PDA

View Full Version : rolling for ability scores, what do you do



Saito Takuji
2013-03-01, 04:53 PM
either as a GM, or a player. when generating new characters what ways have you seen/done for rolling for stats

obviously the standard 3d6,or 4d6 drop lowest, sometimes with re-rolling ones or 2's even

but any more unusual stuff, like 3d6+6, drop the lowest, or something mabey involving other dice?

NikitaDarkstar
2013-03-01, 05:12 PM
I've heard of people rolling 2d6+6 or 1d10+8 before. My normal group mainly does either 5d6 or 4d6 (depending on the power level we want XD), re-roll 1's and drop the lowest.

Hylas
2013-03-01, 05:15 PM
either as a GM, or a player. when generating new characters what ways have you seen/done for rolling for stats

obviously the standard 3d6,or 4d6 drop lowest, sometimes with re-rolling ones or 2's even

but any more unusual stuff, like 3d6+6, drop the lowest, or something mabey involving other dice?

27-25-23.
Generate 3 stats using whatever method you like best.
Then do 27 - (any rolled stat) = your 4th stat.
25 - (any remaining rolled stat) = your 5th stat.
23 - (final rolled stat) = your 6th stat.
Then you add +2 to any stat as long as it doesn't exceed 18 (because you're 'rolling' it and 3d6 can't exceed 18).

Pros: You get three fun odd-numbered stats and the total stat bonuses all add up to the same total (in this case, it'll be +7 for 3.5 and +8 for Pathfinder) so no one is "worse off" than any other player. You can generally get a 17 or 18 no matter what.

Cons: Not as fair to MAD characters as point-buy due to its linear nature, but being MAD is its own special problem. You will also generally always have a stat at 10 or below, which can be either a pro or a con depending on who you ask.

The power level of the rolling system can be changed by changing what numbers you use (such as 29-27-25 or 27-27-27) or giving out more +2s.

Jay R
2013-03-01, 05:35 PM
Back in OD&D, when the rule was 3d6, I would use 3d6, but you can read either the top or the bottom of all the dice. This is equivalent to subtracting each score from 21. This eliminates the possibility of a bad set of rolls, since a bad set of rolls can be turned into a good set, without making the odds of an incredibly good set too high.

CoffeeIncluded
2013-03-01, 05:43 PM
I personally don't roll, I use 32 point buy. It makes things much more fair.

Lord Torath
2013-03-01, 05:55 PM
Here's an extensive analysis of the various methods of creating ability scores: Runecarver (http://home.earthlink.net/~duanevp/dnd/stat_generation.htm)

BlckDv
2013-03-01, 06:05 PM
For 2nd Ed era folks, don't forget Dark Sun: 5d4

Slipperychicken
2013-03-01, 06:06 PM
Point-buy. Sometimes by class tier.

Because when you claim to like the uncertainty... but also roll more than 3d6, and have houserules to turn bad rolls into good ones, and to even inter-player distributions of good scores, you really should stop kidding yourself.

Man on Fire
2013-03-01, 06:19 PM
Rolls make much more banalced characters. Sorry, but D&D and Pathfinder are supposed to be based on fantasy, the msot classical, lot of times pulpy, one. And the characters are supposed to be based on heroes of such stories, as well as legends and myths. Tell me what is Aragorn's dump stat. Or Gandalf's. Or Conan's? or Heracles'? Or lancelot's? Or Guts? Even at what they are described a beign weak they still are at worst at level of common folks. When everybody min-max themselves to the point of having "useless" stats at ridiculussly low levels this just falls apart. With rolling you are more likely to have your lowest stat at reasonable level.

Ozfer
2013-03-01, 06:19 PM
My group allows you to choose between a 25 point buy, or 4D6 drop the lowest, and you can reroll one set. This way, people who like the risk can do that, and people who don't can go with point buy.

Remmirath
2013-03-01, 06:36 PM
When starting anywhere between first and twentieth level, I go with rolling 4d6 and dropping the lowest (with optional rearranging). Sometimes, if the players are playing only one character, I'll also let them roll three sets and pick the one they like best.

For one shot games, especially one shot 1st edition games, I'll sometimes go with rolling 3d6 and taking them in order.

And then, for my usual group's current game, where all the characters are quite well into epic levels, we go with just choosing whatever starting stat values between 3 and 18 we want -- none of us in the group are the type to pick all 18s or some such, and it's a rare thing that a character would make it to that high level without having at least a decent starting array of stats.

Slipperychicken
2013-03-01, 07:04 PM
And the characters are supposed to be based on heroes of such stories, as well as legends and myths. Tell me what is Aragorn's dump stat. Or Gandalf's. Or Conan's? or Heracles'? Or lancelot's? Or Guts?

"Min-maxed" characters in fiction can be very interesting and compelling.

The Hulk/Bruce Banner exemplify this. Banner is a genius, but not strong at all. The Hulk is extremely strong, but also dumb as a sack of hammers, barely able to articulate short sentences.

The hobbits (frodo, sam, bilbo, etc) are portrayed as agile, sneaky, good with rocks (Dex), but don't have very good odds in a straight-up fight (poor Str, Con), trying to avoid combat, and falling in battle where the rest of the fellowship barely take a scratch. Frodo gets his behind handed to him by Gollum, Shelob, and the ring-wraiths, needing others to bail him out each time.

IIRC (stopped reading the series a while ago), Artemis Fowl is a true genius, but needs Butler (his bodyguard) to do pretty much all his heavy lifting, and is relatively helpless in any kind of fight.

And don't forget, an 8 in an ability score is functionally indistinguishable from a 10. You're really never going to notice being 5% less likely to do something correctly. Gandalf or Gimli could well have had 8's in Dexterity.

Yora
2013-03-01, 07:31 PM
Whenever possible in any way, get point buy.

ArcturusV
2013-03-01, 08:07 PM
I run hardcore. 3d6, in order, is fine by me. Also "Stat Training" is usually something I allow, old style where you can choose only two stats. Sacrifice two points in one stat to add one point in the other stat.

Then again, I'm also playing an arcane character in the 3.5 campaign I just started who has a 4 int, and I didn't even blink at that or take the Reroll I was allowed. And not just because all my other stats were amazing either. My modifiers ended up equaling +1 in total.

Another method I've tried before, that has really annoyed the guys with Luck Dice...

