D&D 4E 3d6 and 4E Character Generation

[Edwin_Su]

the dis advantage to roling is un lucky players.
When i started out we used roll 4d6 discard lowest do this 10 times, then chose beat 6
To create a heroic array

but scores woeld still be mostly luck
(some arrays i just rolled)
13 13 13 13 12 11
15 14 11 11 11 9
15 13 13 12 11 11
15 15 15 12 10 11
16 16 15 15 15 14

as you see if this where roled for players some might be happy others might not, so a point buy or simulr system that ruled out the luck facor is prefereble in my oppinion

 

[Shane_Leahy]

One of the methods that my group tried and liked was to use a point buy (normally 25) and then roll 3d6 in order. You got to keep the higher of either the roll or the point buy.

This allowed people to build the characters that they wanted but also gave some variety to the characters. All of a sudden you could have a fighter with a 15 Int.

The players basically broke into two groups. One would ignore the dice rolls and build the stats best they could and treated the dice rolls as extra. The other group would leave alot of 8's and hope for a couple of rolls. I am not sure which worked out better in the end.

 

[Larrin]

I like 4d6 drop lowest, seven times choose best 6, reroll up to three ones, rolling two ones in a row is a 4, rolling 4 ones at once is a 14 and 4 sixes at once is a 19. if three stats are less that 10, start over from the begining.

then i do three more sets just like that and choose my favorite one.


okay i actually just do 4d6 drop lowest or point buy, but i would totally use that system.

 

[Knightlord]

My group usually rolls 4d6, but players are allowed to reroll 1's constantly and 2's once. This method typically creates better than average characters, but, then again, heroes are supposed to be better than average, right?

Never was much of a fan of Point Buy. Always felt too....static, at least IMO.

 

[Larrin]

Never was much of a fan of Point Buy. Always felt too....static, at least IMO.

I agree 100%, I would hate point buy if it wasn't for the fact i have consistently rolled under what i could have gotten with point pretty much every time i've tried in the last few years. after a few stat block of a 15, a 13 and a few 11's, point buy starts looking like a nice static form of salvation. I think i used up all my luck rolling a halfing rouge with his lowest stat being a 14., the next lowest was 16. That used up every ounce of luck i'll ever have for rolling characters, and i didn't have that much to start with. I'm better off using point buy, and that makes me sad.

 

[RayJ]

In our late 3.5 campaigns, my group started with the elite array from the 3.5 rulebook and then added on a 15 point buy to that. We generally run campaigns with multiple monsters near the party's level during encounters, so the added boost helped keep the players active.

Also, under this system no character can have more than a single 18 at character creation without racial modifiers, and all the stats seemed pretty fluid and natural. We had fighters with good charisma or intelligence, and wizards with decent strength or wisdom scores.

At low levels this helped our campaigns to feel much like the pregens do now for 4th edition.

 

[Dausuul]

One of the methods that my group tried and liked was to use a point buy (normally 25) and then roll 3d6 in order. You got to keep the higher of either the roll or the point buy.

This allowed people to build the characters that they wanted but also gave some variety to the characters. All of a sudden you could have a fighter with a 15 Int.

That's brilliant! It guarantees that players get the stats that are crucial to their characters, while still giving the possibility of points in "off stats" that you wouldn't normally invest in.

I'm going to propose this to my group and see what everyone thinks.

 

[thatdarnedbob]

Not to derail this too much, but...

Can anyone explain to me where the straight 3d6 (in order or not) method came from? Because I'm looking at my 1979 AD&D DM's Guide, and the methods it lists are
a) 4d6 drop lowest, arrange as desired
b) Roll 3d6 12 times, and keep the 6 highest.
c) Roll 3d6 6 times, for each ability score in order.
d) Roll 3d6 for 6 scores 12 times total, then choose the set of six you like the most.
In fact, it explicitly says NOT to use 3d6 in order. Was this just an evil DM invention?

 

[Voss]

I can appreciate this viewpoint. Still, I've always tried to instill the idea in my players that it's not a character's ability scores that makes him or her a success. A PC with poor scores can thrive on good RP and decision-making, just as a PC with high scores can falter in the absence of these. I think that more random methods, like 3d6, help enforce this concept.

The problem is the balance point for the game won't necessarily match up well with the bell curve for 3d6. if the game has largely been balanced and tested for 28 or 30 point buy, if you're party ends up on the statistical average, you'll likely eat them alive if you don't tone everything down. That often doesn't end up as a fun game. Neither, IMO, does watching the one guy who did break out of the statistical average dominate the game.

 

[Lacyon]

Can anyone explain to me where the straight 3d6 (in order or not) method came from? Because I'm looking at my 1979 AD&D DM's Guide, and the methods it lists are
a) 4d6 drop lowest, arrange as desired
b) Roll 3d6 12 times, and keep the 6 highest.
c) Roll 3d6 6 times, for each ability score in order.
d) Roll 3d6 for 6 scores 12 times total, then choose the set of six you like the most.
In fact, it explicitly says NOT to use 3d6 in order. Was this just an evil DM invention?

To my knowledge, the original D&D booklets used 3d6 in order.