D&D 5E Rolled character stats higher than point buy?

[Arial Black]

Perhaps I should rephrase the "Uh, no it's not" comment. Yes, you're absolutely correct that the average result of 3d6 remains 10.5, even if you choose to ignore any result less than 8. No, you are not correct if you are trying to say that the average of the things you keep remains unchanged--which is what I was talking about.

Rolls you could get from the dice, but which aren't acceptable for play, should not be counted in the average. But because it would be a statistics nightmare to try to account for those two rules (lowest max score must be 13+, net modifier must be > 0), people just go with the nice, easily-estimated results like AnyDice does. (Incidentally, the slightly-better "standard array" in 4e could be argued to have shifted to take into account the rules that boost the averages.)

There you go.

To clarify, character creation by rolling ability scores does not involve finding the average rolls for a particular method and using them. It involves rolling (in our example) 4d6k3 six times. The average for those rolls might be interesting, but the average plays no part in the actual rolls you just made! Any discarding of an unsuitable set has absolutely no impact on the set you keep! Any discarding is done after those rolls (with the mathematical average associated with that method) has already been completed. Any later discarding does not alter the probabilities of that method to get those results.

Let's try an analogy: let's say that the average height of an adult human male is, say, six feet. Let's say that you have a six-foot tall adult human male standing in front of you. Do you have a male of average height in front of you? Yes.

Now, shoot every adult male who is less than six-foot tall. (note that I'm not actually advocating this in real life; it's just a thought experiment. Put the shotgun down and back away from the 2nd amendment!) Now that there are no adult males less than six feet, the guy standing in front of you can truthfully be said to no longer be 'average height'; he's now the joint shortest guy in the world! But his actual height has not changed one iota! He's still six foot tall, no matter the heights of other people alive or dead!

And if that guy has kids, the average height of those kids when they grow up will conform to the pre-culled population, not the post-culled population. Their heights will lie along the original bell curve of heights, not the bell curve of heights post-culling.

And when you discard the first (or second or third) set of rolls, the next set will be generated by the same mathematical rules of the first, and won't take any discarding (and that effect on the final average) into account. The next set will have the same bell curve as the original, and that curve will be unaffected by any discarding.

So the set of scores that you do keep are the same (and use the same bell curve) whether or not you are allowed to re-roll.

 

[Oofta]

I see the issue now. I've been saying all along that most people use Creative Hero Enhanced Attribute Templates when rolling stats for characters. I just assumed that everybody new what the acronym C.H.E.A.T meant. Silly me.

That or I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek when I said that "Most people cheat, usually with the permission of their DM".

Very few people use straight by the book rules "roll 4d6 drop lowest, roll only one time" because the results are not satisfactory for most groups.

In addition, many individuals do cheat. A DM sanctioned modified roll system (C.H.E.A.T.) is probably one of the single most common house rules out there.

So when the OP asked why 4d6 drop lowest gives better results, my response is that it's only better because most people don't follow the rule. They C.H.E.A.T.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Let's try to go back before the word game bull**** and start over. I put a list of three things that I want out of stat generation, two of them specific and concrete enough to have a discussion about. I haven't really heard specific and concrete reasons in favor of rolling stats, not in the responses and not in this thread. I've heard feelings, value judgements, biased statements, personal attacks against other people's preferences and whatever, but nothing concrete. I'd actually like to hear some concrete reasons. Something beyond "I like rolling", "because tradition", or whatever.

What I want from stat generation is three basic things:

1. Power balance where one PC isn't more powerful than another
2. Stat generation results in characters that live up to player expectations
3. Cheating isn't required to assure 1 and 2

Rolling 4d6 drop lowest arrange to taste doesn't really accomplish any of those things, though #2 is a matter of taste.

