D&D General On Powerful Classes, 1e, and why the Original Gygaxian Gatekeeping Failed

[Lanefan]

Running Village of Hommlet in 1e, I noticed that Gygax's NPCs have pretty incredible stats, eg (from my blog, but I think unchanged) Fulnok of Ferd (Thief) ST 8 IN 14 WI 10 DE 18 (+3 -4) CO 15 (+1) CH 13 , Elmo the Ranger ST 18/43 (+1, +3) IN 15 WI 16 (+2) DE 16 (+1/-2) CO 17 (+3) CH 11. These are normal PC-equivalent NPCs and I got a pretty strong impression this is what Gygax expected PCs to look like.

I was glancing at the pre-gens in (either U1 or U2, I forget which right now) and noticed that out of 20 characters there were maybe two 18's among the lot of 'em, and not many 17s. Other than no-one having anything lower than a 7 anywhere (or if there was one I missed it) those characters could quite legitimately have been rolled using [4d6x1, rearrange to suit].

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I was glancing at the pre-gens in (either U1 or U2, I forget which right now) and noticed that out of 20 characters there were maybe two 18's among the lot of 'em, and not many 17s. Other than no-one having anything lower than a 7 anywhere (or if there was one I missed it) those characters could quite legitimately have been rolled using [4d6x1, rearrange to suit].

I'm pretty sure they're statistically anomalous, looking at U2. I mean, all four Fighters have STR 17 or 16, all but one has a DEX of at least 15, and a CON of at least 14. Oh I see Tenbar as well but he has 17 STR and 18 CON (he is a Dwarf so two 17s) and only 12 DEX.

The vast majority of the characters have 17 or 16 in their primary stat, with a few on 15 and a couple of 18s. Often their secondary stats are decent.

I haven't analyzed the numbers, but as you've already pointed out, there's no-one with less than a 7 and the sheer number of 17s in primary stats (most of them being stats you couldn't easy get bonuses to in 1E - STR/INT/WIS) is pretty high, and having rolled countless 4d6DtL statlines in my day, this looks to me like they rolled these up but booted any statline which didn't have at least 1 16 in it, or had any values under 7. I think it's plausible in the same sense that a player who rolls six sets of 4d6DtL stats and then picks the best of them has "plausible" stats for his PC lol.

You say there aren't many 17s - glancing at it and trying not to be confused by the HP having similar values I counted 11 17s and 2 18. That seems unlikely on 20 4d6DtL characters.

 

[Zardnaar]

I've often wondered what Gygaxs stats for Mordenkainen looked like.

Problem with default array in 5E is intelligence dump stat and it punishes some classes that are MAD eg Valor Bards.

5E can't balance the archetypes with each other let alone between classes so 1E different xp for the glasses doesn't look as bad lol.

B/X got the xp tables right though. AD&D was a bit funky eg Druid xp table and mid-level wizards.

I think each player rolling and they pick from the various rolled stats or the default array. Means you're guaranteed to get something viable and no one feels left out if they roll crap.

Bit of variety in the scores and nothing bad. No one feels left out either. If everyone rolls crap default array.

 

[Voadam]

The base methods for 1e wasn't 3d6 as alluded to in the OP, it was the now main stream 4d6k1 arranged to suit
"Method I: All scores are recorded and arranged in the order the player desires. 4d6 are rolled, and the lowest die (or one of the lower) is discarded." Although the other methods were just as valid, method 1 took rank just cos it was first!
In addition Gygax had this advice for PCs "Furthermore, it is usually essential to the character's survival to be exceptional (with a rating of 15 or above) in no fewer than two ability characteristics. " And that was in the PHB no less, so player's could reasonably ask for re rolls until they got that!

The default 1e stat generation is a bit of a nuanced question.

The PH said the "The referee has several methods of how this random number generation should be accomplished suggested to him or her in the DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE. The Dungeon Master will inform you as to which method you may use to determine your character’s abilities." The Dungeon Master's Guide provided options for how to generate stats and the methods provided do not include 3d6 in order.

However the DMG did not come out until a year after the Player's Handbook. So there was a year of official AD&D characters with no official stat generation method.

