Worlds of Design: Rolls vs. Points in Character Building

Let’s talk about methods of generating RPG characters, both stochastic and deterministic.

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

"Life is like a game of cards. The hand you are dealt is determinism; the way you play it is free will." Jawaharlal Nehru

When creating character attributes, there are two broad approaches to generating them: stochastic and deterministic. The stochastic method involves chance, while the deterministic method does not. Most any other method is going to be one of the other, whatever the details. The pros of one method tend to be the cons of the other.

Stochastic
The classic method is rolling dice, usually D6, sometimes an alternative like percentage dice. There are various ways do this. For example, some of the old methods were to sum the roll of 3d6 six times in a specific order of six character abilities. A variation was 3d6 and change the order as desired, another was roll 4d6, don’t count the lowest die, and then you might be able to change order or not; and so forth.

What are the pros of rolling the dice? First of all and primarily, variety (barring cheating). You get a big range of dice rolls. Dice rolling promotes realism, you get a big variation in numbers so you get some 3s, in fact you get as many 3s as 18s, and with some methods you have the opportunity to play characters with “cripplingly bad" ability numbers. Further, it's always exciting to roll dice, whether you like it or not. (Keep in mind, when I first saw D&D I said “I hate dice games.”)

One of the cons of rolling dice is that it's unfair in the long run, a player can get big advantages lasting for years of real-time throughout the campaign just by getting lucky in the first dice rolls. This can be frustrating to those who didn't get lucky. Perhaps even more, rolling dice encourages cheating. I've seen people roll one character after another until they get one they like - meaning lots of high numbers - and then they take that to a game to use. That’s not possible with point buy. Another con is that you may want to play a particular character class yet the dice just won’t cooperate (when you’re rolling in specific order).

Deterministic
The other method which I believe has been devised independently by several people including myself (I had an article for my system published a long time ago) is the one used in fifth edition D&D. A player is given a number of generic points to buy ability numbers. The lowest numbers can be very cheap, for example, if you are using a 3 to 18 scale, when you buy a 3 it may cost you one point, while an 18 may cost 20-some points. You decide what you want, for which ability, and allocate until you run out of points.

Point buy is very fair (FRP is a game, for some people). No one need be envious of someone who either 1) rolled high or 2) rolled many characters and picked the best one. It prevents the typical new character with sky-high abilities, it prevents cheating, so the player has to supply the skill, not rely on bonuses from big ability numbers. Of course, the GM can choose the number of points available to the players so he/she can give generally higher or lower numbers on average as they choose.

But point buy lacks variety for a particular class. The numbers tend to be the same. It's not exciting, it’s cerebral, and as such it takes a little longer than rolling dice. That's all the cons I can think of. Keep in mind I'm biased in favor of point buy. It's clean, fair and simple.

I haven’t spent much time trying to figure out yet another method of generating a character. The only other method I can think of that isn’t one or the other is to have some kind of skilled contest determine the numbers, such as pitching pennies or bowling. Then the question becomes why use one kind of skill over another?

Do you favor one method over the other? And has anyone devised a method that is not stochastic or deterministic?

 

[hawkeyefan]

I prefer point buy or standard array style attributes, overall. I tend to think that when people roll, there’s a tendency to allow for a reroll here or there, and so on.

The argument that it leads to similarly statted characters has a little merit, but you could always change things up and not put your highest score in your primary stat.

Also, if characters having different scores in their stats is really what makes them different than each other...then I think there are other things to worry about.

Ideally, I’d like a mix of some sort. Five Torches Deep has different methods for determining scores based on your race and class selections. That’s pretty cool. Blades in the Dark starts you off with 1 point in one stat and 2 points in another based on your playbook, and then allows you to add four more to whatever stats you’d like, up to a starting max.

I mean, I don’t see how a balanced method is a bad thing in a game where everyone’s meant to have fun, and which is cooperative rather than competitive. Why does anyone need more than what others have?

 

[MGibster]

The other way I've seen is to bid for attributes, which is a modification of the point-buy system, making it competetive. This is what's used in Amber.

You can run into oddities with any system. The last time I played Amber everyone except me decide to go for #1 in Psyche. I ended up spending a few points on Strength and Endurance because nobody else wanted it and Warfare was my true desire so I ended up in first place on that as well. So in a group of 5 I was the strongest, toughest, and most skilled warrior sitting on my Amber level psyche. Nobody but me was particularly happy with those results.

 

[pemerton]

The world isn't fair. Random rolls fit any game a group chooses.

