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

[Wiseblood]

You could pick a stat array that reflects the power level you desire and let players assign them from there.

Also you could eliminate racial stat bonuses altogether.

And last but not least eliminate constitution bonus to HP. Then hit points per level (if you want random) can be 1d4 plus class modifier. +2 for the Sorcerer and Wizard. +3 for warlock, bard, monk, cleric, druid and rogue. +4 for Fighter, Paladin and Ranger. +5 for Barbarian. This reduces the need for Con and keeps the classes functionally different and tamps down the HP totals.

 

[S'mon]

Are primary stats are also high, even if not spectacular? Because sure. If I can have a decent int and a high strength, why not? Might be fun.

Yes, with my 'free 15' rule everyone has at least a 16 in primary stat, and occasionally an 18.

I'm either using best 3 of 5d6 or best 3 of 4d6 in order, plus free 15, so stats are averaging either 14-15 or 12-13 before race mods. There's the occasional 8 and the occasional 18, and my son managed to roll INT 6 for his dragonborn druid. Again that INT 6 greatly informs his play; the character basically spends all his time wildshaped into a baby copper dragon form (thanks to DM's Guild Book of Dragons) and comes across like a child.

 

[Blue]

Each player rolls 3d6 six times. Those then are the GROUP rolls. Any player can pick any set of rolls, several players can pick the same. Each player then arranges (choice, randomly or mixed based on how random you want).

So maybe two players pick the nice array of 15, 14, 14, 13, 11, 10, two pick the 17, 13, 11, 10, 10, 7 with highs and lows, and the last one picks the wild 16, 14, 11, 10, 8, 6 because like playing with flaws and can still do good with it.

 

[77IM]

The best way to get both randomness and balance is:

Decide an array that you find acceptable.

For example, you might be happy with:

• 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

Then roll randomly to determine which ability each number goes in:

• d6 to assign 14, d5 to assign 13, d4 to assign 12, d3 to assign 11, d2 to assign 10

As a variation, roll d6 to assign each score. If you land on an ability that already has a score, you get to pick where to slot the new score. That gives the players SOME influence over their scores, but also includes some randomness, and also produces (mostly) balanced characters.

 

[clearstream]

" I'd like to push my players off comfort picks, and away from party balance or high optimisation. "

Ok just wanting to add that in my experience, the lower stats overall combined with the other aspects of choice etc... this will expand and exacerbate any issues that optimization and differences in system-fu will create. It increases the impact of those actually seen in play, at the table.

I can see that could happen, and it makes me realise that I'm anticipating high optimisation regardless. So I would drop thar as a goal. My focus is getting away from preconceived ideas about character or party balance*. Those things have their place and I do not intend to denigrate them: equally I want to try something else.

[EDIT] I should add that it is the output, not the act, of optimisation that I'm hoping to blunt. I'm morally certain the players I have in mind will optimise. With rolled stats allocated in order, using something like 4d3+3, the results of their optimisation across the party should be mechanically less strong. I wonder if choice of race should even come before roll?!

*I mean mechanically. I've noticed that players often coordinate to choose different classes and cover the basic dimensions of play (defined using terms like tank, face, caster, cc, dps, skill-monkey, healer and buffer). They vocally seek to create a "balanced" party. I'd like to DM an unbalanced party.

 

[clearstream]

If their ability scores are by some measure lower than the 27 point buy or standard array, combat challenges may be slightly more difficult is all which may lead to more of the sort of "crunchy talk" that you seek to avoid as the players work harder to survive under the new paradigm.

I think your speculation here seems reasonable and it might turn out to be something I learn. My own speculation is that with combat riskier and skill rolls less reliable, players will seek to rely more on imaginative plans and rp.

 

[Lanefan]

*I mean mechanically. I've noticed that players often coordinate to choose different classes and cover the basic dimensions of play (defined using terms like tank, face, caster, cc, dps, skill-monkey, healer and buffer). They vocally seek to create a "balanced" party. I'd like to DM an unbalanced party.

One easy way to beat that at least once (at the start of the campaign) is to have your players roll up their characters in isolation - take each one aside in private, or out for coffee during the week, and say "Roll up the character you want to play". (you can probably be a bit more generous with your rolling method doing it this way, too)

If you're asked who or what else is in the party, the answer is "Never mind, just roll".

Then at the session they'll each see what the others have brought. Of course, if they're at all smart they'll quickly recruit some henches and-or party NPCs to fill any glaring holes in the lineup, but that's somewhat realistic: any such party is probably going to assess its strengths and weaknesses, and try to fill in the weaknesses somehow.

 

[clearstream]

One easy way to beat that at least once (at the start of the campaign) is to have your players roll up their characters in isolation - take each one aside in private, or out for coffee during the week, and say "Roll up the character you want to play".

This is worth considering!

(you can probably be a bit more generous with your rolling method doing it this way, too)

I still also want to make very strong scores less likely and/or constrain the range. I could use points-buy, but my experience with it is that in conjunction with race it still leads to scores reliably stronger on the key stats than I want to see, or in any case it lets players move points exactly where they want them. I want any maximisation to be ad-hoc. Maybe the Warlock still gets to have Charisma as their high score, but then their second highest is something they didn't really want (optimally) like Intelligence or Strength.

 

[5ekyu]

I can see that could happen, and it makes me realise that I'm anticipating high optimisation regardless. So I would drop thar as a goal. My focus is getting away from preconceived ideas about character or party balance*. Those things have their place and I do not intend to denigrate them: equally I want to try something else.

[EDIT] I should add that it is the output, not the act, of optimisation that I'm hoping to blunt. I'm morally certain the players I have in mind will optimise. With rolled stats allocated in order, using something like 4d3+3, the results of their optimisation across the party should be mechanically less strong. I wonder if choice of race should even come before roll?!

*I mean mechanically. I've noticed that players often coordinate to choose different classes and cover the basic dimensions of play (defined using terms like tank, face, caster, cc, dps, skill-monkey, healer and buffer). They vocally seek to create a "balanced" party. I'd like to DM an unbalanced party.

"They vocally seek to create a "balanced" party. I'd like to DM an unbalanced party."

Ok, so, to be clear, your intent is to set up a game that doesnt give thren what they prefer cuz you would prefer something else?

I wish you luck with that.

 

[Coroc]

@clearstream I think I understand what you are trying to achieve now.

I think you do not want to have a party like e.g. if there are 4 players all optimized:

You got a fighter he is optimized for sword and board or great weapon
You got a rogue, he solves any stealth / sleight of hand / perception challenge with ease
You got a cleric, he is an expert healer and never forgets to bless all the melees just in the firs round of combat
You got a mage who specialized in buff /debuff or alternately in cc/area effect


But you rather want, lets say: a mediocre druid he bear tanks for the party.
A mediocre ranger with criminal background who doubles as a party rogue
A bard who serves as the parties main healer
A sorcerer whos e only good stat is his Char and that be 14 and who is a three tric pony


Am in the right direction? Is the upper paragraph akin to what your normal group would look
and the lower paragraph how you would rather like it for your next campaign?