D&D 5E About Rolling for Ability Scores

[Sacrosanct]

The preferred method for generating ability scores has been a topic of discussion in my group lately. Since we started playing 5e, I've mostly opted to use point-buy and allowed players to opt out and roll for their ability scores. In my next campaign, beginning this week, I've finally made the decision to outright ban random generation. I have some players upset with that, but I'm not moving back, and the group mostly supports my decision.

Anyway, after talking with other DMs and players, I decided to write about my thoughts on the matter and make it public (here), because maybe other people are interested in joining the discussion with different points of view (with or against random generation). If it reads just like a big forum post, that's probably because English is not my native language.

Cheers!

All but your last point is a person problem, not a problem with the random die rolling method. So all of those can be pushed aside as illegitimate reasons. Re: #4, that's true regardless of the method, and has little or no significant impact to actual game play.

We had this thread several months ago and when you run the scenarios, there's little difference between a randomly rolled PC and a point buy/array on average. The vast majority of random PCs fall in line with the other methods. Only a very small % of rolled PCs will be an outlier with several really high stats (or low stats). So unless you allow your players to keep rerolling stats to counter the odds, you won't even really notice it. And again, that's a person problem, not a method problem.

Also, when rolling, you have a higher chance of rolling lower than array or PB as well. And as you mention in #4, with bounded accuracy, each modifier means more. So rolling a PC that ends up with a 6 and 8 for two of his or her stats is pretty significant, and makes up for their 17 and 16 they rolled as well.

Every time this discussion comes up, most of the people arguing why random gen is bad either ignore that you can also roll lower than normal, and/or rely on people not following the rules. Either way, not a fair assessment of random PC stat gen.

Also, I don't buy into the whole "I feel cheated if someone else has higher stats." For one, it's a team game, not a competition between players. Secondly, in 99.9% of the cases, you wouldn't even know the other player had a higher stat unless you were reverse engineering their die rolls to figure it out. And who does that? Someone with issues, that's who. Even with array, no PC ends up with the same stats because the player chooses how to allocate them, they are impacted by race selection, and may be further modified by ASI or feat choice. If someone rolled a higher stat than me, I don't feel cheated any more than I feel cheated when playing basketball and another player on my team is better than me.

Bottom line: if you don't like it, don't use it. But don't tell other people not to use it because it's bad/wrong, especially on flawed and/or biased reasoning.

 

[neobolts]

Letting a player choose to roll, on the condition that he/she plays the character no matter how bad the roll turns out to be, doesn't solve the problem. Actually, I believe it gets worse, for reasons I've already stated in my blog post.

Oh, if I was on the player side of the table and given this option, I would choose the sure thing (array/point buy) every time.

But as a DM, if you eliminate the "fake gambling" and have a player who understands the risk and wants to take it, I think the positive (of giving them that opportunity to take a chance) outweighs the negative (of a really strong or weak PC).

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Oh, if I was on the player side of the table and given this option, I would choose the sure thing (array/point buy) every time.

Not me! See the thing is, there are plenty of character concepts you can make and have fun with even if you roll poorly because they are SAD or even NAD (non-attribute dependent). (Moon Druid, blessing cleric, twin hasting sorcerer.) There are other concepts you cannot make at all on point buy, but can make if you roll well. (E.g. Ranger/Necromancer/Assassin is infeasible on point buy.) So I'd just roll and go from there.

After about 50 rerolls on BrockJones.com, the worst set of stats I got was this:

12

10

8

11

10

11

That's well below average, and I could still have fun for a long time with that guy as a variant human (Mobile) Moon Druid relying on wildshape, conjuration spells, Longstrider + Mobile, and maybe Spike Stones.

 

[Staccat0]

I will let players roll for one shots, but in a "serious" game I'm usually doing everything I can to make players care LESS about their stats. Having some character with two 18s never helps with that.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I use a hybrid method. Roll a standard array of scores, but then add/subtract from randomly picked scores until the array's point buy value is within a given range. Keeps the variety and surprise of randomly generated PCs, while mitigating the problem of power disparities.

 

[Valador]

When I play or DM I exclusively use the point buy system for a number of reasons.

1.) It allows you to create the character you WANT. I'm sure some people find it fun to play a randomly made character, but when I play I want to play the type of character that I WANT. I do not find enjoyment in playing a game where I'm forced to play something not to my liking if I can prevent it. I don't play D&D to play Bob the below average idiot.

2.) The false gambling that the OP mentioned. If someone rolls really bad, and it does happen, then a lot of times you feel inclined to let them re-roll or take the point buy method instead. So basically they can either re-roll until they get something they like (usually way above average) or they just use point buy anyways. Why not just alleviate the mess and go straight to point buy.

3.) I don't have to sit there and watch to make sure they don't cheat on their rolls. They can make a character prior to the session and all I gotta do is a quick glance to validate scores. So this saves me time.

4.) It's fair. No one can claim their character sucks due to bad rolls and that someone else outshines them due to good rolls. It's all up to the player.

5.) Future planning. I can have a good idea from level 1 what feats and ability scores I want to take over the course of the characters entire career before I even get started. When I make a character I like to have a long term plan. I don't want to roll a crappy character and then worry about making choices to decide how can I make this character suck less... rather than the preferred how can I make this dude even more badass.