D&D 4E Should Ability Scores in 4E Be Randomly Determined?

[Cadfan]

One thing about point-buy I have never seen decently addressed is the uncommon (but very much possible) situation of someone intentionally wanting to play a character with one or more stats lower than 8, without just giving up some overall build points (in effect, that's what happens in every solution I've ever seen).

Me, I have far more fun playing something that ends up as 18-16-12-11-10-6 than I do with 14-14-14-12-12-12, even though the second sequence has a much higher average stat and total bonus with no "dump stats". The 18 makes it useful, and the 6 makes it fun! Especially when it goes into Wisdom!

(I've no idea what those sequences represent in point-buy totals, by the way)

Lanefan

The problem with a solution to someone wanting less than a 6, but without "giving up build points," by which I assume you mean without being compensated for the 6 with extra points to place elsewhere, is that it lets players cheese out their character with a dump stat they don't care about, in order to get high stats they do care about. The 8 point starting level that you can't go below puts a floor on that race to the bottom.

The first sequence adds up to 35, plus whatever adjustment for the 6 exists, if any. The second sequence adds up to 30. The first sequence is considered more powerful even though it adds up higher and has a higher average stat, because no character class has an equal need for every single stat. It is almost always preferable to have an 18 and a 10 then to have two 14s, so a premium is charged for the 14.

If I were trying to create your first point buy in a 32 point buy game (considered a high powered game), I'd do as follows: 16-16-14-12-10-8. Adds up to 32 points. I'm sure you would find that roleplaying an 8 wisdom versus a 6 wisdom does not dramatically change the gameplay experience.

 

[sjmiller]

Actually, in my 20 years experience with this game, it is the people that cling to "rolling" for ability scores that are the super min/maxing, power hungry, uber ability score whores.

Funny, but my experience has been just the opposite. The most abusive min/max players I have ever encountered have always been ones using a point buy system. Now, admittedly, most of those are not D&D players, but it is true none the less.

 

[delericho]

Funny, but my experience has been just the opposite. The most abusive min/max players I have ever encountered have always been ones using a point buy system.

Likewise. However, I have also seen much more cheating with a random roll system, largely because it's not possible in point buy if the DM checks the stats.

Consequently, I can't say one is better over the other.

 

[Baby Samurai]

However, I have also seen much more cheating with a random roll system,

Yes, this can be a problem, even with usually honest people – temptation.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Joining the discussion a bit late I know..

I use the organic generation method. That is, 4d6 drop lowest 6 times, to generate your stats in order. Then one reroll and one swap of two of the scores. The DM judges them fit or not (including too powerful arrays being rejected) and you're done. You can mostly make a character you have in mind, but still get a little quirkiness.

 

[Roman]

Getting rid of the ability scores themselves and having only modifiers in 4E would not preclude random stat generation, as you could still use rolling for a score for ability generation purposes, but then write down only the modifier, or if different probabilities of rolling for stats were desired, other rolling methods could be easily created.

 

[Korgoth]

Although I think random rolls for attributes are the best, rather than point buy or (to me, worst of all) bare modifiers... why not eliminate attributes altogether? If you're going to have something like "feats" or "backgrounds" or whatever, just have ones that cover those bonuses in a reasonable way.

Example:
"Big Dude" : If you are a Big Dude, you get +X to hit and damage in melee.
"True Grit" : If you have True Grit, you get a +X to Fort saves and +X hp per level.

Then you could say that X equals "1" at Heroic levels, "3" at 11-20, "5" at 21-30, or whatever the appropriate scale turns out to be.

Just a thought. I'd rather use the traditional method, though.

*****

On the notion of coming to the table with a concept in mind, I can see how "roll randomly in order" could be a problem for that... but not how "random rolling in general" is a problem for it. Unless your concept includes "... and is super duper buff", which might indicate a problem with the concept itself (after all, what if my concept is for a 20th level character? Too bad, this campaign starts at 1st level, so that concept will have to be modified, etc.).

I like random rolls in order. But if someone is hot for a particular concept, I don't see whay a "roll in order" DM can't consider making an exception. One good compromise is to allow the highest stat to be switched to the desired prime requisite. So (12 13 9 8 14 12) becomes (14 13 9 8 12 12) if you want to be a Fighter, or (12 13 9 14 8 12) if you want to be a Thief, etc.

 

[JoeGKushner]

and I assume that the default assumption here is that ability scores will be 3-18 as opposed to say -4 to +4?

 

[comrade raoul]

Can't we just say it totally depends on the group?

Some players find the randomization nerve-wracking, and feel less comfortable with their characters than they would if they knew they had control over their ability scores. Some find it dull. Similarly, some groups adjust better to the possible party imbalances that might result from randomly-generated characters than others.

I think it's plausible that the ideal player should be adaptable and grounded enough to feel comfortable with, and enjoy the challenge of, randomly generated scores. But that's an abstract intellectual question--it's not a massively important ideal, and I certainly don't think that people who don't live up to the ideal should be punished, or that it's an ideal everyone should try for.

 

[Reynard]

Keeping random rolls doesn't make any sense if they are going to continue with linear bonuses. What's the point of 3d6 (or whatever) when the likelihood of a very high or very low) score is miniscule but the results are not that much better than close in number, far in probability other stat value? Of course, the current point buys sytem doesn't make any sense either -- scaling costs non-linear, for a purely linear benefit.

This isn't to say that I think point buy should be the standard. I suppose it is fine as an option. I personally hate it. But don't use randomizers unless the random value has meaning, and don't use exponential costs unless the value for the points is worthwhile.