D&D 5E How do you handle randomly rolling for stats

[Clint_L]

Well, for as long as the character lasts; which in an even moderately-lethal game might not be all that long.

That's not a fun way to introduce brand new players to the game. My in-school campaigns for beginners are one term each. Making a student play with a lame character only to die a few games in would be terrible design.

If one decides to focus on that, sure. But if one instead largely ignores that and just enjoys playing the character for what it is, it stops mattering.

Should we apply this philosophy to all games? Okay kids, we're going to play tag. Some of you get to run, but if you were born in a winter or summer month, you have to walk. Enjoy it for what it is!

Or imagine a Super Mario 2 game where your jumping distance is randomly determined at the start of each game, and you have to stick with it until the game is over. What do you think 99% of players will immediately do if they start with a low "jump" ability? Enjoy it for what it is, or immediately kill off Mario so that they can try again with a better jumping ability?

I'll risk saying that learning to deal with such inequities might be of benefit to them.

There is quite a body of research concerning lesson plans that try to teach "life lessons" through activities that emulate real world inequities. They are generally a bad idea that create resentment and division amongst students and can do serious psychological damage. Quite a few real life controversies have resulted from (typically inexperienced) teachers implementing lessons intended to emulate real world inequities only to have the whole thing backfire horribly.

If a teacher proposed such an idea to me, I would tell them, "It's a disaster waiting to happen."

That's just it, though: in real life, not everyone starts from the same place; and I want the game to reflect that. Some people just simply have more going for them than do others (and I don't mean socio-economically, that's a different issue); you know, the sort who have looks and brains and physique and talent, etc., as opposed to the rest of us normal schlubs who might have one or even two of those but not all of them.

A) see above.

B) Most people don't play games to learn life lessons. I play D&D for fun. Also, students are perfectly aware that the world is full of injustice and inequity. It's not like some big revelation they get from their elders. They're at school. They get differences in looks and aptitude and talent and everything else rubbed in their face all day long, half the time while getting assessed on it. Maybe they could use a break from it?

C) There are other games that start with a similar design philosophy so that initial bad or good luck largely determine the rest of the game. Monopoly comes to mind. One of the main changes in modern game design was to move away from structural inequity based on luck and towards systems that are more dependent on player skill.

I do agree that luck is an important aspect of D&D, as it adds narrative randomness. But relying on it to an extent that can feel relentlessly punishing is not for me.

 

[Ogre Mage]

Or imagine a Super Mario 2 game where your jumping distance is randomly determined at the start of each game, and you have to stick with it until the game is over. What do you think 99% of players will immediately do if they start with a low "jump" ability? Enjoy it for what it is, or immediately kill off Mario so that they can try again with a better jumping ability?

Totally random comment -- Princess Peach was by far my favorite character in Super Mario 2 because of her ability to float in the air for 2 seconds. It more than made up for the fact she couldn't run and jump as well as the others.

 

[CapnZapp]

Regarding high ability scores.

Everyone's game is different, but in my experience, the better (at system mastery, not actually playing a role) you are, the more of a detriment it becomes to randomly roll for ability scores.

That is, the difference between one player rolling 18, 17, 16, 10, 9, 8 and another rolling 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13 is greater in a group with people that invest time and energy to create effective characters.

To the point where it can completely break a game. Recently my friend told me about a campaign I'm not involved in, where the barbarian rolled great - so great, in fact, that the player and DM agreed on level 3 to voluntarily lower the stats.

The combination of that player probably having the group's highest system mastery, and the best stats, meant that the character came across as one or two whole levels higher, completely dominating play, easily handling challenges that even two other characters struggle with.

The point is: if your experience is that these discrepancies aren't an issue and you love random rolling, please don't dismiss the possibility this is because none in your group prioritize system mastery, and that you should not dismiss the complaint out of hand.

Starting with the default array (or, to be more precise, every character starting with the exact same array) actually is a significant requisite to gain a good gaming experience.

Not to everybody, but for those that can run away with greater scores, it is essential.

Conversely, just because I am convinced my and my friends need a level starting field (and rules supporting this) doesn't mean you need to.

Either way it is wrong to claim "the game shouldn't include rules for random rolling" or "the game shouldn't include rules for default array".

Likewise, the argument "true D&D gamers roll 3d6 in order" is non-sensical. Just becaause that might work with your preferred flavor of old-school doesn't mean it works with 5th Edition.

While 5th edition (thankfully) is no 4E or PF2, balance isn't exactly unimportant. Randomly rolling opens the window for skill mastery to translate into outright victory, and that's no way to play the game.

Same with +3 items. In a group that skillfully defeats monsters, focuses its fire, and methodically attempts to maximize monster weaknesses, the Monster Manual becomes nigh unusable with high-powered magic items. Monster Manual monsters might present a challenge to new or casual gamers, but very few of them scare a level-appropriate party of veteran optimizers.

So if someone says, say, that "don't hand out shields with bonuses" (because the issue is rarely with character damage output, it's nearly always too-high character defense that breaks the game) that might be true even if YOU and your group doesn't need the advice: if you play with a gaggle of chaotic school children, they might even NEED +3 shields to not melt away against even middling monster opposition...!