D&D 5E (2014) The Philosophy Behind Randomized and Standardized Ability Scores
- Thread starter Snarf Zagyg
- Start date
Blue Orange
Gone to Texas
It's one way to see it, the other way being that it actually suits people so much to be able to have very varied styles of gaming that 5e is the most popular RPG ever...
There's a lot of truth to that. The game survived 40 years and 3 owners, it's doing something right.
d24454_modern
Explorer
It's honestly just a psychological thing.
The effectiveness isn't that much better or worse, but the idea that the role isn't at its full potential makes you think that it sucks.
The effectiveness isn't that much better or worse, but the idea that the role isn't at its full potential makes you think that it sucks.
Well fairness... and asymmetrical ability score to class design.
If you want to play a melee warrior, you had to roll high STR. There was no DEX duelist at the beginning. And even now in 5e, only STR, DEX, and CHA allow for melee builds.
Same with casters. Originally there were only 2 spellcasting classes with 2 casting stats.
Only in 4e did you have warrior, casters, melee, and range be in almost every ability score.
This is before you get to later editions with Multiple Ability score Dependence. When some classes require 3 good rolls whereas others only needed 1.
JiffyPopTart
Bree-Yark
I did a variation on this for my campaign. Each player rolled 4d6 6 times and the 24 results were recorded on a central sheet. I then ordered the results high to low then assigned each player a number 1 through 4. From that point I started with the top score working down to the lowest in snake draft (1-2-3-4-4-3-2-1) order.
I think it was a lot of needless time wasting versus just picking an array, but the players liked the possibility of getting some starting 18s even if it came with possible 6s and requested some sort of die rolling.
I feel my snake draft method allows for some high scores but doesn't end up with characters far from each other when it comes to stat bonus totals.
jasper
Rotten DM
The biggest problem with rolling stats is lots of people will not play a PC with two stats below 9. The number of people I met who played with bad randomly rolled stat is 0. People SAY oh lets do random. Then spend the Saturday morning rolling stats for 4 and half hours till they get the stats they want. Just use an array or a point buy which your players find acceptable. Or get use to Suicide pcs.
I wonder if the designers willingly omit to add a safety belt mechanic or advice for rolled stats? They could easily add an advice for too weak or even too strong rolls. Nope. Nada. Silence. I don’t even remember any Sage advice on the subject.
Rolling is still popular but also mostly home brew.
Would you like an official advice for 2024?
Rolling is still popular but also mostly home brew.
Would you like an official advice for 2024?
pukunui
Legend
Last time I ran a 3.5e campaign (back in 2007), I used the following combined method:
1) Roll 4d6 drop lowest three times
2) Determine the point value of these rolls according to the provided table (with scores of 8 or lower being worth 0 points)
3) Subtract that value from a total of 36 points
4) Use any remaining points to buy three more ability scores
5) Place your three rolled and three bought scores as desired
6) Apply racial modifiers
The idea was to let the old school gamers who enjoyed rolling for stats to have that process while still ending up with characters that were all still more or less on the same (above average) power level.
Don't know that I'd ever bother using anything that complicated again, but I thought it might be worth sharing anyway.
1) Roll 4d6 drop lowest three times
2) Determine the point value of these rolls according to the provided table (with scores of 8 or lower being worth 0 points)
3) Subtract that value from a total of 36 points
4) Use any remaining points to buy three more ability scores
5) Place your three rolled and three bought scores as desired
6) Apply racial modifiers
The idea was to let the old school gamers who enjoyed rolling for stats to have that process while still ending up with characters that were all still more or less on the same (above average) power level.
Don't know that I'd ever bother using anything that complicated again, but I thought it might be worth sharing anyway.
I ran a game with the "colleville method" (roll stats 3d6 for stats in order don't reroll ones but reroll the entire array if you don't have two stats 15 or better). It pushed my players to trying classes outside their comfort zone as designed, but the characters themselves were just standard $class with what were often better than normal stats. It wasn't something that seemed to improve the game & generating the arrays took a long time due to tossing so many.
I'd much rather see "official advice" that realigns the stat mods from every +/-1 for every 2 points above/blow ten where it has been since 3.5 back to ad&d2e style -1 at 5-6 +1 at 15-16. An option like that would free up some room for magic items & such within the system math. Being an "official" option means that I could just point at it & say "this campaign are using this for these characters" like I did for survivors withou the sort of pushback I got with just as if not more powerful level zero characters. Of course 2024 is 3 years away & despite being "most popular RPG ever" I expect to no longer be playing or running d&d due to 5e's failings and wotc will need to meet a very high bar to interest me into returning again.
Khelon Testudo
Cleric of Stronmaus
Our DM rolled 4d6 drop low 7 times, dropped the lowest, and let us each use the resulting six stats in the best order for our class/character. Simple, even, fair.
