D&D 5E What character generation method does your group use?

[MechaPilot]

As the DM for my group, my players roll 4D6 keep 3; then they're able to choose either the stats they've rolled or the standard array (whichever is better).

 

[JonnyP71]

And sometimes people roll because this is a game and they want to see what the dice give them and work with that.

This one. And only this one. We encourage players to accurately portray their ability scores where possible, so if you dump a stat, you play the character in a suitable way.

I'm currently playing a Tiefling Bard with 16 Charisma and 5 Wisdom - she's lovely, but oh how she's managing to get the group into a lot of trouble due to her complete lack of common sense....

 

[Leatherhead]

We use the Standard Array. Mostly because I can't be bothered to explain the math behind point buy, and we don't want to risk having characters who whiff all the time because some of the players are new.

 

[Hussar]

Interesting.

 

[Caliban]

This one. And only this one. We encourage players to accurately portray their ability scores where possible, so if you dump a stat, you play the character in a suitable way.

I'm currently playing a Tiefling Bard with 16 Charisma and 5 Wisdom - she's lovely, but oh how she's managing to get the group into a lot of trouble due to her complete lack of common sense....

And that's a perfectly legitimate way of playing the game. Just not my particular cup of tea - I prefer point buy.

I tend to have strong idea of what character concept I want to play and random roll can interfere with that.

Plus, I enjoy the "mini-game" of coming up with a build and a matching story to go along with it.

 

[Lehrbuch]

I tend to have strong idea of what character concept I want to play and random roll can interfere with that.

Plus, I enjoy the "mini-game" of coming up with a build and a matching story to go along with it.

I think it is much the same "mini-game" when you use random roll (especially when you use random roll in order). It is just the starting point that is different.

In one you begin with a concept and the game is to devise Ability scores etc., that match. In the other game, you begin with Ability Scores and devise/evolve a concept that matches. Both can be fun, but I do find (for me) the second (starting from random rolls) ends up with better and much more interesting characters.

I think because when I start with the concept I am starting with an idea that it is some sort of copy of something I have seen before somewhere. Whereas when I start with random rolls I am prompted to think more laterally and originally. But that's just my experience.

 

[Caliban]

In one you begin with a concept and the game is to devise Ability scores etc., that match. In the other game, you begin with Ability Scores and devise/evolve a concept that matches. Both can be fun, but I do find (for me) the second (starting from random rolls) ends up with better and much more interesting characters.

And for me it's the opposite. It takes all kinds.

 

[Maxperson]

I don’t understand the appeal of a lot of homebrew rolling methods. Somehow we’ve gone from 3d6, to 4d6 drop lowest, to some people even doing2d6 + 6. We’ve gone from roll one score for each ability in order, to roll in order but swap two scores once, to roll 6 scores and assign them to what ever abilities you like, to some people even rolling 7 scores, dropping the lowest, and assigning the remaining 6 to what ever abilities you like. And then there are other bet-hedging house rules like dropping any score lower than 7, or raising the highest stat to 15 if you don’t have any natural 15s it better, or discarding any set of stats with a total below a certain threshold. All these tweaks to reduce the variance seem to me to defeat the point of rolling stats in the first place.

Although I prefer point buy, I understand the appeal of rolled stats. The variance can lead you to play characters you might not otherwise consider. If you roll in order, it forces you to build your character around the stats, instead of building the stats around the character. There’s something charming about the idea of “let’s see what character the dice are going to give me!”, and it can be a fun role playing challenge to get landed with really oddball stats. Even if you assign the scores as you like, the potential for crazy high rolls and the risk of really low rolls is exciting, and it can be interesting to come up with narrative justifications for your 17 Int, 4 Wisdom Wizard or what have you. But the fun of that comes from the random chance.

I just don’t understand why, if you want to roll ability scores, you would want to reduce that random element. If the goal is to produce more balanced results, why not just use point buy? If the goal is to increase the chances of getting higher stats and producing more heroic characters, why not just use point buy with more points? If you want random stats, what is the value of intentionally limiting the variation?

For a lot of people, the increased realism from not having control over what numbers come up, and/or having access to the full normal range of numbers(3-20 after racials) is why they would use a roll that reduces the randomness, rather than point buy. For others, they like to gamble. And for some gamblers, reducing the gamble somewhat is more palatable than the full gamble, so they come up with a method to reduce the randomness by a bit.

 

[Sunseeker]

I think it is much the same "mini-game" when you use random roll (especially when you use random roll in order). It is just the starting point that is different.

In one you begin with a concept and the game is to devise Ability scores etc., that match. In the other game, you begin with Ability Scores and devise/evolve a concept that matches. Both can be fun, but I do find (for me) the second (starting from random rolls) ends up with better and much more interesting characters.

I think because when I start with the concept I am starting with an idea that it is some sort of copy of something I have seen before somewhere. Whereas when I start with random rolls I am prompted to think more laterally and originally. But that's just my experience.

I personally do not find this to be my case, but I suspect that is simply a difference on how we work.

I can work most any sort of stats into the character I want to make. The initial concept is details-light and flexible. Sometimes stats help make it materialize, sometimes they don't, sometimes they're irrelevant.

As a cook, my ingredients tell me what I can make, but that's still a fairly wide band of items. Even a single ingredient can produce a range of dishes. (take eggs for example, hard boiled? Soft? Over-easy? Scrambled?) Add a second ingredient and you've multiplied your possible outcomes a dozen fold. But even with all that range of possibility, I find it more approachable to come at cooking with an idea of what I want to cook.

Character creation is much the same. Do I want scrambled gnomes? Or Dragonbon Huevos Rancheros? That's my concept.

I agree that coming at character creation with an in-depth backstory, a short novella or an otherwise inflexible backstory it can be difficult to match the ingredients to the intended outcome. And it can be depressing to peel back the layers of the character you've created until you've reached a point that you can actually cook with the ingredients you have available.

As far as a concept being a "copy" I think that's unfair. Conceptually, everything has been done. That doesn't mean your Human Soldier Champion Fighter (arguably the most simple character build possible) can't still be interesting. Even if his story is as simple as being a young farm boy who dislikes the restrictions put upon him by his parents that keep him from realizing his dream of joining the military.

 

[Lanefan]

Do I want scrambled gnomes? Or Dragonbon Huevos Rancheros?

Scrambled Gnomes?

Dragonborn Huevos Rancheros?

Sounds like you've already got the best uses for those two races figured out...no need to roll up any more.