Again, random rolls work for a given group that are fine with them. Never played BW or AW or 4e. Do they allow random ability rolls? If so, the group would decide if they wanted to use them.

Duh. If the game doesn't allow it, then YES, you can't exercise that option.

I've lost track of what your point is. You seemed to start by saying that, because the world isn't fair, random rolls can fit any game if a grouip chooses to use them.

Now you seem to be saying that, if a group enjoys random rolls, and if a game provies for them, then a group can use them.

The first claim was interesting and, in my view, false, because there are many games where random rolls don't fit in ways that having nothing to do with what a group chooses, nor with the (un)fairness of the world.

The second claim seems to be uninteresting and bordering on the tautological.

On point-buy, it isn't fair either: there's a level of system mastery that goes into making competent PB PCs. Players more knowledgeable about GURPS or Shadowrun or HERO or Savage Worlds or Mutants & Masterminds will build BETTER characters than a player with limited knowledge of the system .

Can I as GM design tight NPCs that might overwhelm novice and even experienced Point-Buy players?

Yup. I know ALL the kinky munchkin twists. Is that fair? If the novice PB player designs a nice warrior who's outclassed by the warrior PC of a more experienced player, is that fair?

There are points-buy systems that don't manifest the sort of system mastery and kinky munchkin twists you describe here.

One example would be (again) Prince Valiant. Another would be spending XP to change or improve your character in Cortex+ Heroic/MHRP. Another, I think, would be choosing a new PC option in Apocalypse World.

In those systems, player skill - to the extent that it is a thing at all in those games - manifests primarily at the moment of resolution, not in PC building.

 

[MGibster]

The time available to me for gaming purposes is finite and I do not wish to squander it with a character I have no desire to play so it's point buy for me. As others have pointed out, with random rolling you run into issues where someone rolled abysmally low and is stuck with a terribly weak character. Worse yet, the player may be stuck with a character he or she simply doesn't want. If I played a scientist in my last game I might want to be a grizzled street samurai in this game instead. I don't want to hope the dice go my way to get what I want.

Although I do agree it's fun to roll up random characters. I rolled one up for Conan but it was totally random. The characters name, class, country of origin, education, etc., etc. were completely random and I think gender was pretty much the only thing I picked.

 

[MGibster]

There are points-buy systems that don't manifest the sort of system mastery and kinky munchkin twists you describe here.

Savage Worlds is pretty simple so far as point buy systems go but even then new players can run into a few pitfalls. But I can think of very few games where the experienced player won't be better at it than inexperienced players. If folks are randomly rolling I expect the player with more experience is probably going to be able to do more with their character because they understand how the rules work better than the inexperienced player.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Rolling for attributes is exciting for the five minutes you spend hoping to beat the odds. After that, you'll spend the rest of the campaign with the outcome, good or bad, and eyeing everyone else's sheet to compare their results. Nobody ever really goes into this method hoping for less than or average numbers, and many will come up with numerous ways to circumvent the odds to ensure better results anyway, like more dice, discard low numbers, arrange the order, etc.

Point buy makes more sense to me. Everyone is given the same pool of resources and freedom to make decisions for themselves. If players want to play with low scores, it's determined by their choices, not chances.

I prefer rolling so much that I more or less insist on it for virtually any RPG I GM/DM...or play.

With the Random method I've never had a DM say "THOSE are your scores? Too high! You cheated!" ...and I've never had a DM say "THOSE are your scores? Too low! Roll again!".

With Point Buy, I have had a DM's say "THOSE are your scores? Too high AND too low! Balance them better!" ...and I've had a DM say "THOSE are your scores? Too low! Spend ALL your points!".

The point I'm getting at is that...at least in my experience... the "Array/Point Buy" method tends to discourage unusual or unique characters. It also tends to annoy the DM when I get the "official 5e array stats of [15,14,13,12,10,8 ]....and show him my character that has [16, 10, 11, 9, 8, 7]...and the other Players. Suddenly I'm accused of "trying to screw with the game" because I want to play a 'below PC average' character.