Number three on that list isn't so much a concrete reason so much as an indictment of rolling 4d6 drop lowest, and indictment that is made necessary because rolling has a fair amount of traction in D&D. Rolling, by definition, fails goals 1 and 2 to me. Some weird people who aren't playing the same D&D claim that #2 isn't an issue for them, but #1 is a fact(it's a fact that it's true, some people claim it doesn't matter, but that doesn't make it untrue). Rolling followed by houserules leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It leaves a bad taste for system reasons, as rerolling or some sort of DM kludge is merely a band-aid on a system that fails to work properly. The semantics people try to use lawyer-speak to argue it isn't cheating, but it feels like cheating to me. The point of goal #3 is to use a system that actually works properly and doesn't feel like cheating.

It also bears saying that even with cheating or "house rules" or whatever people are calling that crap, rolling still fails #1 since those rarely deals with people rolling high stats that don't balance with the other PCs. Taking away something from a player is almost impossible without tears, and if you can't expect to keep good rolls then why are you rolling in the first place?

To put it more specifically, I refuse to accept that a table being ok with a bad system(one where the results need to be discarded/fudged/cheated to generate acceptable results) has any real meaning to anybody outside that table.

This is another comment I made, and was never addressed. "I like rolling" isn't a contribution to the discussion. It's an exit point where you don't have anything further to say. You preferring rolling doesn't mean anything to my table. Talking about balance, customization, or other concrete things is stuff we can talk about. "Because tradition" at least is something I can reject.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I put a list of three things that I want out of stat generation, two of them specific and concrete enough to have a discussion about. I haven't really heard specific and concrete reasons in favor of rolling stats, not in the responses and not in this thread. I've heard feelings, value judgements, biased statements, personal attacks against other people's preferences and whatever, but nothing concrete. I'd actually like to hear some concrete reasons. Something beyond "I like rolling", "because tradition", or whatever.

Are you calling for people on the Internet to come browbeat you into changing your mind? Because I have the feeling that might be a little bit futile.

Or are you seriously claiming that in decades of playing the game, no one has ever given you a non-vague reason for enjoying rolled stats or a concrete explanation of the pros and cons, and that you genuinely want someone to break down the pros and cons for you? If the latter I'd be willing to give it a shot, but only for a single post. After that, if you don't change your tune, you get set to Ignore.

What do you want?

 

[Oofta]

Let's try to go back before the word game bull**** and start over. I put a list of three things that I want out of stat generation, two of them specific and concrete enough to have a discussion about. I haven't really heard specific and concrete reasons in favor of rolling stats, not in the responses and not in this thread. I've heard feelings, value judgements, biased statements, personal attacks against other people's preferences and whatever, but nothing concrete. I'd actually like to hear some concrete reasons. Something beyond "I like rolling", "because tradition", or whatever.

....

I agree. The only justifications that I've seen

Justification: People like random characters. They don't want to decide how to spend points.
My Response: Use one of the arrays. If you really want to randomize, roll for which array and what order the stats will be applied.

Justification: It's not realistic that everybody's low score is an 8.
My Response: D&D is not a life simulator. It's not realistic. In addition, if you look at the bell curve for intelligence as a guide, most people would fall into the 8-12 intelligence range.

Justification: People like playing flawed characters
My Response: There's a flaw system already built into the system. In addition, I don't remember anyone ever sitting down at a table proclaiming "I hope I roll up a lousy character!" Rolling doesn't guarantee you get a character that's below average just because someone at the table probably have one.

Am I missing something? Because those justifications are pretty weak to me considering the downsides. That's probably why most people don't use the rule as written.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Are you calling for people on the Internet to come browbeat you into changing your mind? Because I have the feeling that might be a little bit futile.

Or are you seriously claiming that in decades of playing the game, no one has ever given you a non-vague reason for enjoying rolled stats or a concrete explanation of the pros and cons, and that you genuinely want someone to break down the pros and cons for you? If the latter I'd be willing to give it a shot, but only for a single post. After that, if you don't change your tune, you get set to Ignore.

What do you want?

