodot]

A minor reason for a wizard or sorcerer not to have 8 strength, though campaign dependent on commonality, is 10 ft pits in dungeons.If you don't have 10 Strength a flavor text becomes an obstacle. The party has to spend real world time thinking of a way to get you across and in game time to do it, which may or may not matter, but both start to become annoying the second time it happens. Alternatively the spellcaster has to cast a spell to get across which is a waste of spell use. 10 Strength you're golden. Any pit larger than 10 ft is meant to be a party obstacle despite the strength warriors can still get across 20 ft pits eventually.

Thankfully something we've never had to deal with since the pits we find are usually 15ft+ across so only our Fighter and Monk are jumping them in one go anyway. We have them take a piton to the other side and make a tight walk out of rope, climbing to the other side. We've used ladders from our Sorcerer's robe of useful items a few times, they're 24ft long.

Considering how many times we've knocked out a Drow to tie them up for questioning when they regain consciousness, we've always been stocked up on Ropes, Chains and Gags. Sometimes I think they enjoyed it a bit too much.

It takes longer but I'd hardly call it an "obstacle". If your solution is to expend a spell slot you haven't come up with a very creative (we used a rowboat patch to cross a 10ft gap through difficult terrain where we couldn't jump it or anchor a rope) or a resource efficient one (Pitons and Ropes are literally and figuratively a small price to pay).

That said, I can't deny that taking a 10 in Str would have been a lot easier. Definitely a very minor reason though.

[NatureKing]

So the answer to the reason to discourage stat dumping is to have all gaps 2ft wider than the minimum strength in the party, and have Mind Flayers. Mind Flayers all the time.

[dreast]

So the answer to the reason to discourage stat dumping is to have all gaps 2ft wider than the minimum strength in the party, and have Mind Flayers. Mind Flayers all the time.

To be fair, Mind Flayers all the time is my answer to everything.

In actual seriousness, I don't think stat dumping is a problem in 5e. I do think that some stats get undervalued by players and underutilized by DM’s in a kind of self-fulfilling feedback loop. This is why you sometimes see posters around here argue, for example, that mind flayer powers should have Wisdom saves. The fact is that the fundamental dichotomy of D&D is that everything has a story purpose and everything has a mechanics purpose, and if you can’t accept that, this is the wrong system for you. Mind flayers are and always have been, story-wise, Lovecraftian monstrosities that invite madness and terror, and mechanics-wise, Intelligence-based game roadblocks against straight combat-build groups that are otherwise supremely optimized for the system.

In the same way, each stat is both a story element and a mechanics element. Intelligence is, story-wise, a fundamental part of a character’s personality, embodying his or her ability to reason and process the implications of the world around him, and mechanics-wise, a safe dump stat for that dwarven barbarian.

Unless there’s a mind-flayer around, of course.

[JumboWheat01]

Because a dwarven barbarian totally needs a brain, right?

[noob]

Because a dwarven barbarian totally needs a brain, right?

yes that barbarian needs a brain for its brain collection because brain collections are not forbidden for non mi go creatures.

[Willie the Duck]

From what I've seen the desired effect is: stop players from putting 8 in Str, Int and Cha because those stats are all considered meaningless at my table, which has nothing to do with the DMing style in any way.

Sometimes it's phrased as something something cookie cutter builds.

As we all know, all non-GWM/HA chars dump Str, all HA wearers dump Dex instead, and all non-wizards dump Int (including EKs), and all non Cha-casters dump Cha.

If you're having lots of them, the difference between an 8 and 10 int is pretty low. You're talking about being able to take maybe one more hit before you go to zero int. If you're wanting players to have more than 10 in non-major stats, then it seems you should either just require them to use something like a 13-13-13-12-12-12 array in the first place, or increase the number of points so that they can afford the defensive stats.

Again, it looks like people are just saying 'stat dumping is bad! just kill the PCs and it will stop!' without any clear idea of what stats they actually want to see.

I fear we've created a straw opposition here siding the 'pro discouraging state dumping' half of the argument, most people left in the discussion seem to split into the 'why would we want to do that?' and 'if you do want to do that, here's how I'd do it' camps. Regardless, I'm really not sure there's a consensus on why you would dislike stat dumping. Certainly the situation where some stats seem better than others has seen some negative attention (particularly Int, but the overall Wis/Dex/Con> Str/Int/Cha unless specific classes are chosen is grating to some).

