D&D 4E 3d6 and 4E Character Generation

[PeelSeel2]

In anticipation of 4e coming out we have not played our regular campaign. Instead, we rolled up characters for Basic Fantasy (http://www.basicfantasy.org/main.html), the closest OGL vehicle to the D&D I started with.

I must admit I have NEVER used the 3d6 method. I decided to try out it. I did make a stipulation that the players could roll stats until they had a net +1 bonus. IF total bonuses where below that, reroll all stats. This was novel to everyone. So we have started playing BFRPG with these characters and the players are having a blast.

Which gave me an idea. I am going to use the method for 4e. I think it will work really well.

 

[Mort_Q]

Well, it worked for all the previous versions.

That said, I'm partial to Point Buy. I don't mind a few bad rolls in an encounter. I do mind a few bad rolls during character generation. Sure you can reroll, but it seems like cheating.

I like all the PCs to start off with all their differences being purely a matter of choice, not of luck. YMMV.

 

[mattfs5]

In anticipation of 4e coming out we have not played our regular campaign. Instead, we rolled up characters for Basic Fantasy (http://www.basicfantasy.org/main.html), the closest OGL vehicle to the D&D I started with.

I must admit I have NEVER used the 3d6 method. I decided to try out it. I did make a stipulation that the players could roll stats until they had a net +1 bonus. IF total bonuses where below that, reroll all stats. This was novel to everyone. So we have started playing BFRPG with these characters and the players are having a blast.

Which gave me an idea. I am going to use the method for 4e. I think it will work really well.

I always like to hear of successes that come from employing old-school methods like this. The idea appeals to me for 4e as well. However, I think it's easier to appreciate the 3d6 method and the variance in scores it generates from the DM's side of the screen. Players used to average net bonuses in the +6 to +8 range probably feel a little hosed by using 3d6. Of course, I just call them spoiled.

I think the main thing that determines how viable this is for a particular D&D edition is what the rules' expectations are for ability scores. If there are a lot of game elements (Feats, for example) that have a 15 Dex or 15 Str prerequisite, etc., it might not be fair to use the 3d6 method with your players, even allowing re-rolls.

I recently started an AD&D campaign with my group. At first glance, I thought that 3d6 might be viable, until I realized that scores didn't really grant any significant pluses until around 15-16. I allowed a method that generated fairly high scores, yet these characters definitely don't seem overly powerful to me.

Matt

 

[Harshax]

I'm very intrigued by the method: roll 21d6. Make six groups of three, and arrange as desired. But my preferred method is:3d6 in order, with one additional roll for swapping.

 

[mattfs5]

Well, it worked for all the previous versions.

That said, I'm partial to Point Buy. I don't mind a few bad rolls in an encounter. I do mind a few bad rolls during character generation. Sure you can reroll, but it seems like cheating.

I like all the PCs to start off with all their differences being purely a matter of choice, not of luck. YMMV.

I can appreciate this viewpoint. Still, I've always tried to instill the idea in my players that it's not a character's ability scores that makes him or her a success. A PC with poor scores can thrive on good RP and decision-making, just as a PC with high scores can falter in the absence of these. I think that more random methods, like 3d6, help enforce this concept.

That said, I'm not the biggest fan of not allowing the scores to be arranged to taste. I love the idea in theory, but in practice, I just think it hurts players that have a preconceived notion of the type of character they want to play too much. Although... having one "swap" score is a neat twist.

-M

 

[drjones]

I always like to hear of successes that come from employing old-school methods like this. The idea appeals to me for 4e as well. However, I think it's easier to appreciate the 3d6 method and the variance in scores it generates from the DM's side of the screen. Players used to average net bonuses in the +6 to +8 range probably feel a little hosed by using 3d6. Of course, I just call them spoiled.

You may say this now, when one of them rolls 3 18s and the next guy has all 12s you may feel different.

I played a lot of the old way and while it was more fun because it was gambling but the cumulative effects of attribute bonuses over the many many rolls in a characters life can cause imbalance at character creation can become larger and larger over time. It is not the end of the world but at this point I think I will stick with point buy.

 

[mattfs5]

You may say this now, when one of them rolls 3 18s and the next guy has all 12s you may feel different.

I played a lot of the old way and while it was more fun because it was gambling but the cumulative effects of attribute bonuses over the many many rolls in a characters life can cause imbalance at character creation can become larger and larger over time. It is not the end of the world but at this point I think I will stick with point buy.

In my current campaign, we definitely have a couple PCs whose scores greatly outshine the others. In game, it's rarely noticed, and none of the players have an issue with it. Granted this is AD&D, but even in 3e or 4e, a DM can always use a "random" method but put boundaries in place to limit the randomness (such as a low and high range for net bonuses).

Again, I can appreciate the pro-point buy school of thinking, and I don't really have any qualms with 4e for promoting it or, similarly, using a set number of base HP per level. I personally just prefer the randomness, as I feel it's both more realistic and more fun. My players seem to agree. YMMV.

Matt

 

[Intense_Interest]

3d6 and other random or semi-random systems are only suited when your players have an overall equality of ability: not only in the overall bonus, but in having at least one character with a good enough "power stat" to be a full time Cleric/Wizard/etc.

When I played my (AD&D) campaign with the 3d6 method, I found that characters gravitated towards the high-end of stats and "preferred" stats simply because bad characters tended to get re-rolled rather than raised. I usually was running a semi-lethal campaign with a less-than-nominal cost to be raised (the PCs usually got in buddy-buddy thick-as-thieves with the local churches/Clerics), so "heroic" PCs with fairly nice stats and balanced parties were common after a fairly rough start-up period.

Many Bothans character-sheets died to bring us this information.

During 3rd Edition my group decided to run with the 4d6 single-swap method, which resulted in a softer run-up within the campaign, but I saw that when characters had bad-overall rolls, they got very outclassed by the always prevalent 18+ Int Wizard and did not see much changing of classes over the campaign- Player 1 plays the Fighter, Player 2 plays the Wizard, etc.

I started experimenting late in 3.5 edition with the "4d6 draft" mechanic upon start up for characters, in which each player rolled 6 4d6s in order + 1 "wild card" and then the players snake-drafted for their stats. This only worked after a TPK or new campaign, of course, but I saw a lot more "odd stat" characters. (I found out about this from lurking on EnWorld)

Personally, I hate most printed point buy systems because they are woefully overpowered. Even assuming a normal 4d6 as your "power" and a base stat of 8, you should be paying 77 "points" to raise a stat to 18 when compared to get a stat to 9, and somewhere between 98 and 115 points to swing around. Anything better and you might as well start having your Ogres be Goblins wearing masks in combat.

Ability 	Point Cost (Assumed Statistical Outcome)
Score
6                -1
8	        0
9	        1
10	       3
11	       7
12	       13
13	       21
14	       30
15	       42
16	       53
17	       65
18	       77

 

[Teydyn]

Personally, I hate most printed point buy systems because they are woefully overpowered.

What? Do you used a different point buy then we did?

Assume you have 28 points for point buy. Getting an 18 takes over half your points. NOT worth it for most chars...

The problem i have with point buy are 18,14,14,8,8,8 chars... (if you can call them chars )

 

[Rouens]

The methode my group used was the suggested roll 6 times 4d6 drop lowest number, mostly combined with rerolls if the stats were "bad" or the fact just take one 18 roll the rest, worked for us.