Prince there is no doubt a lot involving game balance varies with the DM. Character creation is a good example; about 6 different methods of generating scores for player characters are listed in the official rules, and I played games with at least another half dozen variations (I always had players roll their six scores in order on 6d6, and keep the high three). But the bottom line is that 3d6 is the base line for how those scores are derived for the characters who populate a more or less standard world. As long as that is true the mathematical/statistical rules I mentioned will be true. The alternate generation rules are for player characters (and other adventurers) and absolutely tend to generate higher, more advantageous results. I would also mention later rules sets go into more diceless generation, which makes it hard, if not impossible to discuss an "average" world. Each DM can define these things completely to their own liking (unless the official rules say something about "average"?) So yeah, 9-11 is average. The 7-14 range I was using is a broader average, and is generally those scores that have no, or few, bonuses or penalties (its the fat part of the bell curve). But player characters will tend to average higher in every score using most character generation systems I've seen. Even Infinity Engine, which seems to use a pretty true 3d6, allows for 1 to 1 point shifting which will generate a large number of characters with very advantageous scores in their most important characteristics. I'm thinking the "average" dexterity on characters I'VE played is probably around 16.5! I like agile characters, even agile tanks! But if we just left the computer to generate the people of Faerun, we'd get pretty close to that 10.5 across the board.
But the bottom line is that 3d6 is the base line for how those scores are derived for the characters who populate a more or less standard world. As long as that is true the mathematical/statistical rules I mentioned will be true.
I've always imagined (and my campaign worlds reflected) that the normal population (i.e. level 0 people) have almost all their stats in the 9-11 range, with exceptional level 0 people (if that concept makes sense) would have maybe up to 15 or 16 in a stat.
I've always felt that only adventurers (and other NPCs of level 1 or more) actually have stats based on a 3d6 roll (or alternative rolling method).
And yes, I know that my view isn't supported in any of the actual rules, but that's still what I've always thought.
9 ... not especially strong (average) 10 ... not especially strong (average) 11 ... not especially strong (average) 12 ... not especially strong (average)
Since there is no much (bonus) difference between scores 7..14, I tend to group them a bit.
Another point of view:
9..12 are average to me. I don't make much difference between them. 13..14 are over average, but common. 15 makes you noticeable. 16 makes you outstanding. 17 makes you exceptional. 18 makes you famous.
So if I think about a melee fighter, he should be at least quite strong (14), but better strong (15), maybe very strong (16). He need not to be exceptionally strong (17) however.
I think a big problem of the stats is that they are set in stone form the beginning. This just doesn't make sense at all since in reality a lot of these things can be changed with training. Especially Strength and Wisdom, to a pretty big degree Constitution and Dexterity and to a smaller degree Intelligence and Charisma.
Comments
So yeah, 9-11 is average. The 7-14 range I was using is a broader average, and is generally those scores that have no, or few, bonuses or penalties (its the fat part of the bell curve). But player characters will tend to average higher in every score using most character generation systems I've seen. Even Infinity Engine, which seems to use a pretty true 3d6, allows for 1 to 1 point shifting which will generate a large number of characters with very advantageous scores in their most important characteristics. I'm thinking the "average" dexterity on characters I'VE played is probably around 16.5! I like agile characters, even agile tanks! But if we just left the computer to generate the people of Faerun, we'd get pretty close to that 10.5 across the board.
I've always felt that only adventurers (and other NPCs of level 1 or more) actually have stats based on a 3d6 roll (or alternative rolling method).
And yes, I know that my view isn't supported in any of the actual rules, but that's still what I've always thought.
3 ... extremely weak
4 ... exceptionally weak
5 ... very weak
6 ... weak
7 ... quite weak (under average)
8 ... quite weak (under average)
9 ... not especially strong (average)
10 ... not especially strong (average)
11 ... not especially strong (average)
12 ... not especially strong (average)
13 ... quite strong (over average)
14 ... quite strong (over average)
15 ... strong
16 ... very strong
17 ... exceptionally strong
18 ... extremely strong
Since there is no much (bonus) difference between scores 7..14, I tend to group them a bit.
Another point of view:
9..12 are average to me. I don't make much difference between them.
13..14 are over average, but common.
15 makes you noticeable.
16 makes you outstanding.
17 makes you exceptional.
18 makes you famous.
So if I think about a melee fighter, he should be at least quite strong (14), but better strong (15), maybe very strong (16). He need not to be exceptionally strong (17) however.