As for "cheating" players with the Random method; my solution to this if/when it ever comes out is the same solution I made 30+ years ago when I was still a "DM newb with only 8 or so years under my belt". All I said to fix the cheating player was.... "OK, everyone make some 1st level PC's. Just pick your stats. Whatever you feel is a reasonable character or fits your concept, just don't get too crazy". BOOM! Every single PC brought to the table was reasonable. No "multiple 18's", no "multiple 3's". No "mostly in the teens". Just decent, interesting PC's with stats that fit the character concept. Why? Nobody wanted to be accused of being a Munchkin/Monty-Haul type of person with a self-esteem problem who needed validation via a set of high stats. Who wuddathunkit? So I saw stats like "17, 14, 10, 11, 8, 8", or "16, 16, 10, 9, 9, 8", or MAYBE a "18, 15, 11, 9, 8, 6", or even a "13, 11, 11, 11, 10, 12"...but nothing like "17,15,13,12,16,18".

If you want to see what kind of players you have...tell them to each "make a character over the week for the weekend game....and every one just pick your stats". That'll show you what kind of player someone is. Well, at least that's been my experience.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[aramis erak]

Let’s talk about methods of generating RPG characters, both stochastic and deterministic.

[snip]​

I haven’t spent much time trying to figure out yet another method of generating a character. The only other method I can think of that isn’t one or the other is to have some kind of skilled contest determine the numbers, such as pitching pennies or bowling. Then the question becomes why use one kind of skill over another?

Do you favor one method over the other? And has anyone devised a method that is not stochastic or deterministic?

As I've come to expect, another unsubtle and fundamentally flawed analysis.

Not all stochastic modes are simple rolled attributes; Redrick's rolling mode, and my implementation of it as a roller, is a hybrid of the two. It randomly assigns the points for the 5E point build.

Card based char gen as done in Dragonlance Fifth Age is not determinisitic - you draw 12 cards, and allocate them to the 8 primary atts, expertise, wealth, and two personality factors. The deck is 82 cards deep, no central tendency distribution.

Choices with random - Classic Traveller is the simplest to explain. Random attribtues, then pick a service, attempt to enter that service, attempt to not die, attempt to get a commission if desired, attempt to get a promotion if desired and holding a commission, make aging saves, decide whether to attempt reenlistment, roll reenlistment (even if not desired, a nat 12 compels), roll for skills for the term on selected tables. If reenlisted, go back to avoiding death and repeat. Multiple choices, a good bit of control. Later editions (including the d20 edition, but not GURPS nor Hero) all increase the number of choices.

Deterministic...

Pregen only systems: Feng Shui 2, several storygames. Technically, Marvel Heroic RP, too, as the "Character Creation" chapter isn't a character generation ruleset, merely advice on statting up characters

Multiple template systems - No point spends.
The simplest I've seen is Danger Patrol Alpha. Pick a left half sheet, and a Right Half Sheet, put them together, add a name, D&D 5E technically falls into this, at least when using array.

Priority spend systems: Shadowrun, Mechwarrior 2e... technically a multi-pool point spend... but the priority system is determining the sizes of the other pools. It avoids many of the pitfalls of pure points. Especially, when combined with templates. (Mechwarrior doesn't enforce that, but when a GM does...) But not the "Knuckles the XXIII" syndrome

Defining abilities systems - everyone has a set number of abilities, but then defines them in an open ended method. Non-random, non-deterministic, as well. Fate can be handled this way; when it's a specific size tree, and all aspects are up to group agreement, the deterministic skills are often outweighed by the aspects.

 

[R_Chance]

I still make my players roll in the D&D games I run. I like it as a player because I like to discover my character rather than always fall into the same patterns with point buy - so I make my players discover their characters as well. And if that means they have to reconsider something - so be it.

Pretty much this. I've had a lot of PCs and NPCs shaped by oddities in the dice. You can give the PCs an advantage (say 4D6, drop the lowest) to safeguard against those random accidents that are too low, but I think the variations in characters abilities are good. Then too, the game I play isn't dominated by stats, more by level. As for feeling it's unfair when someone has higher stats... I always wanted those guys on my side, or preferably in front of me

This topic always reminds me of arguments over which flavor is "better"...

 

[pemerton]

I prefer point buy or standard array style attributes, overall. I tend to think that when people roll, there’s a tendency to allow for a reroll here or there, and so on.

The argument that it leads to similarly statted characters has a little merit, but you could always change things up and not put your highest score in your primary stat.

Also, if characters having different scores in their stats is really what makes them different than each other...then I think there are other things to worry about.

D&D can be many things to many people - but at least through the classic lens as I read those books the fundamental element of PC build is class. Stats are a soft funnel into a class, and I suspect that very few players build their first or even second classic D&D PC as a low-STR high-INT fighter or a vice versa MU.

