D&D 5E Alternate ability generation rule

[clearstream]

Many of these systems seem overly complex.
How about:

1. The player can assign a 16 to one stat and a 14 to another. It's purely their choice where they place these.
2. For the remaining stats they roll 3d6 and place them where they fall.
3. Apply race bonuses as normal

In my eyes this has two advantages;
1. It ensures that all players will have at least a 16 and a 14.
2. It gives the players an interesting choice: do they immediately place these two stats in their primary and secondary attributes of their class or do they trust their dice enough to give them two good stats out of four that they roll?

Personally, being risk adverse, I'd put them in the 16 in my primary and the 14 in my secondary but I have a couple of players who would be confident enough of rolling an 18 one time in four who might make a more creative choice.

I agree with your sense that streamlined is good. The system you propose will mean that if I do roll well on my four random then I will have a really great array. I really feel like what is wanted is a system that does not amplify an already terrific array but helps a bad one. Drawing on GSHamster's suggestion could I propose -

1. Choose class
2. Roll six times - you may (but do not have to) discard the array if it yields a net-negative bonus (e.g. 10, 11, 10, 11, 10, 9 yields minus 1 so is net-negative and may be discarded)
3. If kept, assign the highest roll to the primary stat for your class, and the rest to the remaining stats in order (i.e. ST, DX, CN, IN, WS, CH)
4. Choose race, etc...

This method will produce the variability desired: great rolls will be rare and generate wonder. It does not force players into a class. It avoids the creation of 'dump' stats (as the array is assigned largely as rolled). And it helps lame ducks without needlessly buffing paragons. It is streamlined: few steps and not complicated. It can be simply tuned by changing the net-modifier that triggers the option to discard. For example, instead of 'net-negative' it could be set at 'net-negative-3' or 'net-positive-2'.

 

[77IM]

OK here's another one, riffing off Skyscraper's original idea.

1. Roll 3d6, assign in order.
2. Increase an ability score of your choice by +1d4 (max 17).
3. If your ability score total is lower than 70, repeat step 2 until your total is 70 or more.

This gives players who roll low more control over their ability scores, letting them decide whether to shore up low scores or top off prime requisites.

 

[clearstream]

OK here's another one, riffing off Skyscraper's original idea.

1. Roll 3d6, assign in order.
2. Increase an ability score of your choice by +1d4 (max 17).
3. If your ability score total is lower than 70, repeat step 2 until your total is 70 or more.

This gives players who roll low more control over their ability scores, letting them decide whether to shore up low scores or top off prime requisites.

I like this - including the 17 cap on the revised rolls so you need 18s straight - but would simply swap around steps 2 and 3 so that it went

1. Roll 3d6, assign in order
2. If your ability score total is lower than 70 go to step 3 otherwise stop here
3. Increase an ability score of your choice by +1d4 (max 17) and return to step 2

Otherwise your man with 106 points still gains his missing point (18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 16) If I wanted to tune your system a bit I might go with recording the actual rolls and replacing them, e.g.

1. Roll 3d6 writing down the numbers rolled, assign in order
2. If your ability score total is lower than 70 go to step 3 otherwise stop here
3. Choose a number you previously rolled and replace it with a new d6 roll (max 17) and return to step 2

 

[77IM]

Oh, those are both good.

I really like the simplicity of, "if your stats are too low, adjust them upwards." It keeps the randomness but nobody gets screwed by low scores.