Character Generation - Stat Draft Method

[Olaf the Stout]

My group is about to start the Age of Worms adventure path after having just completed the Shackled City AP. For the SCAP I had the players use point buy for the very first time.

The reason why I went with point buy was the previous campaign used 4d6, drop the lowest (which is what I have always used since starting playing D&D in the early-90's). I noticed in the pre-SCAP campaign though that there was a big stat disparity between some characters. Some had rolled really high during character generation, while a couple of others had been pretty unlucky and had average-to-low stats. The difference in character effectiveness wasn't huge, but it was definitely noticeable.

I had hoped that point buy would at least put everyone on a similar footing power-wise. It did. However, it resulted in characters that I would consider a little cookie cutter. No players had a stat with an odd number in it. The key stats for each class were high. The stat least relevant to a particular class was either an 8 or a 10.

I wasn't surprised by this outcome. Only 1 of my players is a real min-maxer but, given the choice, not many players are going to make their characters less effective by having 2 odd stats. Similarly, they are not going to put a 14 in Int for their Fighter unless they want to take a feat like Improved Trip.

Which leads me to my current position. What I am going to do is a stat draft. I first came across this concept here and here when el-remmen conducted one for his group.

My draft will be slightly different to the way el-remmen ran his though. Firstly, I will not be rolling up a set of stat blocks ahead of time. Instead we will roll them up as a group and then pick.

Picking order will be random for round 1. For round 2 the picking order will be reverse total point value order. So the player with the lowest value stats will pick first and the player with the highest value will pick last.

We will go through the process twice. At the end of it players will have 2 complete sets of stats. They will pick which set to keep. The 5 sets not chosen (I have 5 players) will be put aside and used for replacement PC's for any deaths.

What I'm still undecided on is how to generate the stats. I'm tossing up a couple of different options.

1. Roll 3d6 for stats. Number of rolls = number of players (so with 5 players there will be 5 Strength stats to choose from). There will also be a set of Wild stats. This Wild stat can be picked as any stat.
2. Same as option 1, except the number of rolls = number of players +1.
3. Same as option 1, except the Wild stat is rolled using 4d6, drop the lowest.
4. Same as option 1, except the number of roll = number of players +1 and Wild stat is rolled using 4d6, drop the lowest.
5. Same as option 1, except all rolls are made using 4d6, drop the lowest.
6. Same as option 1, except all rolls are made using 4d6, drop the lowest and there is no Wild stat.

At the moment I am leaning towards Option 4 (Roll 3d6 for stats (4d6 for Wild stat. Number of rolls = number of players +1).

It may have just been bad luck, but the first stat block I rolled using Option 1 (5 complete stat lines + 1 Wild stat for 5 player using 3d6) and got a very average set of rolls. There were two 17's and one 14 rolled. Everything else was 13 or lower.

Rolling an extra set of stats got a 16 and a couple of 13's (i.e. it was now effectively Option 2). The Con stat line was particularly horrible (6, 10, 5, 17, 7, 13) and the Dex stat line wasn't much better (9, 10, 8, 9, 13, 10).

On top of that the Wild stat line was: 9, 12, 10, 10, 6, 12. So the Wild stat will help offset big negatives, but not much more. So I'm thinking that making the Wild 4d6, drop the lowest will help avoid lots of low rolls in 1 particular stat.

Power-level wise, I'm aiming for characters around a 28-ish point buy level. Some high stats and some low stats is what I'm after, rather than all stats being average or thereabouts. I find it just makes for more interesting characters when they have strengths and weaknesses.

One other option I am considering is, at the end, allowing a +2 to be put into any stat (can't make any stat higher than 18).

Thoughts?

Olaf the Stout

 

[Yora]

Why go through all this trouble? What's the benefit?

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Why go through all this trouble? What's the benefit?

The reason why I went with point buy was the previous campaign used 4d6, drop the lowest (which is what I have always used since starting playing D&D in the early-90's). I noticed in the pre-SCAP campaign though that there was a big stat disparity between some characters. Some had rolled really high during character generation, while a couple of others had been pretty unlucky and had average-to-low stats. The difference in character effectiveness wasn't huge, but it was definitely noticeable.

I had hoped that point buy would at least put everyone on a similar footing power-wise. It did. However, it resulted in characters that I would consider a little cookie cutter. No players had a stat with an odd number in it. The key stats for each class were high. The stat least relevant to a particular class was either an 8 or a 10.

I wasn't surprised by this outcome. Only 1 of my players is a real min-maxer but, given the choice, not many players are going to make their characters less effective by having 2 odd stats. Similarly, they are not going to put a 14 in Int for their Fighter unless they want to take a feat like Improved Trip.

Which leads me to my current position.

TL, DR

Basically using 4d6, drop the lowest results in (sometimes significant) disparity in power level between PC's. Using point buy results in boring min-maxed characters.

I'm trying to find a method that avoids the power disparity, while having PC's that aren't min-maxed stat-wise.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Vascant]

In the games I have run we have always used the 4d6 drop the lowest method, now I know I have been lucky but all my players over the years and rolled with the punches on this. It does seem to add something to the role playing aspect of their characters. Especially with 3.5 there are so many ways to expand upon stats later that this can be used as a goal for the player as they role play.

