Rolling for stats

[LostSoul]

Here's an idea that just occurred to me:

You start off with one 16, then roll 4d6 (drop the lowest) for the other 5 stats, place as desired.

Thoughts?

 

[Garris]

Here's an idea that just occurred to me:

You start off with one 16, then roll 4d6 (drop the lowest) for the other 5 stats, place as desired.

Thoughts?

Eh. Personally I prefer random roll variants that necessarily produce point-buy legal arrays.

This is, however, a solid alternative to 6x4D6 in that it guarantees a minimum of competence in a primary attack stat.

 

[Infiniti2000]

How about place the 16 where you want it, then roll 3d6 in order?

 

[eriktheguy]

How about place the 16 where you want it, then roll 3d6 in order?

So I'm guessing you've played since at least 2nd edition?

My beef with rolling has always been the random. In the earliest editions, ability scores barely effected combat. For example, in 2nd edition a strength of 16 gave no melee hit bonus and a +1 damage bonus. Other ability scores were similar. Wizards spells were the same regardless of intelligence score. Combat was essentially determined by level and class. Ability scores mainly effected skill checks and other outside-of-combat things.

Rolling in present edition means thats some characters will necessarily be more powerful than others. If you roll well in one fight your character outshines the party in that one fight. If you roll well in character creation you will outshine the party for the entire campaign. Sure that character could die at some point, but when the solution to a problem is killing off a PC, it would probably have been better to nip that problem in the bud.
Rolling a poor character is even worse. A few people might get excited at the idea of playing a sub-optimal character, but I personally find it gets old after a few sessions.

If you and your party are comfortable with rolling and enjoy it, go for it. Keep in mind that a character with lower stats compares to a lower level monster, higher stats to higher level monster.

My ideal solution would be to separate the ability scores from the attacks/defenses. Most characters have a primary ability (for attacks) and two secondaries (for effects). I would let them choose from a set of pre-determined bonuses to these effects such as 5/2/1, 4/4/1, 4/3/3...
For example the rogue choose 4/4/1 and apply +4 to dex attacks, +4 to strength based effects and +1 to cha based effects, without having to take the exact stat blocks that match it. The upside to this would be that players no longer need to have stat blocks like this to be optimal
18
10
18
8
10
14

but holy crap, this is another rant for another thread...

 

[LostSoul]

It's mostly the defenses that'll swing high or low, right?

 

[eriktheguy]

Yes, mostly the defenses will swing high or low.
Most players will still have an 18 for their attack stat, but I think that's the intention of your system.

 

[Blackbrrd]

My thoughts are:
"Why would he want to roll stats"
"I can live with an 18 main stat"
"Again, why would he want to roll stats"
"Oh, I might be able to roll a 17 or 18 as well and get a super character"
"Hmm.. bah, with my luck I will roll all 12's"
"Nevermind, it's the primary stat that's important"

 

[LostSoul]

There's something I like about rolling for stats. You might roll well and then you want to keep him alive because you've got a great PC; you might get roll poorly and then want to keep him alive to show how awesome you are.

4d6 for the other stats doesn't sound right, though. Maybe something else would be better.

 

[BobTheNob]

The BIG problem with random is that, if done honestly, players can end up with severly gimped characters. Now, if during a skill challenge I make a bad roll, I suck it up, were the consequnce of the failure, and move on the the next stage of the game. Stats on the other hand are rolled once and apply for the entire life of your character.

Which makes a chaarcter bad rolls prone to nothing but failure for its entire existance.

You can compensate in all sorts of ways to ensure that characters dont get an apalling character, but by the time too many compensating rules are in place, everyone ends up with relatively similar high stat characters, at which stage you would have been better off with a point buy system with generous points...it would achieve the same thing.

That or players swap characters until one with good enough stats come along, but thats no fun for anyone.

I was so happy when third edition came out with point buy. To me it just made more sense. To go back to random now would (to me) be like going back to the bad old days.

Good luck with your little experiment.

 

[eriktheguy]

I was so happy when third edition came out with point buy. To me it just made more sense. To go back to random now would (to me) be like going back to the bad old days.

Good luck with your little experiment.

To be honest point buy was unnecessary in 2e because Stats barely effected combat.
I did like a system where stats were mainly meant for skills and level/class/build determined combat ability. But I would never go back to 2e (I consider THACO to be a swear).
The current system of ability scores determining attacks and defenses works, but it is sad that skill bonuses and feat choices are completely secondary to having an optimized ability score panel.