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

[Benjamin Olson]

Most of my DMs who prefer rolling let us roll away from table, which is basically pick your own stats combined with illusionary pretense.

Only if the player has no honor.

I mean, I'm sure some players cheat at it, because some players do cheat at D&D for whatever reasons, but you present it as though everyone is looking to cheat the moment other people aren't watching them, and, no I'm pretty sure that's still a minority.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I only sullied my hands with a character with unrolled stats once, in order to try out Adventurers League. I did not return. Otherwise all my characters were born of fate.

 

[TwoSix]

Only if the player has no honor.

I mean, I'm sure some players cheat at it, because some players do cheat at D&D for whatever reasons, but you present it as though everyone is looking to cheat the moment other people aren't watching them, and, no I'm pretty sure that's still a minority.

The fact that you want to put a normative judgment on it tells me we have very different perspectives on its relative importance.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I used the Dice Point system, combining the thrill of rolling with the control of point buy.

You roll 1d4+1d6+1d8* for each ability score, in order! But before you do that, you get 3 points to spend on your ability scores. Spending 1 point allows you control over the toss of one die (most likely you will make the 1d8 an 8). Spending 2 points allows control over two dice (most likely the d6 and the d8). Spending 3 points allows complete control, and you can have an 18 in that score if you wish.

Basically, 1 point ensures you will not have a negative modifier in that score, while 2 points ensures that you will excel in the ability.

I find 3 total points fits my style (or rather, satisfies my need for control against my desire for thrills), but you can adjust it to any number of points to fit your own style. I've done 5 points before and that results in powerful characters by my standards, equivalent to maybe a 32 point buy.

* The distribution curve for this unconventional method of rolling is slightly "flatter" than the 3d6 curve, but I think it's insignificant.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

4d6 keep the highest 3, assign as you please.

my stats were absolutely moronically high.

 

[plisnithus8]

We group roll 4d6, drop the lowest, where each player rolls (1+ times) then everyone uses the same random results to place in the abilities of their choice.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have a heroic 4d6 system. Roll 4d6, drop lowest, then re-roll all ones until you have no more ones. This makes for a lowest level of 6. Then arrange how you want.

Do you re-roll the ones before the "drop the lowest" or after? just testing this in FantasyGrounds dice chat scripts and it can drop the lowest but will not reroll the ones but it can do the reroll before dropping the lowest.

 

[Clint_L]

The thing with rolling stats is that it's fun as F.

I don't agree with the results. But I think it is by far the best process, in terms of just having a good time while making your character.

 

[AlViking]

The thing with rolling stats is that it's fun as F.

I don't agree with the results. But I think it is by far the best process, in terms of just having a good time while making your character.

Best for you maybe. I create a new character maybe once every year, I hate having a one time gamble dictate what that character is going to be.

I understand that some people like it, but this insistence that it's somehow superior? Nah.

 

[Lanefan]

Best for you maybe. I create a new character maybe once every year, I hate having a one time gamble dictate what that character is going to be.

During low-level play I could be generating a new character every other session.

I understand that some people like it, but this insistence that it's somehow superior? Nah.

The reason I see it as superior is that it better reflects the real-world luck of the draw when it comes to genetics, nature (as opposed to nurture), and inherent abilities (as in some people are just naturally better at almost everything than are others).

IME the process and inherent risks - and associated luck or lack thereof - of adventuring tend to act as a very effective field-leveller.