D&D 5E How does your group determine ability scores?

[Mannahnin]

I don't see a sample character in the first 50 pages. Maybe it was in the DMG.

It's not a full sample character with a character sheet. They give an example of ability score generation; I think the example character is named Rath, maybe? They talk through a couple of possible personality types that the (mediocre) ability scores could represent. I think it's at the end of the ability score section/chapter, if memory serves.

I can look it up after work.

 

[Maxperson]

It's not a full sample character with a character sheet. They give an example of ability score generation; I think the example character is named Rath, maybe? They talk through a couple of possible personality types that the (mediocre) ability scores could represent. I think it's at the end of the ability score section/chapter, if memory serves.

I can look it up after work.

So looking for Rath, his name comes up a few times in the individual stat sections, but with no word on how they arrived at his number. At the end of the ability score section it gives his stats as S:8 D:14 C:13 I:13 W:7 CH:6, so it doesn't seem like he rolled 4d6-L, but rather the 3d6 in order.

 

[James Gasik]

It's worse than that. 2nd Ed's default (method 1) was 3d6 in order.

Method 2 was the same, but roll two sets and choose between them. Method 3 was 3d6-and-arrange. Method 4 was roll 3d6 twelve times, and arrange any 6 to taste. Method 5 was the well-known 4d6-drop-lowest-arrange.

Method 6 was an interesting one (also the one we used for all but one of our 2nd Ed campaigns). Each score started at 8, and you rolled 7d6. You could then add the numbers on the dice to the various scores to suit, but you couldn't split a die. So if you were lucky enough to roll 7 sixes, you'd end up with a 14 in every score.

I would dispute the "fumbled the ball" description - they seem to have made the game they intended to make, with the focus being on mere mortals becoming heroes, rather than starting with superhumans as in other editions. That's a valid design choice, albeit not a popular one.

(It's also worth noting that this is one of only two instances where the designers managed to put power-creep in reverse - the other being "The Complete Priest's Handbook" in the same edition.)

Yeah but they quickly reversed that trend once Legends and Lore and Demihuman Deities, making powerful specialty priesthoods. And once Forgotten Realms dropped their specialty priesthoods, well, Priests being arguably the best class in the game was pretty much a done deal.

 

[delericho]

The discussion has stirred up a memory...

The more control you have, the more scope there is for optimization. That is, although the 4d6-drop-lowest on average produces better results than point buy, the fact that you can't determine the exact scores undercuts that at least somewhat.

Back when we were coming to the end of our 3e play, we therefore offered each player a choice:

• 4d6-drop-lowest, with a reroll for "hopeless" characters,
• A standard array of 16, 15, 13, 12, 10, 8,
• 28-point buy.

Per the 3e point buy scheme, the average for that rolled method was, in theory (and IIRC), around 30.5 points, while the array was 29.

In 5e terms, what that mostly means is that the "rolled" method is actually, on average, a good bit "better" than point buy - but at the cost of loss of control. (This method also has the scope for throwing out a 16+ score...) Note that 5e as written doesn't have the reroll for "hopeless" characters, though I'd expect most DMs apply one.

And 5e's standard array is actually slightly worse than point buy - although the points can generate exactly that array, for almost all characters there is a more optimised option out there.

That being the case, I'd be tempted to suggest offering a choice as above: 4d6 with a "safety net", or a slightly enhanced fixed array (possibly including a 16 - indeed, possibly the same one given above), or the normal point buy as given.

At this point, though, I'm mostly just churning a bunch of ideas.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don't have my DMG easily to hand, but my understanding is that 4d6-drop-lowest is actually the recommended method in 1st Ed.

Yes, it was the default method for AD&D, with additional methods outlined in the DMG.

Meanwhile, B/X went with 3d6 in order.

 

[DND_Reborn]

In practice even 4d6, drop lowest, arrange to taste isn't generous enough to reliably produce PCs with the two 15s minimum Gygax envisioned and the AD&D ability score charts expect, so for most of my 90s-2000s gaming career my main groups used 4d6 drop lowest, roll three sets and pick your favorite, arrange scores to taste.

FWIW, the expected "standard array" for 4d6-L is 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9; which in AD&D would have barely given you anything for just 2 scores...

(bold added)

We also did three sets back in the 80's and 90's, but rolled in order -- OR --- one set, arrange to taste.

 

[payn]

It makes sense, but I don’t like it in practice as it slows down character creation and makes it too convoluted for the benefit it provides. I’d prefer Point Buy and letting the player decide if and how the character’s background ties into the ability scores.

I agree, most groups dispensed it for the 2-4 arrays that everyone eventually ends up with any way.

 

[Baron Opal II]

PF2 came up with a seemingly clever "ABC" system. Start with a baseline all 10s. Pick you ancestry (formerly race) get a few stat bumps, pick your background get a few more bumps, pick your class and get your final bumps. It all works out to basically 2-4 different arrays and everyone just skips to it that way.

I thought that would be clever, a life path type system. I've always had a great appreciation for Traveller.

You start with X in each, and you choose which attribute will be "prime". This might be the one you want to be highest, or one that is appropriate for the family. Then you have a coming of age event, and two choices, things go well or things go poorly. You gain +2 / +1d6 regardless of the choice, but the attribute is different. Your background is from a list derived from the prime attribute. You might come from a family of farmers or masons if Strength is prime, Charisma if travelling entertainers. Ancestral mods to one or two attributes, and then maybe +1d6 to each to give some randomness / variety.

Haven't had the time to mess with it yet.