D&D 5E How do you avoid overshadowing while applying ability scores as rolled?

[iserith]

Yes, you have to put it somewhere, but notice where you got that dump stat - it was an independently rolled variable. You didn't get it because you pumped those points into something else. You made do with what the dice provided. There was no quid pro quo. That's a different psychological situation to be in.

Right. Though I have no preference either way as to this (as my ability score generation method will be dictated by the campaign concept/theme), customizing to a predetermined concept is quite a bit different than playing with the hand that fate dealt you. Unless of course you're lucky enough to roll exactly the stats you would have assigned to your predetermined concept anyway. In which case, maybe go buy a lottery ticket that week just in case.

And if fate deals you a terrible hand, it can sometimes be fun to see whether you can still win with it. It's like going into battle with nothing but a spoon. You might die, but think of the stories if you win.

 

[Oofta]

I like how the random stats makes the PCs feel real! Organic. Pointbuy PCs tend to feel constructed.

But let's say you roll for stats. After that, absolutely everything is "constructed" from a mechanical perspective. I do my best to make a PC feel organic by how I play them, the numbers (to me) don't define the character.

Do you really know what a player's ability scores are after an initial review? I don't, I don't remember ever having a DM that did.

No, I think generally a stat has to be giving a negative modifier to be considered a dump stat. Or a stat becomes a dump stat because it is the one that almost everyone will assign their lowest score. And which edition of D&D you are playing would determine which stat that would generally be. For example, Charisma back in the 1st Ed AD&D days, or perhaps Wisdom for all the non-Clerics.

But unless you get lucky (or use a more generous rolling method), you're probably going to have a negative.

Yes, you have to put it somewhere, but notice where you got that dump stat - it was an independently rolled variable. You didn't get it because you pumped those points into something else. You made do with what the dice provided. There was no quid pro quo. That's a different psychological situation to be in.

Once again, that's a player's perspective, not a DM's perspective.

Maybe this is just one of those inneffable questions like why people are fans of specific sports teams for decades even though they have complete turnover every few years.

Which is not to dismiss opinions. But the answers seem to be "it's good because it is".

 

[R_J_K75]

Maybe this is just one of those inneffable questions like why people are fans of specific sports teams for decades even though they have complete turnover every few years.

Like us here in Buffalo hoping the Bills or Sabers will win a championship. Its always the same, "were rebuilding, another year away".

 

[the_redbeard]

I do use random rolls but I do use best 3 of 4d6 and set a minimum level - that the sum of your modifiers must be positive or you get to reroll.

But honestly, I find player choices in the game to be more of a determining factor than somebody's luck with d6s. Luck with d20s can sometimes be frustrating, but with 5e we do have the option of making player choices impact that with advantage.

As a DM I do find that one of my roles is to make sure that players are given the option of contributing equally. If I have some players that are more extroverted than others, I try to place the more introverted players near me and make a point out of polling them for their actions. I also go around the table even outside of combat, and try to provide prompts or options if players have trouble contributing. D&D isn't a spectator game.

 

[Yardiff]

It sound to me that a lot of DM's don't follow or even know Gary Gygax's thoughts on stat generation. In the 1e PH Gary says that Player Characters are much better than the average person and suggests that a PC should have at least two 15s.

This of course is paraphrasing.

 

[S'mon]

Do you really know what a player's ability scores are after an initial review? I don't, I don't remember ever having a DM that did.

I know we have a barbarian with INT 16 and a female wizard with STR 18! Neither would happen with Point Buy, & it's certainly made them more interesting characters.

 

[5ekyu]

This follows up my earlier thread. For my next campaign I want my players (who have high system mastery) to allocate their scores as rolled. I also want a lower range than in the PHB i.e. nearer 3d6 than 4d6k3.

People pointed out the undesirable possibility of overshadowing. Where a player with less lucky rolls is in the shadow of another's very lucky rolls.

How do you mitigate or avoid that?

[EDIT] I like the redrick roller mentioned in my previous thread, and want to consider also 3d4+4, or bounding rules like "must nett positive" or "must sum to 60" as others suggested.

As a GM any trait tell you to roll randomly is the same as me saying "it is "flavor" not "stew". Do that means I am going to be basing a lot more of the key moments not on checks but on proficiencies and features - with checks vs DC more for flourish than determination if meaningful stuff.