Stats start at 10. Roll 1d6 6 times. Three of those numbers get added to one stat each, three of them get subtracted from one stat each. If you wanted a more high power game you could alter the number added/subtracted to 4/2, or 5/1, or let them keep all six. But I ran 3/3 and was happy with it.

... the amount of cursing from the normally "Lucky" guy in the game I ran, who got two 6s and four 5s was quite high. So not everyone was happy with it. Most of the party was though as they got to dump things like 1s and 2s and keep 3s and 4s.

Seharvepernfan
2013-03-01, 08:27 PM
I just give my players the elite array: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

95% of all NPCs in the world have the average array: 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8.

Gnome Alone
2013-03-01, 08:40 PM
Me group usually does 4d6 drop lowest reroll 1s, but I kinda like the "organic" one where you roll 4d6 drop lowest in order, switch any two and reroll one. Get some interesting arrays that way.

27-25-23 sounds awesome though, I'll have to try that.

Jacob.Tyr
2013-03-01, 09:12 PM
I'll second the 27-25-23, +2 to one stat. It feels more natural and gives you more interesting stats than point buy, and still involves dice while being balanced.

Granted I also like throwing in 29-27-25 for really MAD and low tier classes and 25-23-23 for SAD high tiers.

Building a 6X6 array of 4d6 drop lowest and letting the players choose any row or column is also fun imo. Have them take turns rolling rows and then let them use whichever row/column they like keeps them involved as well.

Jack of Spades
2013-03-01, 09:52 PM
Well, you shuffle a 54-card poker deck, cut it, and draw 12 cards. Drop 2 cards of your that aren't deuces or jokers. Suit is 1-4 dice in reverse alphabetical order, face is die type. Joker means your character has a Mysterious Past from a table.

...You know, like the rules say.

*Flies away on a cloud of non-game-specific-forum snark*

But really, I tend to enjoy just about anything that isn't straight point buy.

ArcturusV
2013-03-01, 10:18 PM
I'm with you on that Jack of Spades. I don't like point buys. I find it creates strange things.

Almaseti
2013-03-01, 11:08 PM
I'm gonna try the 4d6b3, reroll one set and switch two method next time I run a game. It looks like it would be a good balance between randomness and player agency.

BudgetDM
2013-03-01, 11:09 PM
Normally I do point buy, but when I do roll for stats it's 3d6 in order. If it's useless[1] you can chuck it all and start over, with in reason[2].

[1]As defined by the player.
[2]As defined by the me.

Gavinfoxx
2013-03-01, 11:17 PM
Well, you shuffle a 54-card poker deck, cut it, and draw 12 cards. Drop 2 cards of your that aren't deuces or jokers. Suit is 1-4 dice in reverse alphabetical order, face is die type. Joker means your character has a Mysterious Past from a table.

...You know, like the rules say.

*Flies away on a cloud of non-game-specific-forum snark*

But really, I tend to enjoy just about anything that isn't straight point buy.

Let me tell you about my Huckster!

Jack of Spades
2013-03-01, 11:58 PM
I just realized, I actually have a relevant answer and everything!

In the group I've played most with, we did 4d6, drop the lowest, 7 times, and dropped the lowest ability score. There may have been a reroll-1's in there, but that was probably Deathwatch.

The reason I don't like point-buy is because it gives the player too much control over what they build. Life is unfair, and I like that unfairness to be represented by the cruelty of random or semi-random attribute rolling. Being one who enjoys writing and improv voraciously, there's nothing I love more than a good creative constraint. I'd play a system that makes me roll up every aspect of a character randomly... In fact, I think I have one of those lying around.

Let me tell you about my Huckster!
This guy right here knows about good games :smallwink:

Lappy9001
2013-03-02, 12:03 AM
I've never been a fan of point buy, it's super boring.

We usually do normal roll stuff (6d6, reroll 1's) or (7d6, drop lowest dice) usually with up to 4 total grouped rolls. One time we did 6d6 reroll 1's and 2's. It was awesome.

We also always get 1 reroll for HP each level. Makes things better 100% of the time.

ArcturusV
2013-03-02, 12:07 AM
I do completely random characters for Dark Heresy... which is why I've gotten "Hiver Scum" about 80% of the time. :smallbiggrin: But yeah, I do it completely random if I can too. I think RIFTS and another Palladium RPG (Mutants and Superpowers or something?) had completely random character generation options. And I ran with them.

And yes, exactly the reason I don't like point buy. You end up with almost everyone being someone who has average stats, a maxed stat, and higher normals in their second most important stat. Or you end up with someone taking flaws and adding points by jacking their Dump Stat to recockulous levels that should realistically be almost unplayable in order to max out 3 different stats.

And sometimes my best RPing has come around as a result of completely random rolls and myself going "... what does this roll actually mean...?". In ways that I never would have come up with if I did point buys.

Lappy9001
2013-03-02, 12:12 AM
I do completely random characters for Dark Heresy... which is why I've gotten "Hiver Scum" about 80% of the time. :smallbiggrin: But yeah, I do it completely random if I can too. I think RIFTS and another Palladium RPG (Mutants and Superpowers or something?) had completely random character generation options. And I ran with them.

And yes, exactly the reason I don't like point buy. You end up with almost everyone being someone who has average stats, a maxed stat, and higher normals in their second most important stat. Or you end up with someone taking flaws and adding points by jacking their Dump Stat to recockulous levels that should realistically be almost unplayable in order to max out 3 different stats.

And sometimes my best RPing has come around as a result of completely random rolls and myself going "... what does this roll actually mean...?". In ways that I never would have come up with if I did point buys.This'll give you beautiful results sometimes. One of my favorite characters had 18 Cha, 16 Wis, and 6 Int (granted, there were some racial bonuses/penalties from homebrew) and he was a blast to roleplay.

Point Buy very often leaves everyone feeling the same.

PersonMan
2013-03-02, 12:20 AM
With rolling you are more likely to have your lowest stat at reasonable level.

Point buy: lowest stat, before racial modifiers, is 8.

Rolling: lowest stat, before racial modifiers, is 3.

I've rolled plenty of stat arrays with 4s, 5s and 6s. The 6 was actually welcome as it fit the character concept really well, but otherwise?

