Rerolling stats...cause they're too darn good!

[Kae'Yoss]

Stop quarrelling, girls, you're both pretty

I have to agree with several people here: Rolling dice, but rerolling until you get what you want and what is not to high, is just an awfully time-consuming way of using point buy. It's like someone wants to use point buy, but doesn't want to admit he's using it: You're rolling dice. If they are too low, you roll again. If they are too high, you roll again, too. If they are within a certain range (total bonuses or PB cost, whatever), you keep them. Why even bother? Unless you really like to roll d6, you can save your time by using point buy. Hell, even if you do like to roll d6, use PB and play a wizard or rogue. If you want some variation in the total points the character has, roll 1d4 or 1d6, or just use a couple of points less than you get.


But since everyone seems to use the 25d6 Method to test a character, I'm going to do that, too

Str 3d6:6,1,3 = 10
Dex 5d6:6,4,6,1,3 = 16
Con 4d6:5,3,2,1 = 10
Int 5d6: 4,2,2,2,1 = 8
Wis 3d6:5,1,4 = 10
Cha 5d6: 6,5,2,2,3 = 14

Total Bonus: +4, PB Cost: 22, Conclusion: Wouldn't have fun playing it. I can't Imagine playing a dumb rogue. Rogues have to be smart to survive in the streets. So I'd reroll.....

 

[Roman]

Yeah, I have rerolled stats that were 'too high' before. The only time I did so, however, was in situations where we were asked to create the character at home and bring it to the game. I occassionally rolled very well and was concerned that it might affect trust issues, so I either rerolled to get lower stats, or sometimes just plainly reduced the stats. How ironic that I felt I had to 'cheat' in order not to break trust.

 

[Altalazar]

Ok, I decided I would play:

Str 15
Dex 15
Con 15
Int 18
Wis 16
Cha 16

I used the same dice distribution as the original poster. Btw, the original poster's scores make for 57 points - grossly powerful. Mine was better, though, at 60 points.

I do 32 point buys for my games. Many DMs who want basically weak characters do even less.

Rolling seems to me to result in grossly unbalanced parties at worst, or at best, a result that could have been achieved with a point buy (where everyone ends up with a similar point-value worth of stats).

I'm curious what the stats are for the other characters in this party.

 

[diaglo]

Str 3d6:6,1,3 = 10
Dex 5d6:6,4,6,1,3 = 16
Con 4d6:5,3,2,1 = 10
Int 5d6: 4,2,2,2,1 = 8
Wis 3d6:5,1,4 = 10
Cha 5d6: 6,5,2,2,3 = 14

okay using these dice i got:

Str: 10
Dex: 18
Con: 14
Int: 17
Wis: 12
Cha: 18

total pt buy = 57
total bonus/penalty = +14

and this is before racial modifiers.

 

[Treebore]

If one character is outshining another character because of stats then i would suspect something else is the real problem. Immature envy, maybe? if you have a good "spread" of the character classes the only time stats "might" make one character outshine another is when they are of the same base class type, IE fighter or spellcaster.

Any other time one character outshines the others is because that player usually outshines everyone else. Hopefully it is because they are that charismatic and not because they are that much of an a**h*le.

Even if it is because one fighter has a higher strength or con or whatever, than the other; if a player is "bothered" by that they need to get over their childhood jealousy issues and learn how to play with others.

I do not have this problem in my games anyway. I solved it by developing a house rule for increasing stats within the game itself during the down times. I didn't develop this house rule to address "stat envy" issues. I developed it because I didn't like how static stats are. People can become smarter, stronger, wiser, etc... in real life. The game itself has lots of ways to become dummer, weaker, and far more foolish. But the game only has you be able to restore yourself to your previous self. 1 stat point to put where ever you want to every 4 levels didn't cut it for me.

So, in a campaign, the longer you play, the more even the playing field, stat wise, becomes. Plus when everyone starts getting a bunch of high stats the monsters are tough enough it doesn't matter like it otherwise would. Plus the monsters/NPC's always have the same resources to increase their stats. So I can adjust as i need to in order to keep it challenging. Which I can do anyway, but it gives me one more "legitimate" way to justify tougher monsters/NPC's.


As for the "trust" issues a couple of you have mentioned. I have eliminated that because I let my players create their characters however they want. Even just write in whatever stats they want, if that is what they want to do. I do not care what their stats are as long as it is within racial and level limits.

This way the players get whatever it is they want out of the game and I don't have to worry about cheating in character creation. At the table we all roll in the middle of the table and have to let the dice lay there for others to see. So I have no cheating within my games. Not even on treasure, since it is so well recorded.

Plus, if a character is outshined by another it is because of the choices made by the player of said character. So if they want to be "bothered" by the results of their choices it is their problem. They need to learn to "roll with it" and go on. They will have the ability to rectify their problem sooner or later.

So this should give some of you an idea why I find the initial posters concern over having such good stats a bit sad. This is a game that we supposedly play to have fun. Micro managing and dictating stats is not having fun, it is just another way to exert control, to force players to conform to the DM's idea of how the game should be played.

High stats are not a problem or a balance issue, as long as they are within racial limits. If it is a problem in a game you play in then the DM needs to learn how to be a better DM. High stats are not a bad thing or against the rules when legitimately earned. To suggest otherwise is just, silly.

 

[D+1]

So, let me get this straight...
you roll a good set of stats, using the GM's personal method, in full view of everyone, and you don't want to use them 'cos they're too good?

Are you insane?

Not as such. In all sincerity it has been my experience that characters with REALLY superior stats to other PC's simply fail to be interesting. Players look at their stats and all thoughts of character concept vanish. They play their STATS and not their race, class, or character personality and the character simply doesn't gel. Other players isolate the PC because of his shining absence of personality (or overbearing personality based SOLELY on his stats) and the player with the high-stat character ends up getting a LOT less enjoyment out of the character than he expected adding disappointment to the list of woes.

