Method 3's average character

[Particle_Man]

I did this for 3E, so here is the thread link to the average character for 4e, using Method 3.

[4e] What % of 4d6 characters are "too weak" or "too strong"? - RPGnet Forums

I am assuming that my gonzo stats method will give me something approaching accurate results. I took the 1296 results for 4d6, ordered them, found out (by begging smarter stats folk than myself) what percent would be "too weak" or "too strong" by Method 3's rules, brutally chopped that percentage of results off the low and high ends, respectively, divided the remainder (for the reroll method) into 7 chunks, and found the 6 numbers at the midpoints of those chunks.

In that case, if the DM goes with method 3 and, should the player be "out of bounds", adjusts the character downwards or upwards (which I modelled by chopping all 1296 results into 7 chunks, but rounding up the lowest up the lowest of the six midpoints to the minimum of the remainder, so from 9 to 11 - didn't have to do anything with the high point), the average character would be:

11, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 (or a 20 point buy).

If the DM just has the player reroll the character if it is "out of bounds", then for an average character we get:

11, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14 (or a 21 point buy).

So it seems that either the default array or point buy is going to make a stronger character, as the PHB says.

Interestingly, the default array (10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16) is the roll for an average character in 3.5 using its "out of bounds" rules, again using my gonzo stats method.

 

[Majushi]

I'm not sure exactly what you're after here, but I'm gonna put in my two cents regarding rolling stats vs point buy. (having done both over the years)

1) Point Buy.

The nice thing about point buy is that everyone has an equal footing. No one is noticably more/less powerful.

2) Rolled Stats (4d6 keep 3 highest)

Lucky men like this one. If you're lucky, you can end up starting with three or four eighteens. I've seen it happen.

Unlucky people loathe this. starting with two or three stats below ten is simply not fun.

A common houserule I've seen is allowing a player to re-roll one of their stats (DM approval needed of course.)

I've seen DM's allow a complete re-roll (when multiple stats below ten have been rolled)


Overall, I think point buy is simply the fairer option.

Another common thing I've seen done with rolling stats is a 6x6 grid.

You roll 4d6 keeping 3 a total of 36 times, filling in a 6x6 grid as you go with the results. (filling in in order of course)

Then the player gets to pick a line (either horizontally or vertically) and those are their stats.

This allows for a little flexibility for getting around those times when you've managed to roll four 1's (i've seen this happen)

It also means that player's get the feeling of choice.

Do I take the row with nice average stats (a couple of 14s and a couple of 16s) or do I risk the row with two 18's and a 6?

6x6 grid is fun.

Rolled stats can be.

Point Buy is fair.

that is all.

-Majushi

 

[Tilenas]

Unlucky people loathe this. starting with two or three stats below ten is simply not fun.

I am aware that most people would agree, but I simply don't understand this notion. Personally, I'm not a fan of the "characters-are-better-than-most-people" approach, so consequently single-digit scores don't bother me at all, as long as other PCs/NPCs also have them. I don't think discontent arises over the absolute scores. Rather, it's about one character having considerably better stats than another.
I get lots of fun out of playing a character with strenghts, but also weaknesses. And no, having a 10 as your lowest score isn't a weakness.
In light of this, I prefer the point-buy-method, even though I dislike that you can have everything exactly as you want it.

 

[Majushi]

I think it's the fact that you'd end up with negative modifiers on several rolls.

At least with 4E point buy you can have no more than one 8...

But I agree with you that it's generally disgruntlement due to noticably different scores that arises. One guy with a 6 and an 8 might look at the guy with three 18's and be annoyed...

I too am much more positively inclined towards the point buy system (altho I do fancy my luck with a 6x6 grid)

 

[Particle_Man]

Oh, I wasn't looking for anything in particular, just sharing info.

I think if I was DMing I might just impose the default array on players and be done with it. 16,14,13,12,11,10 is good enough.

 

[77IM]

Somewhat related, here is a system for rolling random abilities, but which guarantees everyone gets the same net modifiers: http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan-creations-house-rules/253570-balanced-ability-rolling.html

-- 77IM

 

[doggywoggy]

Hey, if we take the dice rolling out of Dnd, is it still Dnd? Why not remove d20s too? You could have a list of to hit values like 20 - 18 - 14 - 8 - 4 and make it real cheeze munchkin "nobody can die cuz they'll cry" type gaming. Point buy is the most min-maxiest thing ever. If you roll really badly, re-roll. If you roll really good, try not to die (oops, because death should actually be a likely occurrence to all adventurers) so you get to keep those great stats and make it higher.