Point buy = more reasonable stats.
Rolling = more "ok, so I have two 18s, a 4, a 15, an 8 and a 13. How does this fit together?"

--

I'd counter the LotR party question with:

Yes, they all have reasonable stats. They had a good point buy. With rolls, Gandalf might have ended up with 2 Strength (remember old age!) and Frodo 18 Strength but only 4 Constitution.


--

More generally, I like Point Buy when I have a concept I want to play that should have or needs X stats, if the amount is high enough for me to fulfill that, but if I want to join a game and don't have a concept, rolls can be a ton of fun.

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 01:56 AM
3d6 in order, Fox only, Final Destination.

And one randomly stat-increasing/decreasing magic fountain in every dungeon.

Naw, really, I'm good with Method II or Method IV. Roll 3d6 twice, pick one; either go in order (II) or assign them as desired (IV).

AD&D 2E, obviously. Funny thing, for all that some grognards complain about 2E ruining AD&D, it was much stricter about rolling your characteristics than AD&D 1E. 1E insisted that PCs should have great stats, and 1E had the completely crazy class-specific "roll 8d6 keep 3 for Str, 6d6 keep 3 for Con" methods that guaranteed multiple 16+ scores. AD&D 2E insisted that 15 was a high score, you didn't need high scores, and everything other than 3d6 in order was an optional method you should be careful about using.


For 2nd Ed era folks, don't forget Dark Sun: 5d4

Technically, the default was 6d4, drop the lowest.


Rolling = more "ok, so I have two 18s, a 4, a 15, an 8 and a 13. How does this fit together?"

That would make an awesome... almost any character.

You're a clumsy paladin. You're an enormous but dumb fighter. You're a frail but mighty wizard. You're a rogue with a really nasty disposition. And so on. Fitting the scores together often suggests something about the character.

ArcturusV
2013-03-02, 02:11 AM
Well the thing I did when I rolled similar (But worse, no 18s) for me was a Sorcerer/Fighter mix. With 4 Int.

Exediron
2013-03-02, 02:40 AM
Last time I was part of one of these threads it turned into an argument on the subject of whether point-buy or rolled stats gives greater freedom of character creation. So just as a precaution I won't voice any real opinion here and just the facts:

Main Game: Players pick stats, as Remmirath described.
Most Other Games: 4d6, drop lowest - re-roll if the result contains nothing with a decent bonus.
One-Off or First Ed: 3d6 in order.

PersonMan
2013-03-02, 03:08 AM
That would make an awesome... almost any character.

You're a clumsy paladin. You're an enormous but dumb fighter. You're a frail but mighty wizard. You're a rogue with a really nasty disposition. And so on. Fitting the scores together often suggests something about the character.

But if you already have a character in mind? One that doesn't have a huge flaw due to a really low stat?

Rolls are cool for making characters for games, but I often get an idea for a character, then go to find a game to play them in. In these cases I generally take point buy, because I want to play the character as I see them, not as the dice dictate.

How does 18, 18, 15, 13, 8, 4 fit with "mage student dislocated from her home in a sort of fantasy equivalent of city dweller in the countryside", for example? A high Int fits the concept, but an 18 in anything else...doesn't.

EDIT: There's more to the concept than in the little blurb above, it's just that I can't really sum her up all that well.

Stats affect the character. Hence why I often do crunch before fluff. The difference between being the strongest/toughest/most graceful person around and being average or very weak/frail/clumsy is...kind of huge. I try to reflect this sort of thing in my backgrounds.

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 03:26 AM
But if you already have a character in mind? One that doesn't have a huge flaw due to a really low stat?

Play what you roll. I'm old school when it comes to old games - your character starts out as a bunch of stats, a class, maybe a race, and maybe a sentence or two of description. You develop as you play. If you make it to level 3-5 (where your risk of death has fallen dramatically), the character will be more fleshed out.


Stats affect the character. Hence why I often do crunch before fluff. The difference between being the strongest/toughest/most graceful person around and being average or very weak/frail/clumsy is...kind of huge. I try to reflect this sort of thing in my backgrounds.

Exactly. Roll first (whether in order or assigning), then see what you can make of it. I don't allow players to re-roll to match concepts. You wanted a paladin but got no 17-18 to go in Charisma? Sorry, paladins are rare. Play a LG fighter affiliated with a knightly order.


Obviously, this only applies to AD&D 2E (and earlier editions, should I run them). 3.5 is all about stats, and all about balanced stats (a character with a bunch of 16-18s really messes up the game at low levels), so I go point-buy. But I don't really run 3.5 anymore.

ArcturusV
2013-03-02, 03:34 AM
No being a nice guy and letting them roll that 1d12 on the "Arrays that automatically qualify for Paladinhood" chart in the Paladin's Handbook, eh? :smallbiggrin:

Honestly that was the only way I ever saw someone legit get a Paladin in 2nd Edition.

PersonMan
2013-03-02, 03:42 AM
Play what you roll. I'm old school when it comes to old games - your character starts out as a bunch of stats, a class, maybe a race, and maybe a sentence or two of description. You develop as you play. If you make it to level 3-5 (where your risk of death has fallen dramatically), the character will be more fleshed out.

Ah, a playstyle difference.

I generally do a lot of thinking about characters before a game - even the rare level 1 games I join (only for some specific concepts, like the one mentioned above) I enter with a lot of character fluff.

In PbP I can see a 'play what you roll' attitude semi-working with me, but in an RL group I'd probably not enjoy it.


Exactly. Roll first (whether in order or assigning), then see what you can make of it. I don't allow players to re-roll to match concepts. You wanted a paladin but got no 17-18 to go in Charisma? Sorry, paladins are rare. Play a LG fighter affiliated with a knightly order.

Of course, this punishes people for having MAD concepts - in my opinion, playing a smart, well-spoken, perceptive team leader melee type should not be harder/less likely to be possible than something like 'the mage who is smart, the other stats don't matter'.

(Although if someone complains about not having an 18 in their tertiary stats, I'd probably say no to rerolls for that, too.)


Obviously, this only applies to AD&D 2E (and earlier editions, should I run them). 3.5 is all about stats, and all about balanced stats (a character with a bunch of 16-18s really messes up the game at low levels), so I go point-buy. But I don't really run 3.5 anymore.

And suddenly what you said earlier makes a bit more sense (I don't actually know 2e and earlier editions, but I have a few vague notions of how they worked).