You should, if smart, also figure out that taking an ASzi is not a smart move. Heck, the skilled feat msy be awesome.

I just dont get the "roll random thrn we all use the same array." Seems worst of both worlds.

As player, I make lotsa choices that just font depend on scores. Thst means magic and magic where it foes not matter as much about saves or attacks. Illusions are pretty toast hy ths time checks get made anyway, Fog Cloud has no save, buffs, stuff like that. Likrly as not, bard or druid is my preferred direction.

Once played a character named Fidhbait who had so terribly scores it was laughable. Played him right alongside the GM fiancee who had scores do very far above the norm equally laughable. But we both rolled thrm at a gtoup session... wait... no... yeah... she rolled hers there eith the hm right before we got there.

Yeah, that made it do much more fun.

 

[R_J_K75]

Ive played D&D, 1E AD&D, 2E AD&D, 3E D&D, 3.5 D&D, 4E D&D and now Im playing 5E D&D. Following is just my opinion and in no way am I saying anyone who disagrees is wrong or I am right its just based on my observations over the years.

When we played D&D, 1E AD&D, 2E AD&D some DMs were more lenient and flexible as to how they let you roll and assign your ability scores, others were not so forgiving. One thing was always pretty constant, that was that the first thing you did when creating a character was to roll your ability scores. Hands down this dictated what type of character you could make based on race and class requirements. People I played with generally accepted this and played whatever character they created from what they had to work with, tried to keep them alive for the sake of the campaign, and if you did die you started from scratch again. On the rare occasion when you rolled really well and got that really awesome character you made sure you did your best to keep them alive. Twice I can remember getting one really great roll for my character; I had a fighter with 18/00 STR. I rolled for exceptional strength and before I could look down my DM said "HOLY S**T if I didnt see it I wouldnt have believed it". The other time I was playing an Elf Wizard/Fighter/Thief and some circumstance occurred that I could roll for a psionic wild talent, I ended up with the pretty lame ectoplasmic form. That same character at 4th level took out a stone golem single-handedly as my cowardly compatriots ran and hid. There was nothing particularly special about that character so I think it just goes to show that you can do some pretty great things with average characters.

With 3E and editions after where players for the most part can play whatever character that they want, I think that feeling of ending up with a really special character that you really cherished has somewhat fallen to the wayside, especially with players who never played the earlier editions. I think that if the original poster has a specific campaign vision in mind and makes it clear that hes going to put some limitations on character creation (regardless of what those are), as long as the DM is fair and his players respect and trust them, then you'll probably have a great game; one their players may appreciate.

 

[Lanefan]

Do you really know what a player's ability scores are after an initial review?

I've no real idea what my players' ability scores are but I've reasonable knowledge of those of their characters...

But unless you get lucky (or use a more generous rolling method), you're probably going to have a negative.

A commonly-heard meme around here is "It's the low stat what makes it playable!"

Once again, that's a player's perspective, not a DM's perspective.

This is all player-side stuff: roll-up, overshadowing concerns, all of it. All the DM needs to do is just run the game the same no matter what characters or numbers the players end up with, and Bob's yer uncle.

 

[jsaving]

It isn't productive to make players apply ability scores as rolled and then wring your hands about overshadowing. Of course some players will have better scores than others, the only question is how much you are willing to compromise to reduce it. The more you compromise, the less overshadowing there will be, but the more you stray from your original goal of discouraging min-maxing in character generation.

I'd suggest thinking about the type of players in your campaign before making this decision. If your players think of high rolls as a "victories" because high-stat characters are "better," then it's probably a bad idea to apply ability scores as rolled. And there are a lot of players who think that way, just go to the Baldur's Gate forums and see how many players brag about 100-point characters as if it were an accomplishment to hit the reroll button until you get high stats.

But not every gaming group is like that. If you run a role-playing-intensive campaign that rewards players based on the quality of their role-playing instead of how often they succeed at skill checks and to-hit rolls, then it won't matter nearly as much if you make players apply ability scores as rolled. It can actually be a lot of fun to role-play a character who is massively not min-maxed, you have to be a lot more creative about getting things done and often find yourself having to turn lemons into lemonade. However this only works if your gaming group has the same mindset and is willing to chuckle at the travails of an 8-strength fighter or an 8-dex rogue instead of being angry about having to "carry" those characters through the campaign.