D&D 5E Character stat generation idea

[Slit518]

I was just thinking of a new way to generate character's stats at the beginning. I've decided on this method and think it may work pretty good. Let me know what you think!

Every stat starts off at a 6. You than have a pool of 12d6 and divide up to between your 6 stats as you see fit. The average of this would be 2d6 per stat, to a minimum of 8, and a maximum of 18. However, you can use more than a 2d6 on any given stat, but it subtracts from your overall pool, and the max stat you can obtain before any racial modification is an 18.

So say I am playing a Barbarian, and I really want to get an 18 Strength score. I decide to take 4d6 from my pool and roll, hoping the total gives me an 18.
I then have 8d6 to divide up between 5 stats.

Would you use this method?
Or would you tweak it and do 6 + 2d6 instead?

P.S.
The average for 6 + 2d6 would be 13 per stat.

 

[MarkB]

So you're assigning the dice to ability scores before you roll them? And picking a class first? I guess it'd work if you want characters who don't necessarily play to their strengths.

It also feels like you're getting diminishing returns, unless you relax the upper limits for ability scores.

Let's take your barbarian example. In his worst case scenario he could roll 4 on 4d6, leaving him with a strength of 10. Meanwhile, he might only put 1d6 into Intelligence and then roll a 6, winding up being a smart, weedy barbarian.

On the other hand, in the best case scenario he could roll all sixes on his Strength, taking it up to 30 - except it can't go above 18, and now he feels like he's wasted a great roll. No player should feel disappointed when he maxes-out an ability score roll.

Those are extreme examples, but still possible outcomes, and even in more moderate form they may cause frustration.

The question you need to ask yourself is, what do you want to get out of this rolling method? And will it be something your players will enjoy?

 

[Slit518]

So you're assigning the dice to ability scores before you roll them? And picking a class first? I guess it'd work if you want characters who don't necessarily play to their strengths.

It also feels like you're getting diminishing returns, unless you relax the upper limits for ability scores.

Let's take your barbarian example. In his worst case scenario he could roll 4 on 4d6, leaving him with a strength of 10. Meanwhile, he might only put 1d6 into Intelligence and then roll a 6, winding up being a smart, weedy barbarian.

On the other hand, in the best case scenario he could roll all sixes on his Strength, taking it up to 30 - except it can't go above 18, and now he feels like he's wasted a great roll. No player should feel disappointed when he maxes-out an ability score roll.

Those are extreme examples, but still possible outcomes, and even in more moderate form they may cause frustration.

The question you need to ask yourself is, what do you want to get out of this rolling method? And will it be something your players will enjoy?

Well you see, it's a player's own fault if they roll an excessive amount of die hoping for a high stat. Of course they would assign the scores as they see fit. The player should see the risk vs reward before they roll. If they don't, as a DM they could always explain it to their player(s).

 

[Slit518]

*edit*

For some reason there was a double post.

 

[Valmarius]

You could also roll them one at a time. Choose a stat, then roll a die and add it.
Do this until you've used up all your dice.

This way, you can hit that 18 if you really want. But if you land on a 17 you'd probably take it, over wasting another die for that +1.
Sixes are still great, ones are annoying but not too bad since you can usually roll another die.
Gives you a chance to have interestingly high off-stats.

 

[Slit518]

You could also roll them one at a time. Choose a stat, then roll a die and add it.
Do this until you've used up all your dice.

This way, you can hit that 18 if you really want. But if you land on a 17 you'd probably take it, over wasting another die for that +1.
Sixes are still great, ones are annoying but not too bad since you can usually roll another die.
Gives you a chance to have interestingly high off-stats.

I could see that working too. A little less risk/reward, and more reward.

 

[LordEntrails]

I've used that method before. It pretty much guarantees high and low score mixes, because players will want to have a high score or too and will risk only putting one die (which should be the min, don't allow a player to just take 6 on an ability) on something. Just be willing to enforce the role playing of the low stat. i.e. a dumb character is dumb, not just bad at intelligence skills.

 

[Arial Black]

I thought you were going to roll 12d6 first, then assign two of them to each stat however you choose.

This would guarantee a minimum of 8 and maximum of 18, and give quite a lot of flexibility without absolute certainty.

I would prefer to do that than the method you suggest, with potentially wasted rolls.

Still, I think I'm going with a method which gives more naturalistic results, so stats are not min/maxed but still let you have some control: roll 4d6 keep 3, in order, and then you may exchange a single pair of scores. You can make sure you get your highest score in your favoured stat if you want, but quite a lot is out of your direct control, requiring you to think about how to rationalise this set of stats.

 

[Shiroiken]

I've seen similar methods, but this one has a few issues. Many characters only need 1-2 "good" scores, and 1-2 "medium" scores, so I believe that most players would roll 4d6 for 3 ability scores, and take the 8 in the other three (since you gave that as a minimum, with no dice required). It's possible someone may roll 4d6, 3d6, 3d6, and 2d6, but they still get 4 "free" points in the two scores.

If you want to encourage risk/reward, you might want to get rid of the minimum or require a minimum of 1 die per ability.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*