--

I'd say it just depends on what you're gaming for. I, especially in PbPs, which are the majority of my gaming, tend to go for very character and story-based games, almost always starting above level 1 (and often above the low levels altogether, or do low levels with gestalt/tristalt) and doing a lot of work on my fluff and mechanics to make them fit the image I have of the character. Things do change during the character creation process, but generally not big things like "has been super frail all her life".

I'm not sure where you stand in regard to story/fighting/roleplaying, but judging by your posts it's normal for you to start at level 1 and not put much into a frail, potentially dead from just about anything, character, only working on them once they're past the death zone of levels 1-2.

Personally I'd wonder why you don't just skip those levels, but my past experience with self-identifying old schoolers is that they enjoy the feeling of earning their levels by playing through everything from level 1.

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 03:44 AM
No being a nice guy and letting them roll that 1d12 on the "Arrays that automatically qualify for Paladinhood" chart in the Paladin's Handbook, eh? :smallbiggrin:

Honestly that was the only way I ever saw someone legit get a Paladin in 2nd Edition.

No kits, no Completes (Final Destination).

You don't need that high of a stat array anyway. 17 13 12 9 isn't too tough. Obviously, having a 16+ to go in Strength is nice. Really, becoming a specialist wizard is about as tough as becoming a paladin. You really need that high Intelligence, and then you need a 16 (or a 15).

Generally, I think the need for high stats (in pre-3E) is an illusion that need to be broken (playing OD&D or BD&D is a good way to do it), although AD&D did emphasize them somewhat, especially for wizards; but then again, I think limits on highest-level spells you can cast are a good way to keep magic in a bit of a balance (at least on the campaign setting level), or at least make sure the most powerful wizards are old.

Ashtagon
2013-03-02, 03:50 AM
Start with all 8s for your stats. This technically has a point value of zero. Assign each stat a number from one to six.

Roll 1d6. Add one point to that stat and recalculate your total point value.

Repeat the above step until the total point value equals or exceeds the agreed minimum point value.

Swap any two numbers with each other, so that you can get your best number in the best ability score for your chosen character class.

ArcturusV
2013-03-02, 03:58 AM
It's the 17 that's really killer though. I can't recall any other 2nd Edition class that actually required anything over 15 at most. And that was just some specialist wizards. Otherwise you had rangers that didn't require anything over 14, etc.

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 03:58 AM
Of course, this punishes people for having MAD concepts - in my opinion, playing a smart, well-spoken, perceptive team leader melee type should not be harder/less likely to be possible than something like 'the mage who is smart, the other stats don't matter'.

That concept needs three 12+ stats. Not very demanding.

Like I say above, I think there's an illusion (in AD&D) about needing high ability scores. Playing a smart, well-spoken, and perceptive character is more about how you roleplay them. 12+ is a good enough stat for those descriptors.

In 3E+, obviously, you need more like 14+ for those descriptors, because they have such a directly quantifiable effect on anything you try to do.


I'd say it just depends on what you're gaming for. I, especially in PbPs, which are the majority of my gaming, tend to go for very character and story-based games, almost always starting above level 1 (and often above the low levels altogether, or do low levels with gestalt/tristalt) and doing a lot of work on my fluff and mechanics to make them fit the image I have of the character. Things do change during the character creation process, but generally not big things like "has been super frail all her life".

Yup. I prefer roleplaying focused on decisions over character personalities and histories. You can develop the latter during play - if you want. If you don't, cool, just make decisions in tough situations and try to survive them. No deep characterization required at my table.

It's not better or worse, it's just different. It's also something that's developed at the table over the years we've played. This also doesn't mean there's no characterization.


I'm not sure where you stand in regard to story/fighting/roleplaying, but judging by your posts it's normal for you to start at level 1 and not put much into a frail, potentially dead from just about anything, character, only working on them once they're past the death zone of levels 1-2.

Generally, but it varies. I'm actually considering having my players start their Dark Sun characters at level 1 (instead of 3 as recommended by the book; I don't really get why, because the super stats already give them an edge on survivability). My Dragonlance campaign (DL1 and onwards) started at 15,000 XP (divided between classes) for the main PC, 7,500 XP for each of two henchmen, putting them all at levels 3-5. I've been considering starting at 5,000 XP for Dark Sun and the Undermountain, but on the other hand I sort of want to see the meat-grinder effect in action...


Personally I'd wonder why you don't just skip those levels, but my past experience with self-identifying old schoolers is that they enjoy the feeling of earning their levels by playing through everything from level 1.

Exactly. I still remember the first D&D character (Mentzer red box) that I made past level 3 or so... back when I was probably ~10 years old. A fighter with really mediocre stats but like a 16 Charisma, who I wanted to make a paladin (never made it to level 9).

I do implement "safeguards": I have only 3 players, so I encourage them to use henchmen (like in the DL campaign, 2 each) and hirelings, hirelings can graduate into henchmen (usually level 1 fighters), henchmen get a ½ share of XP (so they stay a level behind the PCs) and can be graduated into PCs if your main character dies... for the Undermountain game, I've even intentionally chosen rules for level advancement and spell research that encourage using a "pool" of PCs so that players can and have to switch between characters, and can customize their party composition for what they think they'll face.

It's a bit of a balancing act: I want to see lethality and make my players use their ingenuity (which they have) to overcome obstacles, I want to see them exult in finally conquering a deadly challenge, but I also don't want any player to be suddenly left with nothing to do because of a character death.

It's probably an odd approach to most modern players, but I look at it more as playing the group than the single character.

MukkTB
2013-03-02, 05:53 AM
It would be nice to have a clearer example of what you *should* do. How do the 3.5 and PF organized events do it?

PersonMan
2013-03-02, 06:05 AM
It would be nice to have a clearer example of what you *should* do. How do the 3.5 and PF organized events do it?

What you should do is what works for you.

3.5 organized events are organized by non-WotC groups, AFAIK, since it's been about 5 years since 3.5 was discontinued.

Not sure about PF events.

Yora
2013-03-02, 06:25 AM
If you don't like your stats and can't reroll, play a wizard and engage the first enemy you run into in unarmed combat. Problem solved.

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 06:55 AM
It would be nice to have a clearer example of what you *should* do. How do the 3.5 and PF organized events do it?

