Orius
Unrepentant DM Supremacist
I'm also in agreement with @cavalier973, the methods for rolling are also dependant on which set of rules you're using. D&D has at least 4 different systems for character scores and stat generation affects them them differently.
In OD&D and Holmes Basic, stats don't really matter much. Only Dex, Con, and Cha gives bonuses and then only +1s. Str, Int, and Wis determine bonus XP. Here the straight 3d6 might be okay, because there's so little to optimize. The biggest concern is more likely the bonus XP rather than the stat bonuses. Even then though Gary found that enough players were dissatisfied with poor random rolls.
Second is AD&D. Stats give out bonuses, but pretty much only from 15 and up. It kind of encourages a desire for very high stats just to have even a moderate boost, and that eventually led to the logic of UA's overpowered Method V. I'm not really a fan of this system, because of the huge range of identical stats in the middle and because there's a lot of fiddly bits thrown in, sometimes a stat gives a +1-4, sometimes it has a percentage chance for something and so on.
Third is Classic D&D. The modifiers for 3-18 are on a bell curve, and are consistently applied. If you want to go past that range, the Immortal rules extend things. I like this system because it's easy to remember, and the results aren't too overpowered.
Fourth is the modern system where every +2 increase in an ability score gives a +1 bonus. It's also pretty easy to remember and use though I think 5e drops a few subtle aspects of the system that made it pretty good in 3e.
Of these systems, I like Classic D&D's bell curve and the modern linear progression the best, because the stats generally mean something. And I usually give players the choice of at least 2 of 4d6, the standard array or point buy. The standard array is designed for the modern system, but it should work fine with Classic. It would be somewhat useless in AD&D. The standard array is a good method for novice players as well since it gives them a decent set of stats to learn things with.
In OD&D and Holmes Basic, stats don't really matter much. Only Dex, Con, and Cha gives bonuses and then only +1s. Str, Int, and Wis determine bonus XP. Here the straight 3d6 might be okay, because there's so little to optimize. The biggest concern is more likely the bonus XP rather than the stat bonuses. Even then though Gary found that enough players were dissatisfied with poor random rolls.
Second is AD&D. Stats give out bonuses, but pretty much only from 15 and up. It kind of encourages a desire for very high stats just to have even a moderate boost, and that eventually led to the logic of UA's overpowered Method V. I'm not really a fan of this system, because of the huge range of identical stats in the middle and because there's a lot of fiddly bits thrown in, sometimes a stat gives a +1-4, sometimes it has a percentage chance for something and so on.
Third is Classic D&D. The modifiers for 3-18 are on a bell curve, and are consistently applied. If you want to go past that range, the Immortal rules extend things. I like this system because it's easy to remember, and the results aren't too overpowered.
Fourth is the modern system where every +2 increase in an ability score gives a +1 bonus. It's also pretty easy to remember and use though I think 5e drops a few subtle aspects of the system that made it pretty good in 3e.
Of these systems, I like Classic D&D's bell curve and the modern linear progression the best, because the stats generally mean something. And I usually give players the choice of at least 2 of 4d6, the standard array or point buy. The standard array is designed for the modern system, but it should work fine with Classic. It would be somewhat useless in AD&D. The standard array is a good method for novice players as well since it gives them a decent set of stats to learn things with.