So rolling for stats is, in a real way, rolling for class. The power variation, especially in the earliest versions with almost flat stat-mods, is modest. It gets greater in AD&D and Moldvay Basic, but the latter also has rules for boosting your main stat at the expense of two other stats.

What distinguishes different instances of the same class in classic D&D tends not to be stats but (i) how they are played at the table, and (ii) what their gear (and, for casters, spell) load-out is.

In contemporary D&D stats aren't just or even mainly a soft funnel for class, if only because there are multiple classes with the same prime requisite, and they are also the foundation of non-combat resolution. Using random generation would be a bit like, in classic D&D, rolling for potency of class abilities. AD&D has a bit of this - percentile strength and chance to know spells - but I don't know many people who point to these as highlights of that system!

I mean, I don’t see how a balanced method is a bad thing in a game where everyone’s meant to have fun, and which is cooperative rather than competitive. Why does anyone need more than what others have?

It depends on the point, flavour, focus etc of play. Part of the appeal of Classic Traveller is that the characters are (in some relative sense) ordinary - they have ordinary origins, they age, they had careers and have bank accounts and pensions, etc. Rolling for stats, for lifepath, for skills etc is part of this. A big part of PC gen is finding out who you are going to be in the world of the far future. Probably no one is going to buy Steward skill, but with random rolling you might discvoer that your character is really good at waiting tables and keeping passengers happy!

At least in my experience one result is a degree of distance or 3rd-person persepctive between player and PC. Though we also use multiple PCs, and while I tend to think that works becusae of the distaincing, maybe I'm confusing cause and effect!

Another thing about stats in Traveller is that they are not super-important in resolution. The standard consideation in resolution is skill level - each skill has its own resolution framework (not as clunky as it sounds, I assert!) and stats often don't factor in at all and even when they do are not normally determinative.

Ideally, I’d like a mix of some sort. Five Torches Deep has different methods for determining scores based on your race and class selections. That’s pretty cool. Blades in the Dark starts you off with 1 point in one stat and 2 points in another based on your playbook, and then allows you to add four more to whatever stats you’d like, up to a starting max.

In Burning Wheel first the GM after consulting with the players sets a lifepath limit. (Typically 3 to 6.) Then you choose your LPs - this determines your skill options and skill points, your trait (roughly, feat) options and feat points, your starting wealth (wizard spells are something you have to buy with this), and your starting age. Startig age plus modifications from LPs determine your starting physical and mental stat pools, which you then allocate to your stats. Stats are sometimes used in resolution (at different frequencies for different of the 6 stats), and for untrained checks; if you're trainined in a skill then your starting value is derived from the relevant stats but checks are made off your skill rank and your stat is now irrelevant.

It just woudln't make any sense to even look at injecting random rolling into that framework.

In Apocalypse World your playbook gives you four options to choose from for your five stats (Cool, Hot, Sharp, Hard, Weird). Each of those options will set one of those stats (the one that is most important for that sort of character) at +2 (+3 for a couple of playbooks) while the rest will be set between -2 and +2 depending on which option you choose. Character improvement can include raising stats.

Given that most resolution in AW involves rolling 2d6 and adding the appropriate stat, it would be silly - game-breaing - to roll randomly. And the idea of (say) a low-Hard Gunlugger would be even more ridiculous than the low-INT MU that some D&D player somewhere has surely built and played.

But the idea that every Gunlugger is the same because they all have +2 Hard (or +3 if a particular starting move - Insano like Drano - is chosen) is silly. An AW character is not defined by his/her stats, nor even by his/her moves although the latter start to at least establish an outline.of who the character is

 

[pemerton]

I can think of very few games where the experienced player won't be better at it than inexperienced players.

In a dice pool game this can manifest either in the ability to do better probability estimations, or at least a better intuitive familiarity with the shape and behaviour of various pools.

But this woul be about skill in action resolutoin, not mastery of the PC build mechanics. One thing I like about Classic Traveller, and RQ, and Prince Valiant, and even Rolemaster (mostly, is that the capabilties of the PC are pretty transparent. Want to hit things hard? Then you want a big number in your hitting things skill (whatever that happens to be in the system).

This contrasts with (say) 4e D&D or Cortex+ Heroic/MHRP. In the former, working out what a PC is capable of requires integrating their stats with their powers with their feats with their gear. In the former, working out what a PC is capable of requires looking carefully at their SFX and how those affect the way they build and resolve their dice pools. In my expereince these systems require more mastery both to understand your PC at the build stage (or pre-gen selection state in Cortex+) and to play your PC at the resolution stage.