D&D General You Were Rolling Up a New Character, and Just Rolled a 3. What Is Your Reaction?

[Lanefan]

Misread this at first! While we're talking about the  sportsmanship of players who want to roll stats as long as they always roll above average-- and my preference for high stats not withstanding, I agree-- can we talk about the DMs that want to insist on random rolls, insist on players rolling in front of them because of "cheating", and then make players reroll anything that's "overpowered"?

I generally insist on players rolling in front of me, in part because I've had some encounters with "dubious" rolling in the past, but I've never made anyone reroll because what they rolled was too good.

I do, however, have a cutline below which a really poor set of rolls can - if the player wants, it's not mandatory - be redone from scratch.

 

[Lanefan]

Careful, as one might interpret that as saying the players at my table have no integrity because they don’t follow your roleplaying rules.

Does anyone ever slip up at your table, perhaps acting in a particular scenario like, for example, INT 13 instead of INT 8? How is that handled?

If it's relatively rare, no problem: even an idiot can come up with a good idea once in a while and even a complete boor can on occasion pull off a diplomatic maneuver. To me, that's both realistic and believable.

If it's an ongoing pattern, though, something eventually gets said - and not always by me; oftentimes it's one or more other players that get to it before I do.

 

[Lanefan]

You don't need to dump Wisdom to do that though. Evidence: far more players than I care to count!

True, but dumping Wisdom at least gives you plausible deniability!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well, you put it in Con and make the character a wizard so they die ASAP and you can roll up a new character. Funny thing, in 5E I can see trying that and making enough Death saves along with getting stablized that the character never actually dies.

Which is why I've never really seen a game force a person to take a character they rolled up, but if they wanted better they'd have to roll another one. I've seen people allowed to do so to much eye rolling by everybody else at the table. Still, probably saves time in getting that character killed, meeting the newly rolled up character, arguing over if we can trust the newly rolled up character as we've just met them in a tavern, and finally getting the newly rolled up character to agree to the general rules of the party.

A wizard with 2 hp + 1 per level. Who should never get hit.

I think con should not be a stat anymore. Or at least not influence total hp. There are no skills attached to it. Maybe it should affect starting hp and recovery. Not HP each level.

Maybe I will try at some point:
HP = max hd * level + con modifier only at level 1.

Level 1 will still be hard for a wizard, but at later levels, it will be ok. Although recovering hit points with short rests will be hard.

 

[DammitVictor]

I do, however, have a cutline below which a really poor set of rolls can - if the player wants, it's not mandatory - be redone from scratch.

For sure. I'm not going to argue that it's necessary or best practices, but if you're going to insist on "fair dice" as an umpire-- and I'm speaking as an umpire-- mercy for players that lose the lottery is admirable, and kneecapping players who "win" by the rules you established is inexcusable.

Of course, if someone wants to play out a bad hand, I'm going to try to find a way to reward the player. On their next character, so I'm not robbing them of the mediocrity they crave.

 

[Lanefan]

A wizard with 2 hp + 1 per level. Who should never get hit.

I think con should not be a stat anymore. Or at least not influence total hp. There are no skills attached to it. Maybe it should affect starting hp and recovery. Not HP each level.

If the game didn't give you back all your hit points every night then Con could play into how much you did get back.

Con in 0-1-2e also had a lot to say about your odds of coming back from the dead; also gone in the later editions.

Con should - and does it, still? - affect your odds to save vs things trying to affect the body e.g. disease, poison, environmental (as opposed to magical) heat or cold, etc.

Maybe I will try at some point:
HP = max hd * level + con modifier only at level 1.

Level 1 will still be hard for a wizard, but at later levels, it will be ok. Although recovering hit points with short rests will be hard.

In 5e everyone has too many hit points as it is.

 

[Lanefan]

Of course, if someone wants to play out a bad hand, I'm going to try to find a way to reward the player. On their next character, so I'm not robbing them of the mediocrity they crave.

Sometimes that "bad hand", i.e. a character who barely scrapes over the re-roll cutline, can turn into a long-lasting underdog-style character; and everyone loves cheering for those.

The (I think by RAW, can't remember now) reroll cutline in 3e is if your total bonus adds to +0 or less, you can reroll. My best 3e character started with a net total bonus of either +1 or +2 (I forget which), and she was amazing!

 

[Clint_L]

No rule. just a matter of sportsmanship.

Sportsmanship? Seriously? It's not sportsmanlike to play a character the way you think they should be played?

Seems like you have it backwards.

The ability scores are convenient game numbers that don't accurately reflect anything about how humans really are (example: according to ability scores, a human can be stronger than an adult male gorilla, or dumb as a cow or a dog but still be an adventurer with multiple languages, social functioning, and a complicated skill set). Insisting that players RP to them is absurd.

I insist that players come up with a goal for their characters (why are they adventuring? - this helps drive plot) and a meaningful flaw (being dumb is not a flaw; the flaw should drive theme and character growth). The rest is up to them.