3.5 is the 15-14-13-12-10-8 array (25 point buy I think? 28? Whatever, it's in the DMG)

AFAIK, by default PF uses 20 point buy, but the prices are different.


If you don't like your stats and can't reroll, play a wizard and engage the first enemy you run into in unarmed combat. Problem solved.

This is part of why new PCs come in at 0/5,000/15,000/whatever everyone else originally started with XP.

There's nothing that says you can't play a fighter with straight 9s perfectly well in old editions. (Indeed, in OD&D, you differ from a fighter with straight 18s only in that you don't get a 10% experience bonus).

Frozen_Feet
2013-03-02, 07:13 AM
My current favorite method is roll 3d6, is on order, and if your total modifiers are less than 0, roll again. (From Lamentations of the Flame Princess.)

Krazzman
2013-03-02, 07:34 AM
In our new group we do it like this:
Warhammer: like in the book 2d10 + starting value for the race.
DnD: 3 columns of 6 rolls. Each 4d6b3, write every number don't sum it directly, you can reroll exaclty 1 result from 1 dice.
PF (with me as GM): 2 columns of 6 rolls, each 4d6b3, write every number, reroll exactly one result from one dice, thrid colum 25pt as in pathfinder rules.

This way you can have luck but have the possibility to have some incredible stats... I think the Ranger has effectivly 28 points, the barbarian/oracly around that too and the witch took 25 pointbuy afaik. The druid I'm not sure how it was it's already some time ago and we don't play that group often.

Ways of rolling that I have thought about doing:
GRID (6 times rolling columns/arrays, format them into grid format, horizontal, vertical or diagonal choose your array) this goes for the whole party.
Yahtzee (basically 4d6b3 but keep the fourth die when it either is a row (3 4 5 6) or all dice show the same eyes ( 4 4 4 4) with all 1's being a reroll.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-03-02, 12:56 PM
I don't roll dice, ever.

I believe players should have complete control over their characters. DMs don't make players choose feats or skills at random, so why should ability scores be the same way? I use Pathfinder's 25 point buy, but that's only because my group plays Pathfinder- I'm not opposed to other point buys.

jedipilot24
2013-03-02, 12:59 PM
My group does 4d6, reroll 1s and 2s and then drop the lowest.

Hippie_Viking
2013-03-02, 01:14 PM
3d6 in order, Fox only, Final Destination.


You can't forget vow of poverty, (no items):smalltongue:


What I think would be interesting would be 1d10 + 2d6 -2, going from 1-20 but with a bell curve:smallsmile:

Synovia
2013-03-02, 02:15 PM
Exactly. Roll first (whether in order or assigning), then see what you can make of it. I don't allow players to re-roll to match concepts. .

This just doesn't sound like a whole lot of fun to me.

"Oh, you've played a fighter the last 3 games and want to play a wizard this time? Oops, looks like you rolled another 12 in INT, and 16 in STR. Fighter it is"

I'd leave.

Frozen_Feet
2013-03-02, 02:22 PM
It requires a different mind-set, but you can have plenty of fun that way. Besides, Int 12 is not bad for a wizard if the adventure is for levels 1 - 4. :smallwink:

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 02:40 PM
This just doesn't sound like a whole lot of fun to me.

"Oh, you've played a fighter the last 3 games and want to play a wizard this time? Oops, looks like you rolled another 12 in INT, and 16 in STR. Fighter it is"

I'd leave.

Why can't you play a wizard with 12 Int and 16 Str? :smallconfused:

I realize this may all be confusion over not understanding how older editions work, but that's a fine character.

Edit: Int 12 is fine up to 13th level. At 14th level, you'll miss out on getting 7th-level spells. But by aging to venerable age, you can get Int 14, and are fine to 15th level...

Dr.Epic
2013-03-02, 03:55 PM
As a DM, I like to assign ability scores, that way everyone is equal and no one complains so-and-so got better rolls.

Remember, all PCs are equal, but some are more equal than others. That was a George Orwell reference by the way.

Thajocoth
2013-03-02, 04:18 PM
I use point buy. It helps guarantee fairer stats.

Averis Vol
2013-03-02, 05:46 PM
I just started up a PbP game that did 1d8+10. We all kinda came out with awesome stats, but I could see maybe doing 1d10+8 to make it a bit more even.

Krazzman
2013-03-02, 05:58 PM
As a DM, I like to assign ability scores, that way everyone is equal and no one complains so-and-so got better rolls.

Remember, all PCs are equal, but some are more equal than others. That was a George Orwell reference by the way.

Jeah, that would be great if this can work... as it has been probably been read in a lot of my rants on this board playing a semi-legit array as a Duskblade next to an elven barbarian with 2 18s and no other stat below 14... wasn't that much fun.

I know this can be a lenghty thing to explain but the point I don't like about DnD and other systems like it is the "jumpy" progession of Characterstrength.

In my opinion this should be more step by step like in Warhammer, being able to raise something basically every session in the beginning is a better way to this things. I probably said that too have seen barbarians with "good" stats having somewhat around 30 hp on level 2 and with similar stats they had the 30 at level 5. The reason I like the Pathfinder campaign I play in. Pointbuy, fixed HP progression this just is fairer.

I think a system like GURPS, SR, DSA and such Full Point Generation systems are just the way to go with "future" systems. Focusing on Fairness between characters without being bland.

As I said I take rolled systems and most of the time have luck dice... Having a 16 14 16 14 16 15 Array for a Melee Cleric or having only one stat under 30 in Warhammer but I still am against them. How "fair" is it when the druid can smack skulls better at level 1 with his walking stick than the "Fighter" (Cavalier) with her Axe?

Synovia
2013-03-02, 06:27 PM
Why can't you play a wizard with 12 Int and 16 Str? :smallconfused:

I realize this may all be confusion over not understanding how older editions work, but that's a fine character.

Edit: Int 12 is fine up to 13th level. At 14th level, you'll miss out on getting 7th-level spells. But by aging to venerable age, you can get Int 14, and are fine to 15th level...

Maybe in Older editions. In 3.5, you'd start not being able to cast at 10th level (Int->13 at 4th level, 14->8th level just as you get 4th level spells), but your DCs would be a problem much before you hit that point. Your character would have trouble being useful much before. (at high level it would stop mattering because +13 vs +15 isn't a big deal).

