D&D General How Did You Generate Your Most Recent Character's Stats?

[payn]

Folks talk about numerical ranges, bounded accuracy, balance, and probability quite a bit, but I don't think the rules for D&D were ever meant to be that rigid. Certainly not as rigid as we often make them, anyway. I think that the game devs assumed that the rules for character creation would be treated like any other rule of the game, and the DM would adjust them to fit--maybe because of the math, maybe because of the vibes.

It’s interesting to parse the philosophies of modern D&D. 3E rolled with rolling because you could pat bad stats with magic and items. In theory, anyways. 4E went the other way with a more rigid SAD system. 5E was a rebound with bounded accuracy to give some wiggle room on rolling again.

I know I mentioned not rolling in WOTC D&D era, but 5E is the one I’d feel best about.

 

[AlViking]

Who said anything about “one guy always hiding in the back”? IME, that “one guy” is not the guy with the lowest stats or fewest hp. That’s an entirely different problem of failing to recognize this is a collaborative game where the PCs work together to achieve shared goals. At least that’s true at our table.

I was responding to the post talking about the group carrying someone they considered dead weight. That person in games I've played? They've been the ones hiding in the back doing everything they can to avoid damage and were rarely an effective member of the team.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I was responding to the post talking about the group carrying someone they considered dead weight. That person in games I've played? They've been the ones hiding in the back doing everything they can to avoid damage and were rarely an effective member of the team.

And so, is that behavior the fault of the stats? Or is that really the fault of the player refusing to engage with the fiction and pointing at the stats as the reason for "it's what my character would do"?

ETA: Playing with such a player, it would be wise to go with standard array or point buy. Of course, it's entirely possible they'd still hide in the back when faced with low hit points.

 

[Lanefan]

If disparity in stats is going to be a major concern, and you actually care about having that player in the game? Probably, yeah. Imho, anyway.

At cost of losing the player who only wants to roll?

Why does the point-buy-only player get priority over the roll-only player here, is my question?

 

[Clint_L]

What my students had a problem with was the obvious inequity built into the rules. It was like starting a soccer game where some players might, randomly, only get to wear one shoe. Yes, you can argue it's fair in that everyone has the same chance of being advantaged/disadvantaged...but how does that make it a better game once you're actually playing it?

 

[Lanefan]

Sorry I don’t consider ‘well you MIGHT get better character stats next time’ to be adequate compensation for having bad stats right now for this adventure.

I'm more "what goes around, comes around" when it comes to this.

And, IME (even including 3e) I've had great stats on characters who didn't get out of their third session and relatively awful stats on characters who lasted for years.

Further, if a character just isn't working - be it due to stats or some other reason - nothing ever stops you (I hope!) from either having it go out with a whimper and simply retire from adventuring or having it bravely throw its hit-point-laden self at the enemy in hopes of going out in a blaze of glory.

 

[Lanefan]

So maybe a strong reason many prefer rolling is that they get higher scores, and a little disparity is worth it. Especially since you can bury low scores in unimportant attributes.

Perhaps, but if generally higher scores are desired the DM can always set the point-buy value higher.

 

[Lanefan]

True. If there's one guy always hiding in the back, doing everything they can to never take damage while also rarely being an effective part of the team? At best it can be disappointing.

And IME that guy hiding in the back being ineffective ain't always the one with the bad stats. Quite the opposite, in fact: bad-stats guy is often the one front and centre trying to prove himself.

 

[Minigiant]

You get a 15
You get a 8

You get 5d6 points to buy the rest.

 

[Lanefan]

It’s interesting to parse the philosophies of modern D&D. 3E rolled with rolling because you could pat bad stats with magic and items. In theory, anyways. 4E went the other way with a more rigid SAD system. 5E was a rebound with bounded accuracy to give some wiggle room on rolling again.

I know I mentioned not rolling in WOTC D&D era, but 5E is the one I’d feel best about.

They still kept linear bonuses for 5e, though, which is an inexplicable design choice when using a bell-curve generation method.