If you don't have anything beyond a vague "I like it" as a reason for preferring rolling, maybe you could give concrete reasons for not preferring alternatives to rolling?

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I agree. The only justifications that I've seen

Justification: People like random characters. They don't want to decide how to spend points.
My Response: Use one of the arrays. If you really want to randomize, roll for which array and what order the stats will be applied.

Justification: It's not realistic that everybody's low score is an 8.
My Response: D&D is not a life simulator. It's not realistic. In addition, if you look at the bell curve for intelligence as a guide, most people would fall into the 8-12 intelligence range.

Justification: People like playing flawed characters
My Response: There's a flaw system already built into the system. In addition, I don't remember anyone ever sitting down at a table proclaiming "I hope I roll up a lousy character!" Rolling doesn't guarantee you get a character that's below average just because someone at the table probably have one.

Am I missing something? Because those justifications are pretty weak to me considering the downsides. That's probably why most people don't use the rule as written.

Another justification is people simply wanting higher stats. Rolling(especially combined with discarding/rerolling low arrays) tends to generate higher stats than commonly used point buys or arrays. I would call that a function of the array or point buy failing to meet player expectations, which is something that should be addressed.

There is one argument those in favor of randomness make that does hit a nerve for me, and it involves two of your examples and a priority I seem to have left out. Also, it is an issue that rolling 4d6 drop lowest IMO does not address. The issue would be dump stats being a bad thing or boring. This is a side effect of a priority I left out: being able to customize and control how your character turns out. There is a lot of conflict between those two priorities, as customizing and control tend to directly result in dump stats. 4D6 drop lowest as people tend to use it does not avoid this, because this system usually involves arranging those results to taste, and the lowest rolls get put in the dump stats. The only real solution to this is to have a system that randomly takes away the ability to dump stats(like rolling stats in a fixed order), but that negatively impacts customization, control and to a greater extent than usual can fail to meet player expectations. I tend to fall on the side of placing more importance on customization and control versus dump stats being bad/boring.

 

[Oofta]

Another justification is people simply wanting higher stats.
...

The default point buy gets you pretty close to the average for roll 4d6 drop lowest. If you're going to create a house rule to have higher stats, it's just as easy to tweak the point buy system.

Of course that doesn't account for people's optimism bias, most people think their character is going to be above average.

As far as the dump stat ... I don't think there's any system that I've seen that gets rid of that short of roll and put stats in the order their rolled which is only used (or satisfactory) for a handful of gamers.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

The default point buy gets you pretty close to the average for roll 4d6 drop lowest. If you're going to create a house rule to have higher stats, it's just as easy to tweak the point buy system.

Of course that doesn't account for people's optimism bias, most people think their character is going to be above average.

As far as the dump stat ... I don't think there's any system that I've seen that gets rid of that short of roll and put stats in the order their rolled which is only used (or satisfactory) for a handful of gamers.

I've found tweaking the point buy to be a funny thing. You can only increase the points so far before the results start getting silly, and there is still the dump stat issue. If you have for example three dump stats, for a lot of people getting a bunch more points to customize stats they'll all go into the three non-dump stats.

There doesn't seem to be a simple and elegant way to accomplish both customization/meeting expectations and minimizing dup stats, I'd agree.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

If you don't have anything beyond a vague "I like it" as a reason for preferring rolling, maybe you could give concrete reasons for not preferring alternatives to rolling?

Was that a "yes" or a "no"? Are you seriously claiming that no one has ever given you a breakdown of the pros and cons and you need someone to do it for you? Or are you just trying to get people to (futilely) persuade you?

Because I simply don't believe that you've never encountered any reasons before, some in this very thread. I think you just don't like and/or don't agree with the reasons, which means that you are not even capable of reaching a state where you can say, "I understand [these concrete reasons] for liking rolled stats, but I have a different preference." I think you're just looking for an argument.

What do you want? You get one more chance to state your goals unambiguously before you go on Ignore. "Yes, I really do want to understand" is sufficient if that really is a true statement.