They hybrid Roll N' Buy ability score generation method

[Shaele]

--Al----
Experienced RPers take what they get and make what they can of it: poor stat characters are more interesting that the straight-18 ultra. The trick is not to throw out the baby with the bathwater- the system is good, but the players may be lousy. So the solution? Change the players, not the system.
--------

Umm, pardon?

I read your post twice to make sure I didn't misunderstand, and I humbly disagree. The _purpose_ of a system should be to create characters that are (a) representative of the power level set by the DM, (b) more or less "fair" and balanced against one another, and (c) fun for the players. If it doesn't accomplish that, it's a poor system. Players first, rules second.

Low-stat characters aren't inherently "more interesting" than average or high-stat characters. Balance and consistency is much more important that "forcing everyone to have a low stat". Point-buy is helpful in that respect, because it's fair - everyone gets the same points. The problem with any system that gives a wide variation, based on a die roll, is that once in a while someone will roll up a pathetic character (or an uber one).

Have you ever DM'ed a party where one character has (for example) 3-18s, while the rest have average or lower stats? If the palyer min-maxes properly, he can _completely_ dominate gameplay. Conversely, this type of system also allows for the "almost completely useless" character as well. Neither scenario is desirable, for the DM or the players.

If the purpose of this type of system is to force variation and roleplaying (however you define that), why not insist on non-metagame elements instead? Ask people for character histories, background... ask them to detail personality quirks, desires, and roleplay according to that? You'll get much more depth in characters than telling the mage to "play like you have a 4 wisdom, since that's what a real roleplayer would do".

 

[kenjib]

Shaele,

I agree with you regarding high variance. The problem, however, with point buy is that you end up with characters that are all very similar. You almost never get a fighter with high charisma or intelligence. You will almost never get a wizard with high strength. You will almost never get a rogue with high wisdom. Given a certain point total you can probably predict what the vast majority of characters of a given class will look like, with perhaps a couple of notable variants as well. When you combine this with a class based game like D&D you get less diversity and realism among characters than I like to see.

I created this method as an attempt to bridge the gap between the two generation methods. There is some variance involved to prevent players from having cookie cutter characters. At the same time, there is a point buy system added in to balance the characters relative to one another.

Another thing to note is that when using straight 3d6 as per this hybrid method instead of 4d6 drop lowest, the chances of getting a set of uber stats are significantly reduced, so you have less of a chance of having to worry about the dominating character with stats that are too good.

The combination of these effects is that you gets characters that are less likely to be overpowered than characters made with 4d6, less likely to be underpowered because you have a point buy baseline to boost characters that roll poorly, and at the same time retain some variance from character to character, preventing the point buy problem of cookie cutter characters. You also retain the thrill of the gamble. Some people like to have it all fall on the roll of the dice, however now it's tempered with a bit of an equalizing element.

 

[Lord Ben]

I like it and I'm going to bring up the idea with my group to see if they like it. I love the randomness of it, but still you can adjust it somewhat.

One concern I have is with Monks and other classes that have more then one primary stat.

 

[Al]

Shaele:

I never stated that 'low-powered characters' are more interesting than average or high-powered characters. What I said is that there is more *scope* for roleplaying in a variety of stats than the straight 18 supercharacter. Half the fun of the character is his defects, shortcomings and peculiarities (imagine GURPS without the disadvantages) and a straight 18 character seems just so bland. Of course, a straight 8 or straight 12 character is probably equally as bad: the most playable characters tend to have variations.

Regarding the problem of 'ultra-dominant' or 'utterly hopeless' characters, this is the task of the DM. Again, deal with the specifics and not the generalities. Normally, if a character is rolled way out of whack from the campaign power level or relative strengths of the party, I ask him to reroll. This counts either way: I've asked uber-characters to be rerolled, and I've asked no-hopers to be rerolled. All good players realise that this is to maintain play balance and take it in good stead.

As for non-metagame roleplay, of course! I do request personalities, backgrounds and the like- but backgrounds for super-characters tend to be less interesting. You get a lot of generic 'I was the most popular, intelligent blah blah blah in the whole village'. Stat variety makes the character think.

My main reservation with point-buy is, once again, what kenjib dealt with very well: a conveyor belt of generic characters.
That's why I go organic.

 

[The Souljourner]

I like the idea of rolling and somehow getting some options so you can customize the character, but I agree with the people that say there are problems with this method. Rolling under 8 really screws you, and rolling near the point buy total removes your ability to customize more than a little.