Some people just have more "points" dealt to them in life. Why not in Dnd? It's becoming more and more like communism: cut the oaks down because they are too lofty and grab up all the light. I really tweaks me badly how min-maxy it is, and loses that "danger" feeling that keeps you on the edge of your seat. I like not knowing EXACTLY how many hit points I will have at 20th level. (this is coming from a 2nd ed guy). 4th ed is fun too, but so unrealistic because of changes like this.

If *I* were DMing 4th ed, I'd re-instate Hit point rolling (max at 1st), 4d6 drop lowest + re-roll 1s (making it somewhat rare to have really poor stats, and fun to have great stats too). If the characters are uber stats-wise, have them fight creatures higher level than them...they will progress faster xp-wise that way too, and feel more heroic to boot. In my 2nd ed game players regularly die (especially the foolish ones), and the ones who make it higher such as myself often prefer the heroic do-or-die approach (my wizard was head on in melee against a vampire count's hulky minions and himself before the paladins could arrive, making my chain lightning especially effective). I'm now 13th level...yay. I had barely any spells left and no enchantments with a bunch of angry villagers trying to hurt me, and I managed to still fight the Evil and prove my valor against all odds (the cardinal eventually showed up and cast several Heals and Restorations on us for the lost levels due to energy drain). Last night's aventure will stick in my mind my whole life. Several of us were within one hp of minus 10, repeatedly, as we keep trying to fight off vampire bats to cleanse the land.

Without risk, without fear of really, permanently dying and losing your loved character, where is the fun? Where is the glory? It's like action video games where you can save anywhere you want. That takes all the fear out of the game...just kills it for me. In real life you don't get to auto-continue with another quarter. If it's game over, it's game over, pal. If your character stats are gimpy, fine, play a disadvantaged beggar or runt-of-the-litter and let your roleplaying make it fun. Some of the best characters in our games *ever* were the gimpiest stat-wise. Turn a disadvantage into an advantage. It's a question of maturity.

If you don't even have one stat above 16, then ya I'd say that's not a viable character and re-roll it entirely. Otherwise, pick a class based on your stats that works out well enough and let the dice fall where they may. Many young men want to be fighter pilots or astronauts or rock stars, but that doesn't happen for everyone, does it. There is no democracy in natural aptitude. It's not fair, deal with it.

"Fortune presents gifts not according to the book." --Dead Can Dance

 

[Prestidigitalis]

doggywoggy: You sort of have a point, although I don't agree with most of it.

But communism? Seriously???

 

[Elric]

Hey, if we take the dice rolling out of Dnd, is it still Dnd? Why not remove d20s too? You could have a list of to hit values like 20 - 18 - 14 - 8 - 4 and make it real cheeze munchkin "nobody can die cuz they'll cry" type gaming. Point buy is the most min-maxiest thing ever. If you roll really badly, re-roll. If you roll really good, try not to die (oops, because death should actually be a likely occurrence to all adventurers) so you get to keep those great stats and make it higher.

Some people just have more "points" dealt to them in life. Why not in Dnd? It's becoming more and more like communism: cut the oaks down because they are too lofty and grab up all the light. I really tweaks me badly how min-maxy it is, and loses that "danger" feeling that keeps you on the edge of your seat. I like not knowing EXACTLY how many hit points I will have at 20th level. (this is coming from a 2nd ed guy). 4th ed is fun too, but so unrealistic because of changes like this.

Point buy as communism?

As far as unrealistic things in D&D goes, I'd put hit points being a fixed amount per level pretty far down on the list.

 

[LuckyAdrastus]

Some people just have more "points" dealt to them in life. Why not in Dnd? It's becoming more and more like communism: cut the oaks down because they are too lofty and grab up all the light.

Oh yeah, exactly.

See, in my group's session today, we raided a bandit tower. The Airsoul Genasi Swordmage used his encounter fly power to get on top of the tower. My Human Taclord character tried climbing up the vines on the outside, but kept failing the last climb check to get over the battlements. So while the ranged guys peppered the bandits, and the swordmage fought without me, I kept shouting out Inspiring Words at him to keep his hit points up. "Good job, I'll be there in a minute! [Fails climb check] Almost there! [Fails another climb check] You can do it -- you don't even need my help!"

And the whole time, you know what I was thinking?

"This reminds me of Karl Marx."