This is one of those half glass empty or full kind of thing and just depends on how you and your players look at it though.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I just rolled up a second set of stats using 3d6 for stats. The stats rolled were decidedly average. Strength, in particular, had a 13 and then nothing higher than a 9.

The Wild stat rolls were slightly above average (11, 13, 11, 10, 15, 13), which would offset some of the low stats. Funnily enough I rolled a second set of Wild stats using 4d6, drop the lowest and got lower numbers! (10, 10, 11, 11, 15, 11)

So I don't know that 3d6 as a rolling method will work. I may have to go with rolling 4d6, drop the lowest, but have the number of rolls = the number of players.

Another possible option I'm thinking of to give me a result in line with what I am after (some high and some low stats) is after you have your stats, pick one stat and add 2 to it (max 18). Then take 2 away from your lowest stat.

Thoughts?

Olaf the Stout

 

[Olaf the Stout]

In the games I have run we have always used the 4d6 drop the lowest method, now I know I have been lucky but all my players over the years and rolled with the punches on this. It does seem to add something to the role playing aspect of their characters. Especially with 3.5 there are so many ways to expand upon stats later that this can be used as a goal for the player as they role play.

This is one of those half glass empty or full kind of thing and just depends on how you and your players look at it though.

Yeah, last campaign was the first campaign that I've ever used anything other than 4d6, drop the lowest for character generation.

The only reason I moved to point buy was because of the significant stat disparity between some of the PC's. It probably didn't help that those players that had the better stats were a bit more min-maxer than the ones with the lower stats. It meant that the gap widened as the PC's went up in level.

So power disparity is one issue. The other is wanting PC's with strengths and weaknesses, not PC's that are average in some stats and good to slightly above average in others. That isn't as interesting to me.

Olaf the Stout

 

[scourger]

I like the organic method from 3.0:

Roll six times recording in order using the best 3 of 4d6. Re-roll any one ability score taking the best of the two. Then switch any two scores.

I used it for Omega World d20 as the default (I think it was the default in that game). It produces the kind of realistic (organic) results that you seek. I like it because I find it gives PCs with stats that are more realistic: a strong wizard, smart fighter or any charismatic character.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I like the organic method from 3.0:

Roll six times recording in order using the best 3 of 4d6. Re-roll any one ability score taking the best of the two. Then switch any two scores.

I used it for Omega World d20 as the default (I think it was the default in that game). It produces the kind of realistic (organic) results that you seek. I like it because I find it gives PCs with stats that are more realistic: a strong wizard, smart fighter or any charismatic character.

Yes, but it still doesn't address the issue of PC's having differing power levels. It could possibly even make it worse.

It would definitely make for an interesting character, but the player may not enjoy the experience if he is obviously much less effective than the other PC's.

For example, the player of the Fighter rolls much lower stats overall compared to everyone else and also rolls a low Strength and Constitution. So not only does he have much lower stats overall, but he is also only able to cover off one of his 2 key stats.

Olaf the stout

 

[Kaodi]

I was going to talk about modelled (or constrained) stats , where you use point buy to simulate what you roll, but when I asked Invisible Castle to give me a test set to work with, the first thing it gave me was 12 8 10 15 13 14. Very funny, Invisible Castle. Very funny.

The second go came up 15 13 13 9 14 14 . Perhaps not the greatest set for my purposes, but this needs to be able to work for anything. I prefer Pathfinder, so I will use its 15 pt scheme for my example. That array works out to 22 pts. You could turn that into 14 13 13 13 12 9, which has a similar spread, or 15 13 12 12 12 9 if you think at least a 15 in one stat should be retained.

Another is 13 12 14 17 15 16, a whopping 40 pts, which could probably be reduced to 15 13 12 12 11 10 or 14 14 12 12 11 10. Or even 17 12 11 10 10 9, if again you want them to preserve their high stat.

Finally I got a low score, 11 8 13 13 13 9. I think I would turn that into 14 14 14 11 10 9.

Hmmm... I suppose this sort of system requires a bit of finesse. There is no set way to deterime how stats get changed, though the general idea is to preserve the "spread" in a reasonable way. I am pretty sure that I, as a player, would be happy to play in a game where stats were developed this way though.

Edit: I missed that you were using 28 pt buy, which rules out a Pathfinder conversion, .That would the conversions something like:

2) 15 14 14 13 13 9 = 15 14 13 12 12 9
3) 17 16 15 14 13 12 = 17 13 12 11 10 9
4) 13 13 13 11 9 8 = 15 14 14 12 10 10

 

[Nellisir]

I got rid of ability scores in favor of ability bonuses several campaigns ago, and haven't regretted it at all. The deciding factor was a group with, like yours, a wide disparity in ability scores (the high character had a total of +11 in ability score bonuses; the low character had +4). I settled on +6 as a good starting point.

Characters start with +0 (ie 10) in every stat), and add bonuses as they see fit. They can gain up to 2 more points by taking an equivalent penalty. I usually restrict starting characters to a max bonus of +3 in any one score. (You could increase this to +4 for demihumans in their bonus stat).

It's a perfectly clear, simple system that I've been 100% happy with. You can't min/max it by tweaking your odd/even stats. Everyone has the same bonus total.

If you really want 3-18 scores, do as above, and then roll 1d6 for each stat. Odd means the stat is odd, even means the stat is even. There's almost no mechanical meaning to 3-18 scores in 3e/3.5e, though (weight allowance is the exception, I think, and that's easily calculated.)