And frankly, when you're playing a game and one character has essentially +LA2 worth of stats and another has -1LA worth of stats, its not a whole lot of fun. (I've seen straight roll games where one guy has 14,10,9,7,7,5 and another has 18,18,16,14,14,12. Its not fun to play Clark Kent when the guy next to you is Superman)

Rhynn
2013-03-02, 06:54 PM
Maybe in Older editions.

Yes, which are the editions I've been talking about since my first post, repeatedly, in detail, and explicitly, and which are the only editions that use 3d6 in order (or even the Method II and IV variations I use).

Gnome Alone
2013-03-02, 07:01 PM
Yes, which are the editions I've been talking about since my first post, repeatedly, in detail, and explicitly, and which are the only editions that use 3d6 in order (or even the Method II and IV variations I use).

Doesn't the 3.5 DMG mention 3d6 in order as one of options available to folk? I think with some warming about its harsh and forbidding nature or something?

ArcturusV
2013-03-02, 07:10 PM
Yeah but no one seems to use it (Yet to see anyone but me use it for 3.5). The one I don't like myself is when someone says something like 30 point buy, or 4d6 drop one, assign at will, whatever is better.

I mean if you're going to go random, might as well accept the risk that comes with it and take things as they happen, for good or for ill.

PersonMan
2013-03-02, 07:11 PM
Doesn't the 3.5 DMG mention 3d6 in order as one of options available to folk? I think with some warming about its harsh and forbidding nature or something?

"This frequently generates unplayable characters" is the exact wording on the 3d6 in order method, I believe.

Jack of Spades
2013-03-02, 08:38 PM
I don't roll dice, ever.

I believe players should have complete control over their characters. DMs don't make players choose feats or skills at random, so why should ability scores be the same way? I use Pathfinder's 25 point buy, but that's only because my group plays Pathfinder- I'm not opposed to other point buys.

You don't choose how smart or charismatic or dextrous you are, training and concerted effort aside. You do choose whether you study religion or how to create scrolls.

Not that DnD was really going for realism or anything, but you get my point.

I believe players should have complete control over their characters, too. But I also believe they have an imperative to be flexible. There's nothing I hate more than the school of roleplaying where every character has 3 pages of backstory written with barely any knowledge of the setting and an untouchable character arc which they embark on that they needn't change regardless of the world or their interactions with other characters. And God forbid their character actually die before their predestined epic battle against their designated nemesis under the crescent moon after which they ascend into godhood. That would just be unfair.

Digression, and hyperbole, but still. Players ought to be more flexible in almost every regard than they are, is my point.

Felandria
2013-03-02, 09:02 PM
Roll 4d6 seven times, drop the lowest.

LibraryOgre
2013-03-02, 09:17 PM
For 2nd Ed era folks, don't forget Dark Sun: 5d4

Actually, the Method I for Dark Sun was 4d4+4, in order.

Hackmaster goes with 3d6 in order for all 7 stats.

Now, if you KEEP them in order, you gain 50 Build points.

If you switch two stats, you gain 25 BP.

Or, you can rearrange them at will, but you don't get any bonus BP.

You can also spend BP to increase your fractional scores, and even your integers (at 10 BP per full point until 10, 20 per full point after 10, and 33 1/3 per full point after 15, IIRC). You also gain in fractional ability points each level in every stat but looks (and you can spend more BP at levels to increase stats).

Since there's very little you can effectively "dump", it makes character creation a bit of hard choices.

Raimun
2013-03-02, 10:43 PM
It's usually 4D6, drop lowest. Re-roll everything, if you get really bad stats.

I don't GM but if I did, I'd just allow everyone to pick their stats, unless they'd be all 18s. One or two 18s would be just fine. Even three would be negotiable, if you wanted to go MAD.
That way, everybody could play the kind of character they want. There would be less constraints to creativity, so they could design the characters more like a writers than a gamers.

Sure, people could "tailor min-max" their characters. For Example, I'd imagine fighting types would most likely pick something like: Str 18, Con 18, Dex 14, Int 14, Wis 12 and Cha 10. I also predict no stat in the party would be an odd number.

It would be a power boost but so what? Even "all stats 18"-character isn't invincible.

I think the benefits would outweight any drawbacks. Want to be a charismatic warrior like the movie action stars? Or MAD Monk/Paladin? You can.
Or do you want to be an idiot hero Barbarian, with Int 3 and Wis 3? That's possible too.

Terazul
2013-03-03, 01:33 AM
Point Buy. Fairer overall stats, more flexible options. Not really any more min-maxing than in rolling; people tend to put the higher rolls in the stats they care about and the lower ones in the one they don't. Doesn't really change much.

Badgerish
2013-03-03, 04:41 AM
Either point buy or the following:

Everyone rolls an array of stats through a standard method (probably 4d6b3, 6 times), then everyone gets to choose an array rolled by the group.

balanced, but with a decent chance to have multiple viable arrays with different strengths.

Yes, this can result in high stats, but at least the party gets to share them.

Man on Fire
2013-03-03, 10:40 AM
Point buy: lowest stat, before racial modifiers, is 8.

Rolling: lowest stat, before racial modifiers, is 3.

Point Buy: Lowest stat, when players are done substracting points from it to add to more important atats is 3.
Rolling 4d6b3, reroll 1s, reroll lowest result (which is how I do it): Lowest stat is rarerly below 8


Point buy = more reasonable stats.
Rolling = more "ok, so I have two 18s, a 4, a 15, an 8 and a 13. How does this fit together?"

Point buy = more "So I substracted all points I could from my physical stats and applied to my Intelligence. My wizard is an anemic genius who barerly can walk and lift his own gear."
Rolling = more 'So I have one 10, two 12, two 16 and 17. I can work with that"


I'd counter the LotR party question with:

Yes, they all have reasonable stats. They had a good point buy. With rolls, Gandalf might have ended up with 2 Strength (remember old age!) and Frodo 18 Strength but only 4 Constitution.

With point buy Gandalf would have ended up with 2 Strength.
Also, why do it look to me like you belive it necessary to apply results in order and not to what player needs the most?


"Min-maxed" characters in fiction can be very interesting and compelling.

The Hulk/Bruce Banner exemplify this. Banner is a genius, but not strong at all. The Hulk is extremely strong, but also dumb as a sack of hammers, barely able to articulate short sentences.

