Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Barolo" data-source="post: 7209693" data-attributes="member: 61932">All the above. If it is really your preference to roll stats, as you have stated, you don't really need to give it up. See, having everybody gather together for a session zero to roll stats and create characters is part of the social contract of my gaming table, and always worked out just fine. One important thing though, is to know your players' preferences. If they all are really on board on the idea of rolling stats, they should not oppose to rolling stats in front of the whole table.I would add it is also important to understand your players' preferences and expectations. People who like rolling stats are usually okay about not planning a concept in advance, or are open to playing whatever goes according to stats rolled. I do that, as I was used on the earlier editions to have my options restricted by all sorts racial and class restrictions (which frankly, never bothered me) and I prefer rolling stats. On the other hand,  [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] already did a good resume about why people do not like rolling stats, and if your players are not into the randomness that follows, why push them into that?The difference *may* be significant, but this is not guaranteed. For folks like me, who like rolling stats, there are workarounds for bad stats, for example playing support characters. Just remember, there are people, like me, who enjoys the randomness, and are okay with building their PCs according to whichever luck brought.There is, of course, the other side of the coin, which is when somebody rolls incredibly high stats, as opposed to incredibly low. This is just anecdotal, but in my table, it is common that when it happens, people feel free to go for unconventional builds (melee evoker who likes to sculpt spells around herself, high DEX and CON to be able to frontline, and warcaster for concentration and to be more sticky with cantrip powered AoO) or more roleplay-driven decisions for stat positioning where stats will be placed less optimally (i.e. a barbarian aspiring to be a leader of men, with higher CHA and INT than CON), or MAD classes and subclasses.It is also worth noting that around here people most often check out what everybody else is playing, so they can fill any gaps for the group. This alone usually avoids stat envy, as usually nobody is competing directly for the same spotlight. Of course, let's not be naive, sometimes a PC casting a shadow on another happens, but in my experience this is rare enough not to bother us. Well, here is the thing: for folks that like rolled stats, the resulting differences might not be as drastic as what you are painting, mostly due to different character build methods, as I pointed before. Moreover, two PCs might have very different point total but still be mostly balanced, due to having similar scores on their primary and secondary stats. Finally, when rolling stats, it is not guaranteed that somebody will end up significantly better than somebody else, as your presented method for rolling levels suggests. Even if I would agree with your assertion that the resulting differences are as drastic as to give some player up to 3 levels difference from other, a character creation method to mimic that should look more like a bell curve, where most PCs will fall in the middle and not present significant differences from each other.Even though I like the traditional 4d6k3 method, I really enjoyed this option, and now I want to try it in my next campaign. Kudos for you!</blockquote>

Verification