Question for DM's

[Foamhead]

I have noticed more than a few DM's here seem to like telling people not to have stats above or below certain numbers, usually 16/6.

Why do DM's do this? If a player wants to make a genius glass cannon isn't that the point of an RPG? Does that extra +1 really unbalance the game so much?

I don't get it.

[SirGraystone]

Because if you make a Fighter with 18 STR, 18 CON and dumb the rest of the stats, you dont get a glass cannon, you get a killing machine who's bad at everything else outside combat. A

[celestian]

Because if you make a Fighter with 18 STR, 18 CON and dumb the rest of the stats, you dont get a glass cannon, you get a killing machine who's bad at everything else outside combat. A

Nothing wrong with that.

[GunnarGreybeard]

I don't worry about any generated stats as long as they are done by a legally allowed method but of they roll, it has to be done in front of me, in FG and you go with what you get. If anyone ends up with a high stat (or stats) I adjust the campaign as needed to keep it challenging.

[madman]

I think that the problem is more the fact the character requires so much extra focus and time. Thus giving less time to the other characters. Players should not feel like they have to grant so much of their characters time and effort to either do things the way that character needs to do things to survive.
I know as a player I will not use my character to keep another players character alive if they require extra effort. (more than the rest of the party ever needs)

Not that I will not allow my players to make a character with flaws, but they must make a viable character. (as most games if not all have combat) I have had characters in games that just took so much extra effort because of the dump stat that they would want to roleplay a situation and try and make something happen, knowing that they could do nothing about.

Because if you make a Fighter with 18 STR, 18 CON and dumb the rest of the stats, you don't get a glass cannon

This is not what i like but the player that makes this type of character must like combat. They would be good at it.
(and having low "Wis" makes them fun to mind control.)

But as far as balance goes as long all the other characters do it, No it really does not unbalance the game at least in Pathfinder.

Madman..

[Full Bleed]

I have noticed more than a few DM's here seem to like telling people not to have stats above or below certain numbers, usually 16/6.

Why do DM's do this? If a player wants to make a genius glass cannon isn't that the point of an RPG? Does that extra +1 really unbalance the game so much?

Well, it depends on the system. In 5e, the +1 is more tangible than in previous editions. But games are balanced around certain numbers... and those numbers may be more important to some GM's than others.

I don't get it.

You don't really have to "get it."

It comes down to the kind of game the GM wants to run and the kind of players they want in that game. If you don't "get" their rules and preferences, it's probably not the game for you and you'd do best to move on to one that is.

I, personally, have a problem with players dumping stats because they, inevitably, fail to play (or accept) their dump-stats accordingly. And it's not a lot of fun to police.

[Ken L]

i gave up on rolled stats and just use point buy. Too much drama.

[Targas]

Player‘s should not expect by maxing out numbers they will make the game easier for them. The GM needs to adjust the Challenge, which will probably frustrate those players playing ‚by the rule‘. So instead of expecting a better game, it will make it worse for everyone. More effort, more attention, more unbalancing. Roleplaying games are no solo experience. It works best, if you have a cooperative group.

Min. and max. attributes are possible, but will make it more difficult for a gamer to play his Character accordingly. If played well, it can add some flavor to the gaming session, but many gamers I had cannot keep up playing their Character representing their attributes.

I allow any value normally generated by normal rules. In the early days of roleplay of the ‚most popular rileplaying system‘, one was very happy to roll exceptional strength on a 3d6. There are essay‘s on this topic going back decades, therefore I don‘t want to stretch it.

[Black Hammer]

If you let people build one trick ponies, you're setting them up to be bored later when a session doesn't revolve around their specialty. I restrict overspecialized builds because they lead to two possibilities:

1. Outperforming other characters, making those players feel bored or ineffective
2. Being irrelevant, making that player feel bored or ineffective.

As others have pointed out above, they also push a GM to design encounters in an unbalanced way.

[JohnD]

If a ruleset has a point buy mechanism I use it.

In the case of RMC, which doesn't, I grab from RMSS.

In the case of C&C, I use dice rolls, where you get an extra 3d6, and re-roll the whole stat block if you don't meet a minimum overall +4.

This results in truncating the bottom end, while still allowing players to be good but generally not overpowering awesome in comparison to the rest of the group.