D&D 5E Alternate ability generation rule

[77IM]

Whats the point of all these rerolls, roll and add +12, change the order, replace stats, make one a 14, roll multiple sets and pick?

The point is creative restriction: working with what you are given to make a character instead of having total creative freedom.

For example could you make a viable character with these scores: Str 9, Dex 9, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 8, Cha 15? Nobody would ever pick those scores, but if you were making a character with them, what would that person be like?

The obvious downside is PCs can be wildly imbalanced. There are methods to allow for both randomness and balance, but they wind up being very complex.

 

[77IM]

Here's an idea that will produce balanced PCs.

1. Roll 1d10 to select an ability score array:

1: 16 16 11 8 8 8
2: 16 15 12 10 8 8
3: 16 14 12 12 8 8
4: 16 14 12 10 10 8
5: 16 13 12 12 10 8
6: 15 15 14 10 8 8
7: 15 15 12 10 10 9
8: 15 14 14 12 8 8
9: 15 14 13 12 10 8
10: 14 14 14 12 10 8

2. For each score in your array, roll 1d6 and assign it to an ability:

1: Strength
2: Dexterity
3: Constitution
4: Intelligence
5: Wisdom
6: Charisma

3. If you get an ability that already has a score put it in the next open ability (if you get to the end, wrap back around to the beginning). This means that your sixth score doesn't need to be randomly placed because there will only be one ability left without a score.


Example: I roll 7 on the d10 getting 15,15,12,10,10,9. I roll 1 on the first d6 so I put a 15 in Str. I roll another 1 on the second d6 so I put the next 15 in Dex because Str already has a score. Rolling 6 I put the 12 in Cha. Rolling another 1 I put the 10 in Con because Str already has a score and so does Dex. Rolling a 5 I put the other 10 in Wis. Then I put the 9 in Int because that's the only ability left without a score. This gives me Str 15, Dex 15, Con 10, Int 9, Wis 10, Cha 12. (That's a tricky array to make a good character because Str and Dex are somewhat redundant, but I've been thinking about converting a 4e character, an elven avenger with stealth and a greatsword, and I think I could get pretty close as a half-elven vengeance paladin using these scores.)

 

[Skyscraper]

How is it dealt with? I've only ever heard this "dealt with" in one of two ways:

"Suck it up crybaby! Just because your best score is an 11 and the GM's spouse's lowest is a 16 doesn't mean the game isn't fun!" (Aka don't deal with it at all, just insist this particular player continue to have a very frustrating experience and mock them anytime they have a complaint).

Method 2. "As you start your adventuring careers, leaving the village for the first time, you spot a vast chasm.."
"I find out how deep the chasm is... by jumping in it."
"You die, roll a new character"
"YESSSS!" (AKA, hopeless character is so distraught by his comparative lowness of scores he suicides at the first opportunity for the chance to roll up something better.)

I think that it has to be determined what the players and DM are looking for. If players each want an 18 or they'll cry to their mommy, then perhaps they're not the players for my game

(intentional cynism to align to the post I replied to. This is meant on a light tone, don't take this seriously please )

 

[Skyscraper]

The most important question is do your PLAYERS think it is part of the fun?

Dealing with an adversarial DM who is always out to "get" the players can be fun (simply surviving the experience is a sort of bragging right) but not everyone is into that. I'm asking because I've dealt with the aforementioned adversarial type of GM before and was okay with it; but my friend in the group was angry to the point of shaking by the end of the session (it was a convention game).

Very relevant question of course.

I'm not an adversarial DM. I'm not there to "get" anyone. The game isnt about winning. The game is about fun.

To me, everyone having 18 in one score isn't fun. It means everyone is equal. There is no purpose having scores if all scores are equal.

Any house rule I plan on introducing, I first propose to the players. This is our game, collaboratively.

I know the players with whom I play. I doubt that they'll refuse my proposal, ultimately. Quite on the contrary, I think that they'll find the idea amusing and interesting.

 

[Skyscraper]

So how do you deal with the character with a 4 Wisdom constantly failing "Save or Suck for the rest of this encounter" saves and not being REALLY pissed off that it keeps happening? Because to ensure that player 'has fun' you'd have to either scrap your campaign setting of anything requiring a Wisdom Save, or have every single one of those creatures only target members of the party with higher Wisdom, or not do any of those and just say "Chin up champ, you get to *try* again next round! Fun, right?"

