D&D General here's how to stop jealousy in between lucky players and unlucky ones

[Seramus]

To have the same numbers, even if they are put in different spots, thus necessarily means "these characters have exactly the same personality," which is a huge no-no for most people.

As someone who has used "Choose Any Set" for many years across multiple tables and groups of people, I'm happy to report this has never happened a single time. Not once! The general response is usually pretty positive.

The issue with someone rolling super-hero stats is real though. I've had some decent milage using bounded totals, like 70-85.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Rolling stat arrays is a way to introduce elements of variance between games without forcing variance between players. I take that you don't like it, but I do. It's not different from varying between 27, 30, or 32 point-buy. Obviously, the more players you have, the more likely a high array will turn out. But that high array would turn out anyway for one player, and the more players you have, the more likely you end with a strong variance between the highest and weakest series. I'm much happier with an equally strong party than with one strong and one weak character in an average party. I find it easier to DM at any case

In the end, it's just another tool in the shed. Your group finds point-buy fair-but-dull? Your group finds individual rolling exciting-but-unfair? Then rolling for stat arrays is the way to go. If your group is fine with individual rolls or point-buy, then don't use rolled stat arrays. That should go without saying...

It has little to do with my distaste (though I do have that distaste, and make no secret thereof.) It is that a very significant chunk, perhaps the majority, of folks asking after rolling methods ultimately are trying to meet contradictory desires. Either of those desires alone would be fine. It is only because they are contradictory that there is a problem, and the never-ending search for solutions.

As someone who has used "Choose Any Set" for many years across multiple tables and groups of people, I'm happy to report this has never happened a single time. Not once! The general response is usually pretty positive.

The issue with someone rolling super-hero stats is real though. I've had some decent milage using bounded totals, like 70-85.

Oh, certainly. That said, from what I have heard of at least some folks' groups on here, even the bounded total thing would lead almost inevitably to abuse. Or, at least, that's what some folks have said. At those tables, if you give anyone even the tiniest bit of "use your own discretion, please respect the spirit of the game" room, they will rush to exploit it so hard and so fast your head would spin.

 

[Laurefindel]

It has little to do with my distaste (though I do have that distaste, and make no secret thereof.) It is that a very significant chunk, perhaps the majority, of folks asking after rolling methods ultimately are trying to meet contradictory desires. Either of those desires alone would be fine. It is only because they are contradictory that there is a problem, and the never-ending search for solutions.

Fair enough.

However, I think that most problems, perceived or otherwise, ultimately stem from contradictory desires, and the solutions have been in constant evolution since the earliest days of RPG. In D&D alone, the evolution of Vancian magic throughout the editions is a perfect example of a search to strike balance between contradictory desires.

 

[CleverNickName]

This basically means roll once for each player pick whatever stays you want.

I've stopped rolling due to 5E design. Higher stats are equivalent to several feats.

Might let a monk roll there stats I liked my one but had higher stats and monks kinda need that vs every other class.

I came to the same conclusion, and here's how I handled it.

When I kicked off this campaign, everyone rolled their stats using the 4d6 method. Then they added up all of their ability score modifiers.

• If the total of their modifiers was +4 or less, they could reroll them or keep them and start with a free feat or ASI at 1st level.
• If the total of their modifiers was +5 to +8, they had to keep what they rolled.
• If the total of their modifiers was +9 or more, they could reroll them or keep them and forfeit their 4th Level feat or ASI.

Most players landed around +5 or +6, so this whole exercise was moot. One player rolled a whopping +10, but wasn't willing to forfeit their feat at 4th level and chose to reroll.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Most players landed around +5 or +6, so this whole exercise was moot. One player rolled a whopping +10, but wasn't willing to forfeit their feat at 4th level and chose to reroll.

Surprising. Unless that +10 was super spread out (e.g. 15, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12), I would absolutely exchange an ASI for that. Even though I love feats and absolutely hate the fact that WotC forces players to choose between them and boring push-numbers-up.

 

[CleverNickName]

Surprising. Unless that +10 was super spread out (e.g. 15, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12), I would absolutely exchange an ASI for that. Even though I love feats and absolutely hate the fact that WotC forces players to choose between them and boring push-numbers-up.

IIRC, they were all +1 and +2 adjustments, and nearly all of them were even numbers....something like your example, but I can't say for sure because they got tossed out. I remember the player bemoaning that selecting "Human" wasn't going to help them much.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

IIRC, they were all +1 and +2 adjustments, and nearly all of them were even numbers....something like your example, but I can't say for sure because they got tossed out. I remember the player bemoaning that selecting "Human" wasn't going to help them much.

Ah, then it's fairly understandable. Had it been something like 18, 16, 14, 10, 10, 8, I'd jump at the chance, but if it's super flat that's pretty disappointing, yeah.

 

[OsirisDawnEU]

To reduce jealousy maybe give one 18, one 16 and roll the rest randomly. makes sure your main stats are covered, but gives some variance where it doesnt hurt (that much).
Just my 2c.

 

[haakon1]

Some old school choices:

• Let them reroll once, but they have to take the second set.
• Let them reroll only if a character would be “4-F”, as in they’d fail a draft physical. Any stat below X allows a reroll, but the first set with no terrible stats is it. And of course, they can choose to play a “4-F” set if desired.
• Let them reroll X times (someone said 3) and keep whichever set they want.

 

[haakon1]

Is it common to try to avoid player differences in stats?

I sure don’t care, but I’m not interested in 2024 edition, so my opinions are irrelevant.