Psion
Adventurer
I discussed my stat-gen method over in the 4e forum, and it got some curious looks. I thought I'd throw the complete thing up here.
The Why
I do not like the dump-statting and repetitive build habits that point gen permits, and I also think it's niggly and time consuming. Thus, I strongly prefer rolling to point buy of any sort.
If I do roll, I like the matrix method or a method where you allocate dice to different stats (by player choice or by table according to race/class) and THEN roll and keep what you get.
But I find that rolling can lead to too high a variance. I find that rolling methods need a little conditioning to keep the spread of player power small, conditioning methods that can get a bit complicated.
Thus, I came up with this system. I had toyed with some systems like this for a while, but getting my games ready for GenCon, it all crystallized. I was prepping a Spycraft game (which had a point gen system) and a D20 Mars game (which uses a highly variant diced stat variant.) Both of these had basic system that would produce a baseline average of 13.5 if the character stats.
I came up with a little system that tried to live up to the dual goals of variety and PC equivalence by using cards. Thus I present to you...
Psion's D20 System Game Card Generation Method
1) Get a deck of standard playing cards. Take the 4-9 cards of two suits out of the deck. This should give you 12 cards, 2 of each numbered 4-9.
2) Shuffle the deck. Deal them out in pairs. Flip them over and total the pairs. This gives you 6 numbers that can range from 8 to 18.
(If you are happy with this, just allocate these scores to the 6 stats at the player's discretion. I, however, was shooting for a slightly higher average to match the assumptions of Spycraft 2.0 and D20 Mars, and I wanted to avoid 8's, so I added this step.)
3) Sort the pairs from highest to lowest. Add 1 to the 2nd, 4th, and 6th highest numbers. Allocate statistics to ability scores to taste.
Note:
In Spycraft, to compensate for the fact that some players have more odd scores than others, I allow players to subtract 1 from two odd scores in exchange for 1 bonus feat, similar to Spycraft's Modular campaign quality.
In D20 Mars, you get more frequent attribute boosts than in standard D20 games, so odd scores are less of a "sunk cost."
Example:
The cards are shuffled and dealt, resulting in these pairs...
6, 5 ( = 11)
9, 4 ( = 13)
7, 7 ( = 14)
5, 9 ( = 14)
6, 4 ( = 10)
8, 8 ( = 16)
The scores are ordered, and 1 is added to the 2nd, 4th, and 6th highest
16
14 + 1 = 15
14
13 + 1 = 14
11
10 + 1 = 11
Resulting in
16
15
14
14
11
11
Comments on method
Having been using this for a bit, I have observed a few properties that differ here from random dice rolling.
Obviously, by intent, the spread between PC power is much less than random, but unlike point-buy, you don't see pattern builds and a flurry of ugly fighters and you don't see the big point cost hit for higher stats.
While dealing the cards to make scores, it's psychologically a different experience than rolling. If you roll a crappy score using a dice method, there's the definite feeling that you have been set back, because you can't expect the rest of your scores to make up for it. When using the card method, you deal out some low cards, you know a good score is coming, because those cards are out of the deck.
The main randomization between characters is that some characters will have higher peak stats than others. But that's okay by me. I find forcing a spate of hyper-optimized characters is detrimental to character variety. By giving the player a higher score, you force them to consider credible sidelines. It sort of adds some variety to character design.
The Why
I do not like the dump-statting and repetitive build habits that point gen permits, and I also think it's niggly and time consuming. Thus, I strongly prefer rolling to point buy of any sort.
If I do roll, I like the matrix method or a method where you allocate dice to different stats (by player choice or by table according to race/class) and THEN roll and keep what you get.
But I find that rolling can lead to too high a variance. I find that rolling methods need a little conditioning to keep the spread of player power small, conditioning methods that can get a bit complicated.
Thus, I came up with this system. I had toyed with some systems like this for a while, but getting my games ready for GenCon, it all crystallized. I was prepping a Spycraft game (which had a point gen system) and a D20 Mars game (which uses a highly variant diced stat variant.) Both of these had basic system that would produce a baseline average of 13.5 if the character stats.
I came up with a little system that tried to live up to the dual goals of variety and PC equivalence by using cards. Thus I present to you...
Psion's D20 System Game Card Generation Method
1) Get a deck of standard playing cards. Take the 4-9 cards of two suits out of the deck. This should give you 12 cards, 2 of each numbered 4-9.
2) Shuffle the deck. Deal them out in pairs. Flip them over and total the pairs. This gives you 6 numbers that can range from 8 to 18.
(If you are happy with this, just allocate these scores to the 6 stats at the player's discretion. I, however, was shooting for a slightly higher average to match the assumptions of Spycraft 2.0 and D20 Mars, and I wanted to avoid 8's, so I added this step.)
3) Sort the pairs from highest to lowest. Add 1 to the 2nd, 4th, and 6th highest numbers. Allocate statistics to ability scores to taste.
Note:
In Spycraft, to compensate for the fact that some players have more odd scores than others, I allow players to subtract 1 from two odd scores in exchange for 1 bonus feat, similar to Spycraft's Modular campaign quality.
In D20 Mars, you get more frequent attribute boosts than in standard D20 games, so odd scores are less of a "sunk cost."
Example:
The cards are shuffled and dealt, resulting in these pairs...
6, 5 ( = 11)
9, 4 ( = 13)
7, 7 ( = 14)
5, 9 ( = 14)
6, 4 ( = 10)
8, 8 ( = 16)
The scores are ordered, and 1 is added to the 2nd, 4th, and 6th highest
16
14 + 1 = 15
14
13 + 1 = 14
11
10 + 1 = 11
Resulting in
16
15
14
14
11
11
Comments on method
Having been using this for a bit, I have observed a few properties that differ here from random dice rolling.
Obviously, by intent, the spread between PC power is much less than random, but unlike point-buy, you don't see pattern builds and a flurry of ugly fighters and you don't see the big point cost hit for higher stats.
While dealing the cards to make scores, it's psychologically a different experience than rolling. If you roll a crappy score using a dice method, there's the definite feeling that you have been set back, because you can't expect the rest of your scores to make up for it. When using the card method, you deal out some low cards, you know a good score is coming, because those cards are out of the deck.
The main randomization between characters is that some characters will have higher peak stats than others. But that's okay by me. I find forcing a spate of hyper-optimized characters is detrimental to character variety. By giving the player a higher score, you force them to consider credible sidelines. It sort of adds some variety to character design.