Ability scores FREAKING MATTER, especially the ones related to saves, and Wisdom is the queen mother of "if this score is too low, you will be spending a lot of game sessions playing on your phone instead of playing D&D because your character is rendered helpless."

Honestly it's question of gaming style. What I'm looking for, is a house rule to fit my gaming style. It may not fit with yours, which is fine.

This said, I'll still follow your line of thought.

In my games, in a 4-hour gaming session, I'd be surprised if there are more than 1-2 fights. Let's say 2 fights per session, I'll round it up. Out of, say, 10 fights (I'll be very generous here), there may be 1 fight with a creature having an ability requiring a wisdom save. Let's say that, in such a WIS-save fight, a PC in a 5-member party has 50% chance of being required to roll a WIS save (again, I'll be generous). This means that the PC might be required to roll a save once every (10 fights / 2 fights per session * 0.5 chances of being targetted) 5 gaming sessions. This character with a 4 WIS score has -3 on his score. Compared to a PC with a 10 WIS score, he consequently gets about 15% chances more of missing a WIS save, once every 5 game sessions. Don't know about you, but I don't see this as any reason to jump my PC off a cliff.

However, This 4 WIS PC is likely to have numerous role-playing opportunities per game session. Every game session. And his 4 WIS score will provide an obvious tangent offered to the player, for the role-playing to be made interesting. That has been my experience.

To me, the trade-off is pretty darn good.

 

[clearstream]

You mentioned options for dealing with a 4 wisdom and the presence of "Save or Suck" being a major impairment for such a character. What are they, specifically, other than scrapping the character?

You also mention ability scores don't matter much in the grand scheme. If that is the case, why not let the player decide what stats they want to have? After all, if it doesn't matter all that much, why not let them decide for themselves? Then nobody is stuck with a score they didn't tacitly accept.

I feel like you don't quite hit the nail on the head here. The DM can scale their campaign to their players: it doesn't matter if they are at +s or -s on their saves. In your case in point - save or suck - the roll will be most likely be against the caster's spell casting ability which includes their stat modifier and that will just be a little lower. But there is a problem that relates to your example. That is where characters have highly disparate modifiers. So for example if one character has +s across the board and another -s then it will be harder for the DM to find things to challenge the first without marginalising the second.

I'm interested in the problem of creating interesting stat arrays. But straight 3d6 can introduce problems because it will increase the range of modifiers across the party. Your problem arises when one or two players have very bad -s while the rest have strong +s. I believe that this volatility can add interest, but it could be frustrating also. Perhaps that is what you are getting at?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I usually use a point buy. Random can be a pain if the player already has a specific character concept--which is most often the case in modern D&D, unlike really old school where you didn't really even think about it until after you rolled. "Str 4, Int 16. Looks like wizard is my best option." Since most people don't play that way, random rolls are counterproductive to most styles.

However, sometimes it can be fun to do random generation. For those situations, I have a system that creates different but equal ability score arrays.

System 1
(Ignore point buys. When I mention "points" in context of this system I mean raw absolute numbers. A Strength 15 is 15 "points.")

1. Decide a total number of "points" you want everyone's character to add up to. If you wanted an average of all 12s, for instance, that is 72 points. Pick a normal rolling method the comes close to the values you want. 4d6 is a good choice most of the time, or 5d6 if you choose a really high point value.
2. Each player rolls and records ability scores (don't assign them to abilities yet, but do make sure you have them written down in some sort of noticeable order), and also adds them up to see what the total comes to.
3. If your total is higher or lower than the target point value, you adjust it up or down until it hits the point value, using the following random method.
a) Roll 1d6, the result tells you which of your rolled scores to modify
b) Roll 1d6 again. Add or subtract (based on whether you have too many or too few points) the result from the score you are modifying. You can't go over 18 or below 3. Any points that would do so are lost. You also can't raise or lower your overall point total beyond that needed to reach the target point value.
c) If you still have too many points, repeat b) until they reach the target value.
4. Assign scores to abilities as desired.

That sounds complex, but it's actually rather simple. Here's an example run:

Let's say I want scores to average out to our 5e standard point buy. I add up 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 for a total value of 72. That's supposed to be pretty close to a 4d6 (drop lowest) method, so I'll roll 4d6 and see what I get.

