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

[Deset Gled]

Well, it's unfortunate. And I'll probably have to rethink my build. But we can go on.

My groups will generally allow a reroll if all stats are bad enough. But one dump stat isn't a problem, per se.

 

[el-remmen]

It depends on if I am playing 3E or later or 2E or earlier.

Actually, it really depends on my mood. It could be any of those on any given day.

 

[CreamCloud0]

"who the hell managed to convince me to use rolled stats?"

(i did read the OP first but still voting for i don't use rolled)

 

[GMMichael]

Assuming you are creating a new character, and
assuming that you DO roll your stats, and
assuming you DID roll a nat-3...
...what is your initial reaction?

I shrug, and roll the other 2d6.

 

[Bae'zel]

Depends on the GM, the campaign pitch and the chemistry with the other players.

Light hearted romp through classic dungeons? Sure why not.

Serious character arc-building campaign? ehhhhhh I'll ask for a re-roll, unless I can make that terrible stat be an interesting trait.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

In a full campaign I appreciate that it I got something distinctive and can narrow down which character concept I'm pursuing, but am probably a little disappointed my character won't be more well-rounded.

In a one-shot I think up a silly novelty character to have 3 intelligence or whatever. Last week it was a Barbarian called Garnuld the Christmas Orc.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Provided I have decent other stats, I can think of plenty of characters that could work with a dump stat that bad. Though, I do remember an instance where a player thought it would be funny if they couldn't speak Common at all. They learned that not being able to talk at all got really old, really quickly. Some schticks are only funny for a bit.

A PC's lowest stat often gives them more character than their highest, in my experience.

 

[Lanefan]

To me, the second and fourth options here are the same: the entertainment and comic potential IS the gift that makes it more interesting. Would have voted for both if I could.

Our not-always-joking reaction to a very low stat here is often "Now it's playable!".

 

[Lanefan]

Provided I have decent other stats, I can think of plenty of characters that could work with a dump stat that bad. Though, I do remember an instance where a player thought it would be funny if they couldn't speak Common at all. They learned that not being able to talk at all got really old, really quickly. Some schticks are only funny for a bit.

One still-famous character from our early days was played as a mute, the backstory being that his throat was so badly mangled and scarred in some fight or other that his speech had been reduced to - at best - very low monotonic grunts.

A PC's lowest stat often gives them more character than their highest, in my experience.

Amen to that!

 

[KYRON45]

4d6...drop the lowest...arrange to taste.