The PH also said "The range of these abilities is between 3 and 18. The premise of the game is that each player character is above average — at least in some respects — and has superior potential. Furthermore, it is usually essential to the character’s survival to be exceptional (with a rating of 15 or above) in no fewer than two ability characteristics. Each ability score is determined by random number generation."

Roll 3d6 in order and reroll until you get at least two 15s is a reasonable inference from the information solely in the PH. Roll 3d6 in order and if necessary bump up stats to meet the two 15s would also be a reasonable inference and would avoid rerolling.

Particularly when the instructions from OD&D were "Prior to the character selection by players it is necessary for the referee to roll three six-sided dice in order to rate each as to various abilities, and thus aid them in selecting a role."

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I really liked your post, but I'm not sure this broke that many games. I found exactly 0 DMs that would allow me to use that method. 4d6-L was pretty universal in my experience. Even after the UA was released.

I think that the amount that it was used probably varied depending on the area you were at - it's hard to generalize. I didn't use them because I thought it broke the game (but I say that about pretty much everything in UA).

That said, I think it's pretty good evidence that Gygax was throwing in the towel in terms of those ability-score restrictions.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

The default 1e stat generation is a bit of a nuanced question.

That's exactly correct. If you were coming from OD&D and transitioning to AD&D, you likely used the 3d6 as a default and were just adapting the new rules.

The four methods of rolling in the DMG (which is why the UA method is, of course, Method V) are listed as alternatives to the assumed baseline of 3d6, in order.

After discussing how 3d6 can create marginal characters that might discourage new players, the DMG says "Four alternatives are offered for player characters:" (emphasis mine).

To put it more bluntly- AD&D is a codification and expansion of the OD&D rules (despite whatever certain lawsuits might have alleged). 3d6, in order, is the default, and acknowledged as such. The methods proffered in the DMG are alternatives to the default.

Whether it's because it was listed first, or because it's by far the easiest to implement, 4d6k1 became the alternative that most people were familiar with. Perhaps because rolling twelve characters and selecting the one you want sound annoying (Method IV).

 

[Voadam]

I really liked your post, but I'm not sure this broke that many games. I found exactly 0 DMs that would allow me to use that method. 4d6-L was pretty universal in my experience. Even after the UA was released.

I allowed it and players in my campaign used it. It was a good way to bypass that gatekeeping you out of the good stuff (stats and classes) that 1e had. I still ended up with a party including two drow and two Grugach in my long term campaign from then though.

 

[Maxperson]

I think that the amount that it was used probably varied depending on the area you were at - it's hard to generalize. I didn't use them because I thought it broke the game (but I say that about pretty much everything in UA).

That said, I think it's pretty good evidence that Gygax was throwing in the towel in terms of those ability-score restrictions.

I don't think he was really throwing in the towel. If you look at the PCs his players had, there were lots of 18s, 17s, 16s, etc. It was pretty clear that he wasn't practicing what the DMG preached for a long time prior to the UA coming out. Combine that with the UA being optional rules and I think it wasn't so much Gygax throwing in the towel, but rather he was giving DMs the option to play the game differently.

 

[Alzrius]

If you look at the PCs his players had, there were lots of 18s, 17s, 16s, etc.

Did we ever see stats for the PCs in Gary's campaign? I ask because the only major source that I'm aware of is The Rogue's Gallery (affiliate link), and to quote from the product history on the sales page:

Of course, these character write-ups aren't entirely trustworthy. Gary Gygax later said that at least his character stats were "quite fallacious" because he wasn't willing to give information on characters that he was still playing to Brian Blume. It's one last insight into how different things were in those early days of roleplaying, when characters might actually be secret.

 

[Maxperson]

Did we ever see stats for the PCs in Gary's campaign? I ask because the only major source that I'm aware of is The Rogue's Gallery (affiliate link), and to quote from the product history on the sales page:

Dunno. I'm not sure where the stats I saw came from. Maybe @Rob Kuntz can shed some light on the stats of PCs in Gary's games. Not specific values, but whether they were generally higher than the DMG methods would produce, or whether they used the DMG methods.