13, 11, 10, 9, 14, 11 = 68

That's 4 points less than the target of 72, so we'll equalize it.

I roll a d6 and get 2. Then I roll again and get 4. So I target the second number (an 11) and raise it by 4 points, to 15. My finished array is 15, 14, 13, 11, 10, 9 = 72 points.

Let's do it again (it's fun!):

15, 13, 18, 12, 15, 11 = 84

I'm 12 points high (hope I can keep that 18!)

I roll a d6 and get 1, then 3. I drop the first score by 3 points, changing it to 12.
I hit 'em again. Drop 2 points off of my sixth score = 9.
This time it's 6 off of 6 = 3.
Now I only have 1 point left to take off, and I roll a 5. I don't have to roll for a value to subtract, as I can only take 1 point off, putting it at 14.

My final array is 18, 14, 13, 12, 12, 3 = 72. I've got both an 18 and a 3--how much more old school can you get?

A couple more times:

9, 17, 16, 11, 16, 12 = 81
Adjusted: 16, 16, 16, 11, 10, 3 = 72

11, 11, 14, 16, 15, 13 = 80
Adjusted: 16, 14, 13, 11, 10, 8 = 72

If the potential for really low scores is a concern, you can either use a lower rolling method (stick with 3d6 for example) or use a d4 to modify stats instead of a d6.

I have another system also.

System 2
My other system is more traditional, but it doesn't create equal scores. Just allow each player to roll for scores, and if they don't like what they get they can use point buy. Optionally, allow whoever rolled the lowest results to opt to use the results of the person who rolled the lowest array that they chose to keep (rather than choosing point buy). This guarantees that no one player can have the worst random results.

 

[mudlock]

There are methods to allow for both randomness and balance, but they wind up being very complex.

Every player rolls 4d6 six times. Put everyone's results in a shared pile. Players take turns taking numbers out (clockwise until everyone has one, then counterclockwise until everyone has two, etc.) When everything is taken, players can trade. ("I'll give you two 14s for your 16 and 10.")

 

[Crothian]

Every player rolls 4d6 six times. Put everyone's results in a shared pile. Players take turns taking numbers out (clockwise until everyone has one, then counterclockwise until everyone has two, etc.) When everything is taken, players can trade. ("I'll give you two 14s for your 16 and 10.")

I do like the drafting method. Instead of having the players roll I like to pick the numbers and put them on a large poster board and then we cross them off when picked. One time I made the numbers attribute specific and not all the numbers were for each attribute. For instance I think I had a 20 con but 16 was the highest dexterity. The lowest was a 10 for each attribute but someone could select an 8 and get a bonus of some kind for doing that.

 

[Skyscraper]

I think, in the end, the question I wish to tackle with ability scores is: what represents a formidable ability score? How strong is 18 STR? Is it your run-of-the-mill fighter PC, or is it a rare and extraordinary feat to have 18?

If 18 (and 20 by the time you have had a couple of ability increases) is what everyone has (and is expected to have) in his main ability score, then how do you make extraordinary the magic item that provides 19 or 20 in an ability score? How is the 500 pound ogre strong, if any PC fighter is just as strong or stronger?

Personally I like that the PC that can challenge an ogre in a strength matchup is, like, pretty darn exceptional. I wish that the giant with 21 STR is a mighty opponent strong enough to unroot small trees. I want that item that provides 19 or 20 STR be extraordinary and a great find. In looking at the stats that appear in monsters and in magic items, I'm under the impression that, apart from monsters that come into play at levels 10+, there are few monsters that have an ability score that will be better than the strong ability score of a given PC in a group, with all PCs getting an ability score in the range of 18-20 at the time of creating the PC or at most by level 8.

So really, it's a relative thing, ability scores. Me, I wish for that relative value to position PCs well below ogres and giants in their strength; and well below mind flayers in their intelligence. However, there might be the rare PC that has a 18 in STR and the other that has 19 in INT. And perhaps they'll find a magic item that raises one PC's CON score to 19. Those scores will be looked upon as rare and valuable. The PC with 18 STR can actually challenge an ogre! That's, like, normally unthinkable, but when he does, the entire village will be in awe!

This is what I hope to achieve. Wonder.