The hobbits (frodo, sam, bilbo, etc) are portrayed as agile, sneaky, good with rocks (Dex), but don't have very good odds in a straight-up fight (poor Str, Con), trying to avoid combat, and falling in battle where the rest of the fellowship barely take a scratch. Frodo gets his behind handed to him by Gollum, Shelob, and the ring-wraiths, needing others to bail him out each time.

IIRC (stopped reading the series a while ago), Artemis Fowl is a true genius, but needs Butler (his bodyguard) to do pretty much all his heavy lifting, and is relatively helpless in any kind of fight.

I don't know if this isn't really a result of them being only average at these things, while people they're going up against are much higher. With exception of Hulk, and even then, Banner has a strength of average person. And with Hulk that depends on form - yes, Savage Hulk has Int somewhere arenoud 4 or 5, but original Gray Hulk and Joe Fixit would have 8, Green Scar has at least 10 and higher Wis than Joe Fixit, and Professor Hulk has all stats maxed up.


And don't forget, an 8 in an ability score is functionally indistinguishable from a 10. You're really never going to notice being 5% less likely to do something correctly. Gandalf or Gimli could well have had 8's in Dexterity.

But if build with point buy they were more likely to end up with 4 or 5 in it.

Ashtagon
2013-03-03, 11:40 AM
But if build with point buy they were more likely to end up with 4 or 5 in it.

Are there any WotC/paizo point buy systems that allow for a score of lower than 8 in anything?

Terazul
2013-03-03, 12:18 PM
Point Buy: Lowest stat, when players are done substracting points from it to add to more important atats is 3.
Rolling 4d6b3, reroll 1s, reroll lowest result (which is how I do it): Lowest stat is rarerly below 8


You don't get to subtract points from anything to make it lower than an 8. The only way it can be lower than an 8 is due to racial or age modifiers. And look at all those rerolls in your method; You're adding so many modifiers and rerolls just to obscure lower stats you might as well just give them the stats they want at that point.



Point buy = more "So I substracted all points I could from my physical stats and applied to my Intelligence. My wizard is an anemic genius who barerly can walk and lift his own gear."
Rolling = more 'So I have one 10, two 12, two 16 and 17. I can work with that"

What you just rolled was 43 point buy worth of stats. That's like 11 points more than what most people use. The highest you could make intelligence in point buy is 18 base, which costs you 16 of your 32/howevermany points. And Whether you roll or use point buy doesn't change the number of stats the wizard needs to focus on to begin with. Whoo, extra carrying capacity.



With point buy Gandalf would have ended up with 2 Strength.
Also, why do it look to me like you belive it necessary to apply results in order and not to what player needs the most?


Gandalf was an NPC Outsider with a crazy angel template anyway.

toapat
2013-03-03, 12:42 PM
I use 4d6b3 * 7 Array in a Frying pan or bowl, i tend to have all 1-3s if the surface is flat.

JusticeZero
2013-03-03, 01:36 PM
The one I enjoyed the most was the Bingo board method. Everyone, including the GM, filled in a 6x6 grid with 4d6 best 3 rolls, then put them all in a pile so that players could look them over and decide which one to use. Read the numbers in any direction, including corner to corner, but they had to be in order with no rearranging.
But I might do some sort've point buy method next time, probably a three and mirror technique of some sort. It's less hassle.

Jack of Spades
2013-03-03, 01:46 PM
The one I enjoyed the most was the Bingo board method. Everyone, including the GM, filled in a 6x6 grid with 4d6 best 3 rolls, then put them all in a pile so that players could look them over and decide which one to use. Read the numbers in any direction, including corner to corner, but they had to be in order with no rearranging.
I really like that method. Had never heard of it before.

Gavinfoxx
2013-03-03, 03:19 PM
I think most wotc point buy systems let you lower a stat down to, before mods, an 8... or sometimes a 6, maybe??

toapat
2013-03-03, 03:23 PM
I think most wotc point buy systems let you lower a stat down to, before mods, an 8... or sometimes a 6, maybe??

the expanded version of the DMG Pointbuy lets you go downto a 3 before modifiers, although which book that is in i dont know

Saito Takuji
2013-03-03, 04:47 PM
one i just cobbled together here

2 scores generated as, 3D6 plus 6 (re-roll ones and drop the low score)

next 2 generated as 4d6 re-roll ones, drop the low score

and final 2 as either 3d6, re-roll ones, or 4d6, drop the low score


after generating, you may re-roll any one score for free, after that, you take a cumulative -1 penalty to each reroll

bit complicated, but could be interesting to do it in a way that has 2 good, 2 average, and 2 otherwise stats

Saidoro
2013-03-03, 08:58 PM
You don't choose how smart or charismatic or dextrous you are, training and concerted effort aside. You do choose whether you study religion or how to create scrolls.
Yes, actually you can train to improve any of those things. Virtually everything anyone ever does is a skill, they can all be learned or improved by someone willing to take the time and invest the effort.

Point buy = more "So I substracted all points I could from my physical stats and applied to my Intelligence. My wizard is an anemic genius who barerly can walk and lift his own gear."
Rolling = more 'So I have one 10, two 12, two 16 and 17. I can work with that"
With point buy Gandalf would have ended up with 2 Strength.
Actually, dexterity and constitution are quite important for wizards, much more so than wisdom or charisma. Also that's an exceedingly good set of rolled stats.
On a less nitpicky note: not every point buy character is going to be perfectly theoretically optimized, some will be but the only real guarantee is that they'll mostly have stats optimized well enough that they can do their job competently.

Are there any WotC/paizo point buy systems that allow for a score of lower than 8 in anything?
Paizo's point buy goes down to 7, which means you can get 5 after racial modifiers.


A method I've heard good things about but never tried is having each player roll a set by some method and then allowing each player to use any set rolled by any player(and yes, there can be duplicates).

Artillery
2013-03-03, 10:28 PM
It depends on the game. In Legend I do the 16, 14, 14, 12, 12, 10 array for stats.

For 3.5 i do 4d6 drop lowest. You can reroll if your total modifier is +8 or below.
Sometimes I do 3d6 reroll 1 and 2s.

For high power one shots I have also done 3d6, with exploding dice on a 6. Other option for that is 42-point buy.

