Rolling Abilities

[Runestar]

We prefer rolling, and friends refuse to use point buy (which I don't like anyways) so it's all good.

For some reason, find rolling more fun

Sanjay

When you get good stats.

 

[Marasmusine]

I like random rolling, and I'm disappointed if I don't get one stat under 10, which I can then roleplay. Fighter with a gimp leg, an autistic wizard, an oblivious cleric, etc.

 

[Foxen]

Our gaming group has always rolled for attributes...and we often get the range. This time around, I actually wished and totally regreted not point-buying (which was an option). While most players got decent rolls...I ended up with...

14
14
14
11
10
and 7 (err)

After a +2 stat boost from being human, I was rather hard pressed there after. Only one other player got a total +4 bonus, but he at least started with one 16 (before racial bonuses).

Rolling does make the game more interesting, and our GM, as well as players, don't totally mind the randomness and "unbalancedness" of the characters. After all, it's a "roleplaying" game, where character personality and interaction makes all the difference (except in 4e where it's SO combat oriented...err).

Heh.

Fox

 

[AverageTable]

Tradition and/or to forestall grognard rage.

This is the answer to the original question.

In fact, rolling was only the default method in 3rd Edition for the same reason. That is, they worried that they would alienate the 2nd Edition fanbase too much by making point-buy the default method, so they left the "sacred cow" of rolling as the standard and made point-buy an official option.

With 4th Edition they now figure that most people are accustomed enough to the notion of point-buy that there won't be the same culture-shock regarding it; so point-buy, or even a default array of equal value to the point-buy, are now the usual methods. Rolling, however, is still included as an official option to, again, appease the fanbase. It's clear from the design of the entire game as well as the priority of the point-buy and standard array methods in the book that you aren't really intended to use that outdated rolling method; but by putting it in print they can avoid the outcries that would result from removing it altogether.

 

[AverageTable]

It's not stated to be optional. It's stated to be "Method 3."

True; but the intent of the writers is clear. When they list, "Method 1", Method 2", etcetera, they don't mean to say, "Each individual player is free to choose as he wishes which of the following methods to use."

What they mean, obviously, is, "Select ONE of the following methods by which to generate ability scores for ALL PCs in the game."

So if the DM decides that point-buy will be used for his game then "Method 3" becomes irrelevant.

 

[erik_the_guy]

I know a lot of you seem to think that low rolls make for good roleplaying characters, but I think that every character should have AT LEAST a 16 and 14 for their primary and secondary stats. I mean you can have your 5s and 7s and have tons of fun, but you need one or two higher stats to make yourself at least useful in combat.

I find rolling often produces characters with very high or very low stats. Very low stats screw the player over, and very high stats make the rest of the party angry. If rolling gives you slightly higher or lower than average stats, I can see that as being fun. This is where the value in rolling is, if its fun it should be part of the game.

I'm going to work on a method that incorporates rolling and point buy. It will be less likely to produce super characters or crap characters than rolling. It will probably also be too complicated for 4e books.

 

[Mort_Q]

... I'm disappointed if I don't get one stat under 10, which I can then roleplay. Fighter with a gimp leg, an autistic wizard, an oblivious cleric, etc.

You can do that with point buy.

 

[Nifft]

Rolling is fun when PCs are disposable.

4e makes it easier to make new PCs than 3e did, but many players don't consider their PCs disposable any more.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Togetic]

Hmm... has anyone statistically compared rolling to point buy to see if the average stat bonus is really lower, or in the +4 to +8 space.

I just did a quick analysis of 4d6 drop the lowest. The average stat is 12.25, which means that you end up with a +6 to +7 character, on the whole.

 

[MrGrenadine]

In defense of rolling dice

At the risk of having a "grognard" label thrown at me, (tied to a heavy brick), I would say that rolling dice is always better, because random is better.

And why is random better? Because its a game, and more specifically to me, its an improvisational storytelling game, and way more fun to roll the dice, and hope for good rolls, and deal with bad rolls, and improvise the story as the successes and failures rack up.

So, I'm in favor of rolling attributes.
And rolling hp.
And rolling to hit.
And rolling damage.
And rolling skill checks, (take 10--bah!).

Automatic results might make for mathematically perfect balance between all characters and monsters, (boring!), and make for faster sessions, (why are we in a hurry?), but I don't like it. Let the game get a little swingy, and roleplay around the swings.

So...hand me the dice!

MrG