I think, to my mind/imo, there are really only two good arguments for why stat dumping is disagreeable --
1) making a well-rounded character ought to have some practical benefits. I mean, not inherently, but it is a reasonable position to take. I could get that idea. It would be nice if making a 12 12 12 13 13 13 (maybe non-variant human, so 13 13 13 14 14 14) character was somehow a rewarding character build. Sadly (for the argument, if nothing else) I think that ship sailed in a number of ways well above and beyond simple stat rewards (medium armor not being great, switch-hitting between Str- and Dex-based weapons isn't really rewarding since str-based ones tend to need feats to have an advantage over rapiers, etc.). Beyond that, the argument is a should statement, and the obvious counter-response is, 'well, no, why should/ought it?'
2) if there is no disadvantage to stat-dumping, and everyone is just going to create the same couple of builds, stat-wise, why have stats at all? Or, at the very least, why have intermediate stats at all? If the former, if the decision point is whether to make a Str-based fighter or Dex-based fighter, get rid of Str- and Dex- and just make two types of fighters. If the latter, and the real decision point is whether your Str-based fighter is going to boost their Str to 20 asap, or leave their Str at 16 and just take GWM, PAM, and Sentinel ASAP, then just start the Str measure at 0 and make 18 and 20 become baseline+2 and baseline+4. There are clearly counterexamples where people have not gone 8 8 8 15 15 15 and/or dumped the obvious stats (some people have even chosen 4-stat builds). However, I find the base premise of the argument a little more valid than #1... it's just kinda asking for a complete rebuild of the system.

So the answer to the reason to discourage stat dumping is to have all gaps 2ft wider than the minimum strength in the party, and have Mind Flayers. Mind Flayers all the time.

And adventure hooks gated behind knowledge checks, druids have to occasionally persuade gaolers to let them talk to their imprisoned party members, enforcing encumbrance, magic weapon drops which do not conform to the party builds, and a whole bunch of other niggling bits I'm sure we could find depending on how wide we cast our net. Some of these are annoying in that they are pretty campaign specific. Others seem like not-useful-merely-vital requirements ('you will never use this Int score during your normal adventuring career, but if you don't have a ___ or higher, you will not be able to pass through the Valley of the Brain Eaters, and so will have to travel through the much more treacherous Pits of Plot Contrivance to reach your goal').

[NatureKing]

DM to players: Guys, what do you want to do? Just want to know, because I'm going to tailor it to target all of your weak points.

This is basically what it boils down to. 'How do you want to have fun? Because I'm not gonna do that'.

Hard pass.

[Max_Killjoy]

I fear we've created a straw opposition here siding the 'pro discouraging state dumping' half of the argument, most people left in the discussion seem to split into the 'why would we want to do that?' and 'if you do want to do that, here's how I'd do it' camps. Regardless, I'm really not sure there's a consensus on why you would dislike stat dumping. Certainly the situation where some stats seem better than others has seen some negative attention (particularly Int, but the overall Wis/Dex/Con> Str/Int/Cha unless specific classes are chosen is grating to some).

I think, to my mind/imo, there are really only two good arguments for why stat dumping is disagreeable --

1) making a well-rounded character ought to have some practical benefits. I mean, not inherently, but it is a reasonable position to take. I could get that idea. It would be nice if making a 12 12 12 13 13 13 (maybe non-variant human, so 13 13 13 14 14 14) character was somehow a rewarding character build. Sadly (for the argument, if nothing else) I think that ship sailed in a number of ways well above and beyond simple stat rewards (medium armor not being great, switch-hitting between Str- and Dex-based weapons isn't really rewarding since str-based ones tend to need feats to have an advantage over rapiers, etc.). Beyond that, the argument is a should statement, and the obvious counter-response is, 'well, no, why should/ought it?'

2) if there is no disadvantage to stat-dumping, and everyone is just going to create the same couple of builds, stat-wise, why have stats at all? Or, at the very least, why have intermediate stats at all? If the former, if the decision point is whether to make a Str-based fighter or Dex-based fighter, get rid of Str- and Dex- and just make two types of fighters. If the latter, and the real decision point is whether your Str-based fighter is going to boost their Str to 20 asap, or leave their Str at 16 and just take GWM, PAM, and Sentinel ASAP, then just start the Str measure at 0 and make 18 and 20 become baseline+2 and baseline+4. There are clearly counterexamples where people have not gone 8 8 8 15 15 15 and/or dumped the obvious stats (some people have even chosen 4-stat builds). However, I find the base premise of the argument a little more valid than #1... it's just kinda asking for a complete rebuild of the system.

My biggest objection to "stat dumping" is when players try to use it as "free tradeoff" by then ignoring the low stat as much as possible in-game. Classic example being the guy who builds a Fighter, puts an 8 in INT and a 10 in WIS... and then plays the character as a shrewd and brilliant tactician.

It would help avoid this, and enable things like smart fighters or buff sorcerers, if there were some way to trade off other stuff to get more points for the Ability scores, so that a character could be more Abilities and Skills based... but D&D steadfastly does not work that way.