D&D 5E Alternate ability generation rule

[Skyscraper]

I'm more of an old schooler regarding ability generation and I like the roll 3d6 and apply it to your ability method. But I admit that having a bad ability score in your main ability kind of sucks. That, and having poor stats all around.

However, I like to have intelligent fighters or strong wizards be a possibility. And I like for the really bad ability scores to remain in there, PCs with a 5 in wisdom or a 4 in dex, usually make for really interesting role-playing opportunities. I also like for an 18 to be exceptional; and for a 16 to be rare and good.

Here is an alternate ability generation method I'm toying with:

1) roll 3d6 six times and apply the result to your 6 ability scores, in the order in which they are rolled
2) swap any two ability scores, once
3) roll 1d4 "heroic die". Add it to any ability score that is 13 or less
4) repeat #3, once

So you get two d4 heroic dice, but you need to roll them one by one and apply them immediately in the order they are rolled.

Any thoughts?

By the way, I'm not necessarily looking for you to convince me that buying ability scores or rolling 4d6 and applying them in the order you select, is better. That's a question of preference, and I respect that your preference might differ from mine. I've played extensively with those methods, I simply prefer another. I'm more wondering if the method I'm contemplating has issues that I not foreseeing, or generally looking for feedback on it to see for example if I might end up with unexpectedly weak characters. Thanks!

Sky

p.s.: anyone remember the 1E Unearthed Arcana alternate ability score generation method? We used that. You could apply 9d6 to one stat, 8d6 to the next, and so on until you had 3d6 for the last; keep best 3 on each. The reason you had 7 stats is because comeliness was introduced in UA. I can tell you we didn't have a lot of players awarding anything worthwhile in that stat in the number of d6 department

 

[Paraxis]

Sure you can end up with weak characters you are rolling randomly for stats and placing them in order, you have to see that.

The issues are the ones with all random roll generation of ability scores, but you know that too, you will get a mix of Heroes and Zeroes at the table.

 

[Crothian]

I like it. Some characters will be better then others but that's a simple problem to deal with.

 

[rjfTrebor]

i feel like after having this explained to me the necessary four times it would take to get it, i'd just ask what the point is and find another game.

also, if i had a score of 4 in anything, i'd volunteer my character as a trap clearing dummy and hope the one i rolled next was actually capable of engaging the game.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I think this system would be fine for something pre-3E, where stats didn't really do anything unless you had a 17 or better, but doesn't necessarily fit with a later game. Ever since 3E, games have been designed with the expectations that you'll have more control over your stats.

 

[clearstream]

1) roll 3d6 six times and apply the result to your 6 ability scores, in the order in which they are rolled
2) swap any two ability scores, once
3) roll 1d4 "heroic die". Add it to any ability score that is 13 or less
4) repeat #3, once

So you get two d4 heroic dice, but you need to roll them one by one and apply them immediately in the order they are rolled.

Looking at your system I feel some doubt about applying those heroic dice to a score that is 13 or lower because I think that is just pushing up the average score instead of letting a player focus on something. You'll end up with stat lines that can multiclass easily but only by absolute fluke be excellent at specialising.

Compare two stat lines.

18 10 12 10 11 9
net +4

15 10 15 10 13 9
net +4

I think both of these would be fun to play. The latter can easily multiclass. The former will be terrific at something. Both can be dialled toward a class through race selection. But I feel like your system of choosing two 13 or lower stats to raise by a d4 is likely to yield a lot of characters with no flaws and no god-like stats. Certainly they won't often yield an interestingly lop-sided character.

Equally, if what you want is well-rounded characters then your system looks good for that. I can swap a good roll off my throwaway stat. And I can buff up two things to middling +s. But please also bear in mind another problem with making really good rolls rare: when someone gets one they are often uniquely advantaged. One of the great benefits of 4d6 six times, order as you like, is that after picking race players have comparable characters. I like this sense of fairness. In a way, the big fault with leaving it up to 3d6 to find the 18s is that if someone gets it they're more likely to put other characters in their shadow.

 

[Croesus]

also, if i had a score of 4 in anything, i'd volunteer my character as a trap clearing dummy and hope the one i rolled next was actually capable of engaging the game.

Whereas one of my favorite 1E characters was a wizard with a 17 INT and a 4 STR. He made it to 13th level before my group stopped playing D&D.

 

[Minigiant]

It's okay but the game kinda assumes you start with at least a 15 and a 14. And 3 nonegatives.
And there is a tiny bit of Mutliple Ability Dependency in 5e for many classes unlike pre-3e.

Let's see.

"I rolled 3d6 in order and got
7, 17, 5, 8, 11, 6.

Oh my Con. Swap with my Int.
7, 17, 8, 5, 11, 6.