Here's what we're doing for our next campaign, and I think it worked rather well.

Start each stat at 6 and then roll 12d6. You can assign those dice however you want as long as nothing goes above 18. This method adds some nice randomness, but guarantees that the character will get good stats where he needs it.

Personally, I like point buy, because unlike what most people expect, characters *don't* all come out exactly the same (that is, unless you're giving them way too many points). One fighter might feel it's worth it to pay for 18 strength, another might be willing to pay for 17 and wait til 4th level to get up to 18, and another might be content with 14 or 15 and have better con or dex. I started DMing a campaign several months ago that used point buy and I think it worked out well. There's none of the anguish that players get when they roll crappily, and it keeps characters balanced. Plus, there's a lot more thought and customization to it than you'd think. Strategically placed odd scores are very important to consider, and whether or not it's really worth it to spend all those points on an 18 becomes a very intense thought problem. Compare that to the guy that just rolls an 18... there's no thought there, just luck.

Now, your system does allow point buy to some degree, but you restrict how the initial rolls are placed, which I don't think is that good of an idea. Many classes need several different stats to be good in order to function well, and a fighter who's forced to have a 16 in charisma is going to feel screwed because it counts against his point total, even though it's relatively useless for him.

To fix your method, I'd do this - allow the player to place the rolled stats as he sees fit. Make scores under 8 worth negative points (one per point under), and don't give points to players who roll over the point total.

-The Souljourner

 

[Infinite Monkey]

Just a note about players making stereotypes in point buy : We created characters last night for my new campaign, mostly inexperienced combat oriented players. We have a fighter with a 9 in Str and Con and a monk with higher str and con than dex or wis. Players don't neccesarily go for stereotypes.

 

[kenjib]

To fix your method, I'd do this - allow the player to place the rolled stats as he sees fit. Make scores under 8 worth negative points (one per point under), and don't give points to players who roll over the point total.

-The Souljourner

You make some excellent points in your post but I think this last suggestion would just basically give you very close to standard point buy and thus not really be worth the trouble. You introduce the risk of uber rollers without removing the problems some people have with point buy, so I don't see the benefit anymore. Why choose that method over standard point buy? The system was intentionally designed to give you some control but also have some things happen that you don't intend. It's supposed to produce the occasional fighter with 16 cha. That's the fun of it. It's based on the premise that people in real life are built with a combination of nature and nurture. You start out with certain attributes and then you are given some leeway to adjust them to develop your character, but you can't completely eradicate your natural inclinations and talents.

 

[Al]

Just a note about players making stereotypes in point buy : We created characters last night for my new campaign, mostly inexperienced combat oriented players. We have a fighter with a 9 in Str and Con and a monk with higher str and con than dex or wis. Players don't neccesarily go for stereotypes.

Good for you. And I mean that.

But the overwhelming majority of players would go for the stereotypes: and very few indeed would be brave enough as to go for a fighter in 9 Str and Con (they tend not to live that long...)

 

[Lord Ben]

Some good and bad points I've found. I've rolled a character with every stat 9-11, that sucked. I also rolled one at 47, that rocked. However for the most part I've found that it's incredibly well balanced.

Monks were fairly hard to do, but it was still easy. All in all it's a good system, but if there are too many rolls below 10, and an 18 and a 17 then it gets broken really fast.

If the DM is kind and fair it's far better. Too bad for my players that I'm the DM... hahaha

 

[Seraphael]

I've thought about using a hybrid method for a while myself, but there are three problems the system has to handle IMO.

1) What do you do with characters who roll supercharacters?

This is pretty easy though, you can just ask them to reroll or tone down the character (maybe give them a straight point buy without dice rolls as a bonus, that way they exchange their overpowering character for the ultimate in flexibillity).

2) What do you do with rolls below 8?

I'd suggest assigning some negative value to rolls under 8, 1 per pt probably works, although if you reverse engineer the point buy (which is loosly based on probablities) you get 3=-11, 4=-8, 5=-5, 6=-3, 7=-1. The problem with that is the fact that, if a character is played properly , low scores are less of a hindrance that high scores are an advantage (in most cases, anyway).

3) To do well by the system, players need to roll really low or really high; rolling an average character (or one close to the point buy limit) is actually a disadvantage.

I'm a bit more stumped about this one, you could guarantee all players 4 points unless they roll over a limit (for example, you are using a 28 pt campaign, and player who rolls under that s guaranteed 4 points. Players who roll over are allowed to be 32 pt characters. Any player who rolls over 32 pts is treated however you treat super characters).