It doesn't always happen, nor to the same degree when it does, but it is a verifiable phenomenon.

 

[Guilt Puppy]

Actually Bendris, the whole thing is relevant. We have a guy posting because he feels guilty about rolling exceptionally good stats. then a bunch of you tell him how he should feel guilty.

...

Well I tell him good for you! Go kick some butt and take as many names as you can! Have fun! Have a blast! Enjoy feeling like you are a kick butt adventurer!

Guilt? Why? Makes no sense to me.

I don't think anyone's said he should feel guilty (don't get me wrong, I wholly support guilt in all its permutations) -- most of the posts in support of rerolling for lower stats are along the lines of "that doesn't sound like it'll be a very fun character to play," which is (I think) what the original poster was worried about.

The idea is, it's one thing to feel like a "kick butt adventurer," it's another thing to feel like a kick butt set of stats, for some people at least. The way I game, a lot of the enjoyment I get is from having a sense of risk, of having a character with weaknesses, and perservering through. There are other ways to play the game, of course, and there's no one way that's "better" or "right." Your bit about "I'm not obliged to follow some DMs rules, I can simply walk" goes without saying -- finding a group that fits your style of play is always important. (Of course, it helps to be willing to compromise a little.)

Based on the fact that the poster even came here with this question suggests to me that his way of playing the game isn't compatible with this set of stats. If that's the case, he should reroll. Even if he being a statmonster doesn't ruin the game for him, if he consistently overshadows the other players it might spoil the game a bit for them, and it's hard to enjoy a game that nobody else is enjoying.

As far as rolling methods, I personally prefer the standard 4d6 drop method, as I (and the players I game with, usually) quite enjoy the anticipation that goes into rolling up a character, and likewise I (and my players) are generally willing to accept the statistical imbalances which can end up occurring. If a game is a bit more slashy, I'll usually tack a "roll a seventh stat if none of the first six are above 16, and replace your lowest" caveat, just to help avoid characters that are so weak they end up becoming stressfully unheroic in play.

Also, I've gotta try this rolling method. Going for a Wizard:

Str (3) 2 6 1 - 9
Dex (4) 2 6 5 6 - 17
Con (3) 3 4 5 - 12
Int (8) 5 4 4 4 3 2 3 2 - 13
Wis (4) 4 5 2 5 - 14
Cha (3) 6 3 3 - 12

Which would actually be an interesting set of stats to play with, and not at all what I had in mind (clearly) in allocating the dice rolls. There's something that feels a bit more natural about this method, yet it still allows you to distribute stats in a way that at least involves you in a process. I would only use this method in a game where the players had vague ideas of what sort of character they wanted to play going into it ("Wizard," for instance... if I think Wizard and then run into these stats, suddenly I've got this very different sort of Wizard presented to me -- perhaps after three levels of Wizard I'll go monk, or maybe I'm just a rather average magician at any given level, compensating for my lack of magical prowess with a bit of vesatility)... If you have any real character concept going into it, though (as it sounds like the original poster did), you're bound to run into trouble.

 

[Treebore]

Maybe my point of view, with regards to stats, stems from the fact that you can have all 18's and I assure you that I will still make you feel "weak". you will still sweat bullets, you will still have the crap beat out of you. You will still feel challenged. I don't need you to play a low stat character to make it easier for me to make you feel challenged, your character will probably die anyway, just like most adventurers do.

Since high stats don't effect my ability to challenge players and their characters I can only assume that is why I don't sweat how characters are created, as long as the "how" is honestly told to me. Honest rolls to hit and save and accomplish tasks are what is really important. No matter how good your stats you will roll enough 1's at the wrong time, and I will roll enough crit's at the right time, to make you sweat.

 

[Altalazar]

Maybe my point of view, with regards to stats, stems from the fact that you can have all 18's and I assure you that I will still make you feel "weak". you will still sweat bullets, you will still have the crap beat out of you. You will still feel challenged. I don't need you to play a low stat character to make it easier for me to make you feel challenged, your character will probably die anyway, just like most adventurers do.

Since high stats don't effect my ability to challenge players and their characters I can only assume that is why I don't sweat how characters are created, as long as the "how" is honestly told to me. Honest rolls to hit and save and accomplish tasks are what is really important. No matter how good your stats you will roll enough 1's at the wrong time, and I will roll enough crit's at the right time, to make you sweat.

The problem isn't high or low stats. The problem is party balance.

All 18s is a problem when that 96 point character is in a party with another character who is a 22 point character. Then anything you do to make that 96 point character sweat bullets will have killed the 22 point character 29 times over. On the other hand, if you want the 22 pointer to survive, then the 96 pointer will be wiping the floor with your "challenges".

Point buy makes everyone in the party on an equal footing. Sure, you could challenge someone with all 18s, but unless EVERYONE has all 18s, then you'll find your challenges either are too easy for half the party or too hard and kill half the party.

 

[Treebore]

I guess another factor for me, in case you haven't noticed, is i am not here to please everyone all of the time. If a player is having a problem because he didn't get the same blue bike with the bell, whistle, fog horn, and cell phone holder as Jeremy, I don't care. He can either grow up enough to realize his turn will come, eventually, or he can go home and cry to his mother.

On top of that, I have a very generous stat generation system, so no one is going to be much more superior to anyone else, unless they want to have a stat below a 9. Then it is entirely their choice and their problem. Most stats for characters in my game are in the 13 to 15 range. No huge difference will happen. If someone wants to be envious of 2 or 3 bonus points, they are probably someone I don't want playing in my game anyway. Which has been the case for me so far.