Con still negatives. Heroic die of... 4.
Straight to Con.

7, 17, 14, 5, 11, 6.
Come on!... Heroic die of... 1. Sad face. Wisdom I guess.

7, 17, 14, 5, 12, 6.
Eew... Guess, I'm gonna be Dex based. Time to pick a race."

And there is you issue.
If a player rolls bad Constitution, most players will swap it.
If a player rolls high in a primary ability score in a class their don't care about, they will swap it.
If a player rolls really high Constitution, many players will swap it with any positive modifier of primary score they like.
Then is all luck if the other rolls are good after race.
Anything under 7 is not worth a heroic dice.

Not bad but don't be surprised if the party is full of squishies and ironmen.

 

[clearstream]

Oh my Con. Swap with my Int.
7, 17, 8, 5, 11, 6.

Con still negatives. Heroic die of... 4.
Straight to Con.

7, 17, 14, 5, 11, 6.
Come on!... Heroic die of... 1. Sad face. Wisdom I guess.

Con of 12, surely Anyway, some research suggests the following -

4d6 take the best three tends to yield 74 points distributed like this 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9.
3d6 keep tends to yield 72 points distributed similarly to the 5e array, which is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
3d6 keep and add two d4s will add 5 points so yield something like 77 points. The prohibition against boosting high stats will make the array look something like 15, 14, 15, 15, 10, 8.
I don't myself see the advantage of 15, 14, 15, 15, 10, 8 over 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9.

Race will then add some points.
4d6 take the best three means I can take human and get 17, 15, 14, 13, 11, 10. Or non-human and get 18, 15, 13, 12, 10, 9.
3d6 keep and add two d4s means I can take human and get 16, 15, 16, 16, 11, 9. Or non-human and get 17, 14, 16, 15, 10, 8.
I feel like the 4d6 stat-lines look more interesting than the 3d6 plus 2d4 ones.

So that's pretty much my critique. It's an imaginative system but I feel like you could question the merit in terms of the arrays it will tend to output.

 

[Skyscraper]

Thanks for all the comments.

There is a clear assumption since 4E, and even in 3E before that, that PCs should have 8+ in all scores, and 10+ in about 5 scores; and everyone should have a 16+ in his main stat - even 16 is seen as weak. In 5E, 18 is average, 20 is just good and it is what any player will be getting for his PC by the time he has access to stat bumps. Having everyone stand on high ground means everyone is on equal footing. The high ground then means nothing. I'm hoping to find a way around this. Going back to 3d6 appears to achieve the variability and uniqueness of very good (and very bad) scores that I hope to have in a group of characters.

However, playing a wizard with 7 INT makes little sense. I do not wish to force players to choose their class after their rolled up their charactere. So I still hope that the character's main stat will have at least a 12 and hopefully a 14. And that the character might also be able to boost a secondary stat to 12 or even a 14 - albeit not necessarily the one that he would naturally be inclined towards. Apart from that, I'm happy with the variability.

5E, contrarily to 4E, provides more leeway to design encounters such that a 14 in a main stat will not be problematic. In 4E, this was almost unthinkable.
[MENTION=71699]vonklaude[/MENTION] and [MENTION=63508]Minigiant[/MENTION], you make good points about how my system might not be achieving what I'm looking for.

Are there any other stat generation systems that might achieve what I'm looking for?

i feel like after having this explained to me the necessary four times it would take to get it, i'd just ask what the point is and find another game.

This system is complex, really? 3d6 six times, swap two stats if you want, add 2d4? Hmmm.

also, if i had a score of 4 in anything, i'd volunteer my character as a trap clearing dummy and hope the one i rolled next was actually capable of engaging the game.

This is clearly a result of the recent versions of D&D. I find it too bad that people see a 4 as a bad thing, but do not see that 18 means nothing, since everyone has an 18.

Also, as for the scores of 4, I actually have very good experiences with them in my gaming career. I've played a wonderfully flavorful barbarian-cleric in a 4E game that had 4 INT and 6 CHA. We actually had the 4d6 method, but I rolled really crappy. I made him a dim-witted sympathic huntchback called Udo. This character gave such a strong impression that even now, 3-4 years after that short campaign, he occasionally comes up in conversations among my friends and I as a running joke.

We played a DCC campaign with 3d6 straight into ability scores. Characters had all sorts of flaws that made them - really - interesting. The 4 STR dwarf made us laugh to tears, we made so much fun of him.

In a long 3E campaign about 5-10 years ago, one very flavorful PC had a 5 WIS score. She was always throwing caution to the wind and her actions always prompted all sorts of amusing game situations. She was a clearly interesting component of the campaign.

I see flaws in characters as good role-playing opportunities and, often, a lot of fun at the table.