D&D General How Do You "Roll Up" Ability Scores?

[the Jester]

If I'm not the DM, I bow to their wishes.

My game is 4d6 drop one, arrange to taste; but my preference is 4d6 drop one in order, and when I'm playing a game that allows rolling, I always* leave my stats in order.

*Virtually always; I have swapped things on occasion, but very rarely.

EDIT: Also, as a DM, if you roll a boring array (too low, too high, too average) I may have you discard them and start again. What constitutes boring depends on the circumstances, but this is intended (among other things) to prevent one pc from vastly outclassing another based on stats alone.

 

[aco175]

We just use standard array. It makes all the characters about the same and have not had any problems. Truth be told, I have not checked and character in years and if a player in my group did something else I would not know, unless the PC had all 18s or something.

 

[Iosue]

In 5e, 4d6 drop lowest, placed.

In B/X, 3d6 in order, but if you already have a class picked out, I allow the Prime Requisite to be chosen.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

You are making a new PC for a D&D game.

How do you generate ability scores for the character?---I use the Advanced Dice Point System wherein I have 3 points I can distribute among my ability scores. After I distribute the points I roll the scores in order but for scores that I gave 1 point I roll d4+d6+8, for scores I gave 2 points I roll d4+14, scores with 3 points equal 18. This gives me some control but still allows for randomly generated scores (and it completely eliminates dump scores).

Why do it that way?---I do it that way because I enjoy discovering a character as much as I like building one.

Is it your choice, or the GM's?---It's my choice, and when I'm the Dungeon Master it's the GM's choice.

If you are the GM, how do you require players "roll up" scores?---I give them a choice: They can roll up their scores, then if they don't like the scores they rolled up they can take the standard array and place them as they wish. I remind them that you can't have a base score higher than 15 with the standard array method (or the point-buy method for that matter).

Why?---I want to tempt players to discover a character rather than always build one.

In either case, does it change based on campaign or edition, or does your table(s) do it the same way no matter what?---I always like tempting them.

 

[cbwjm]

4d6k3 place anywhere from 2e to 5e.

BECMI/OSE etc, 3d6 in order but can spend some stat points to boost others.

In both cases it's a DM decision, I always ask the DM how stats are rolled if I'm joining a game as a player. So far it's been as above but I'd use point buy or standard array if a DM asked for it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Characters are rarely balanced IME regardless of ability scores. Choices of race, class, subclass, etc. as well as how you play your PC and how lucky you roll are all larger factors IMO.

Its a bigger issue in the WotC editions, but I agree anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Um, yes they are. They contribute to basically all of your rolls.


Will it work "fine" for the player whose chracter is behind? Maybe, but that is pretty subjective.

My point was that it just seems weird to me to intentionally create such intraparty imbalance when you don't have to. Why don't randomise everyone's starting level while you're it?

And yet, its been the primary method in the book for nearly 50 years.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Yeah, yeah, friendly smendly...

Most of us really are playing with friends instead of people we fully intend to turn into social pariahs and targets for our verbal abuse if they aren't happy losing on a frankly unnecessary gamble they have to live with potentially for the length of a campaign or have a different approach to playability than we do.

 

[ezo]

Most of us really are playing with friends instead of people we fully intend to turn into social pariahs and targets for our verbal abuse if they aren't happy losing on a frankly unnecessary gamble they have to live with potentially for the length of a campaign or have a different approach to playability than we do.

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen, ya know.

 

[billd91]

Right. So what do you do when a player rolls a -1 total, and another player rolls a +3 total, then you let the first player roll again, and they get a +7 total. The other player gets stuck with the +3, but the one who rolled BADLY gets a much more powerful character, right?

Essentially, you can get rewarded for rolling terribly and "punished" for rolling average. Seems like the definition of "unfair" to me.

There’s really no reward for unlucky rolls. You might get a Mulligan, but it’s just a reroll under the same parameters as the player who had average rolls. That isn’t really a reward. And if their net bonuses are greater than +3 after the reroll because they got really lucky, so what? The game tolerates variation in PCs.