D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[Maxperson]

Lord T'underin' Bajebbuz! That's a LOT of tables. Looks like a hell of a lot of fun.

I own it and still use it sometimes. My players like to take those events and write backgrounds around them. Pretty sure you can't die while rolling up the background, though. You can however have some seriously bad stuff happen. Also, you will often get a series of events that simply don't make sense when combined with other events, so I will have players re-roll the events that don't make any sense at all.

There is also a Central Casting Dungeons which is helpful for dungeon/castle design.

 

[Wiseblood]

A) There is no step 4 in your post.

B) I didn't skip a step. Step 3 was the last 2 lines of my post. (Really, the whole post is step 3 - the first paragraph is him giving the reasoning behind the stats, someone beginning to question him, and then his rebuttal. What I'm trying to say is gamers are terrible people and this is why we can't have nice things. )

You got me there. That's what I get for posting after my bedtime. 8)

With rest, I also realize, some of my players don't want the responsibility of picking their stats.

 

[Caliban]

Lord T'underin' Bajebbuz! That's a LOT of tables. Looks like a hell of a lot of fun.

At the time it was often more fun than actually playing the game.

(I was a teenager and my friends and I weren't really very good at running or playing D&D or any other RPG. We spent more time creating characters and talking abut how cool they'd be than actually playing...)

 

[Satyrn]

I don't know if it has been suggested. Heck I may have suggested it.

1) Come up with a character concept.
2) Try to imagine the stats this character would have.
2.5) Lower the stats to the bare minimum with which you can evolve into your vision.
3) Ask the DM (and other players) if you can use those stats.

That means no buying, no rolling, no excuses.

While [MENTION=284]Caliban[/MENTION]'s response was to humorously point out the extreme, I think what could easily happen is that the players engage in a little game over time where they, first, figure out what the DM's cieling is, and then with each future character work to push it ever higher.

 

[Satyrn]

I don't know if it has been suggested. Heck I may have suggested it.

1) Come up with a character concept.
2) Try to imagine the stats this character would have.
2.5) Lower the stats to the bare minimum with which you can evolve into your vision.
3) Ask the DM (and other players) if you can use those stats.

That means no buying, no rolling, no excuses.

While [MENTION=284]Caliban[/MENTION]'s response was to humorously point out the extreme, I think what could easily happen is that the players engage in a little game over time where they, first, figure out what the DM's cieling is, and then with each future character work to push it ever higher.

 

[Yardiff]

Hmmm...I have to say this one has my attention.

However, please allow me to do what I do best and point out a flaw:

While this is fine for all-hands character generation at session 0, what happens three months in (or three minutes, more likely) when my character dies and I need another one; followed next week by Bob retiring his and trying again? Is the DM supposed to record the original 18 dice rolled at session 0 for use with all future characters?

Lanefan

I don't see why not. Wouldn't be that hard.

 

[Maxperson]

While [MENTION=284]Caliban[/MENTION]'s response was to humorously point out the extreme, I think what could easily happen is that the players engage in a little game over time where they, first, figure out what the DM's cieling is, and then with each future character work to push it ever higher.

Does it matter, though? If the DM is okay with it, and the players are okay with it, where's the harm?

 

[Maxperson]

I don't see why not. Wouldn't be that hard.

Yeah. You could easily backwards engineer from every character at the table what the original numbers were. 5e bonuses aren't that extreme.

 

[Satyrn]

Does it matter, though? If the DM is okay with it, and the players are okay with it, where's the harm?

Probably none.

But re-reading what I wrote, I realized I failed horribly to deliver what I had intended: I had started out intending to humorously say that the result of it all would be the table settling on a defacto standard array of their own.

*sigh*

(Anyone want to click Laugh out of pity? )

 

[Caliburn101]

Uneven is not inherently unfair. That's just your personal view of the results. The results of of the fair rolling method are inherently uneven and that's where it stops.



1. Since rolling is an equal method, the results being based on the principles of equality(justice doesn't apply) means that the results are fair.

2. Nothing unkind, inconsiderate or unreasonable about rolling. It's a fair method. If you don't like it, don't use it.

3. It follows the rules of the game, so number 3 doesn't apply, either.

This argument that the character you get is fair because you all had equal use of a method that produces variable results, sometimes widely variable in numbers you will be forced to feel the consequences of in every game you play is a patently ridiculous one.

Just try pulling that stuff on MMO players when they log on and forcing them to play the character. You'd lose money so fast your company would collapse in a week.

It's like saying that as everyone has an equal chance to be born into a rich family, and as everyone is born to a human mother, that social inequality is 'fair'. It is like saying that as everyone has (on a population scale) a statistically equal chance of being born with a disability, so it is 'fair' that some have one.

What utter tosh.

It's the numbers you end up with that matter - not the method of determining who will be disadvantaged and who advantaged by RNG.

"Sorry bud, but as you all had an equal chance of very high or low numbers, the other player gets to have a more powerful character than you at the start of the game, and you cannot play that MAD character class you wanted to as they will be far too weak and a liability on party survival. You can instead play this character class which will at least be something other than useless. Tough luck by the way..."

The fact is a lot of DMs faced with the above scenario fudge the issue out of pity and allow re-rolls, and are equally forced to accept multiple 18's when they come up - even on a re-roll, also meaning that the average roller who didn't quite qualify for the pity-re-roll had half the statistical chance to get a high stat character. Once again, a commonly enough encountered unfair consequence of rolling stats.

The fact is, point buy or the standard array always allow you to play an effective member of a class - always. Random rolling doesn't, and can force you to play a class you didn't want to so as not to be useless. Or, as I have also seen many times, encourage players to suicide their character to get a re-roll.

Random stat generation is unfair, and people can be quite creative in getting around it, because they feel they have to. It should not be necessary, and everyone should have an equal start.

As for the comment about 3rd edition you made. I encourage you to revisit the numbers and rethink - the issue should be self-evident, so I am not going to get into it further.