I have seen a person with such strange luck that they ended up with a character with 29, 18, 10, 4, 3, 3 on a level 5 character in a one-shot. That was a hilarious barbarian, best Suggestion based Party Wipe i have ever seen.

LibraryOgre
2013-03-03, 10:35 PM
Ah, another factor of Hackmaster is the "Shopkeeper" rule. If you don't have at least one 13 or higher, or have two stats of 5 or below, you get to trash the character and roll whole new set. Beat the shopkeeper rule? Play him at least one session.

Blacky the Blackball
2013-03-04, 05:28 AM
I use the following:

Roll 3d6 for each ability in order, but you can re-roll the lowest die (or dice if there's a tie) of each 3d6 roll.

Then you can swap any two scores.

If you rolled badly, you can take my "Standard Array" instead (16,14,13,12,11,9) and arrange them how you like.

The reason for this is that the distribution curve for "3d6 reroll lowest" is better than the one for "4d6 drop lowest" at avoiding extremely low scores, but also gives less bias towards extremely high scores. Following the rolls by swapping any two scores makes sure you're not excluded from the class you want to play because you rolled a bad score for its prime requisite.

If the swap isn't enough to make what you want or if you were simply very unlucky, replacing your rolls with the standard array option (which has been pre-calculated to be one roll at the median of each of the six sextiles of the "3d6 reroll lowest" distribution) guarantees you average "rolls" and compensates you for being merely average by being more flexible in how you arrange them.

I've also been known to have the whole group generate a single 6x6 grid of 3d6 rolls (or 4d6 drop lowest rolls) between them and then each player chooses a row, column or diagonal (as in a wordsearch puzzle - and you can read in either direction) as their ordered set of scores. This one has the advantage that no player gets luckier than any other because they all have the same set of rolls to choose from, and it's more collaborative as players suggest things like "this row would make a good Cleric" and so forth.

TuggyNE
2013-03-04, 07:54 AM
The reason for this is that the distribution curve for "3d6 reroll lowest" is better than the one for "4d6 drop lowest" at avoiding extremely low scores, but also gives less bias towards extremely high scores.

Hmm, I'm not sure about that. 3d6 reroll lowest is very nearly identical (http://anydice.com/program/1ebc) to 4d6 drop lowest; the only difference is that you don't get to keep the previous lowest if your reroll is lower. Similarly (while calculating the curve for rerolling ties is really annoying), that graph shows no very substantial change even with the extra rule to reroll all ties. Certainly, it's better at avoiding higher scores, but not much; and it's hardly any better at avoiding very low scores either — in fact it's more likely to give lower scores overall.

Lesson: careful what you think the dice are telling you, they're tricky like that.

Frozen_Feet
2013-03-04, 12:58 PM
The one I enjoyed the most was the Bingo board method.


I use a similar method when creating LotFP characters en masse. :smallsmile: Roll 3d6 36 times, arrange to a 6x6 grid. See what lines are legit and which are not (=cross out lines with total modifiers less than 0).

It's faster than just rerolling each time you get an invalid array.

Blacky the Blackball
2013-03-04, 06:24 PM
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. 3d6 reroll lowest is very nearly identical (http://anydice.com/program/1ebc) to 4d6 drop lowest; the only difference is that you don't get to keep the previous lowest if your reroll is lower. Similarly (while calculating the curve for rerolling ties is really annoying), that graph shows no very substantial change even with the extra rule to reroll all ties. Certainly, it's better at avoiding higher scores, but not much; and it's hardly any better at avoiding very low scores either — in fact it's more likely to give lower scores overall.

I think your mistake is that you are assuming that you must reroll the lowest die or dice and that you are treating the re-rolling of a tie as an "extra" rule when I clearly stated it as part of the normal rule. I said that you can reroll the lowest die or dice. That makes a significant difference, because the player is never forced to (for example) re-roll a 5 and get a 1.

To get a 3 in 4d6-drop-lowest, you must roll 1-1-1-1, which is a 1 in 6^4 or 1/1296 (which is 0.0008 to four decimal places, as reported by AnyDice).

To get a 3 in 3d6-reroll-lowest, you must have first rolled a triple (because otherwise one or more dice would be higher than the others and therefore by definition wouldn't be a 1, so re-rolling the lowest - which again by definition wouldn't involve re-rolling that particular dice - couldn't give you all 1s). The odds of any particular triple are 1 in 6^3, and there are six of them - so cancelling nicely that gives us the odds of getting a triple as 1 in 6^2.

Now if you are forced to re-roll the lowest, any of those 1 in 6^2 rolls must be re-rolled, and that re-roll has to be a triple 1 to end up with a total of 3. The odds of a triple 1 are a straightforward 1 in 6^3, so therefore the odds of a triple followed by a triple 1 are 1 in 6^5, or 1/7776 (which is 0.0001 to four decimal places, again as reported by AnyDice).

Clearly this is a much smaller chance than 0.08. In fact we know exactly how much smaller, since it's 1 in 6^5 rather than 1 in 6^4, so it's 6 times smaller. In other words, even with a forced re-roll, you have a six times greater chance of rolling a 3 with 4d6-drop-lowest than you do with 3d6-reroll-lowest.

However, since the re-roll is optional, the odds are even lower. No-one is going to re-roll an 18 or 15, for example, and if they know anything about the odds they're not going to reroll a 12 either (although a brave player may risk that one).

So you're actually not looking at 1 in 6^3 x 6 because not all six triples will be re-rolled. You're only looking at 1 in 6^3 x 3 because only triple-one to triple-three will be re-rolled. Since that's half the chance of the forced re-roll, and the odds of triple-one on the re-roll are unchanged, this means that the overall chance of a 3 is half of that with a forced re-roll.

In other words, the chance of getting a 3 has gone from 0.0008 to 0.00006 - you're twelve times less likely to roll a 3.

I could go on and do this for all the other results, but that would take ages, and I'm sure you get the idea by now. For example at the other end of the scale you're not forced to re-roll the 5 in a 17, or to re-roll all three dice if you get 18 - so the odds of getting those are greater than those reported in your AnyDice simulation.

Using the assumption that a rational player will re-roll if the lowest is a 3 or less (because the odds are in their favour) and not re-roll if the lowest is a 4 or more (because the odds are against them), I've run a computer simulation (not AnyDice, my own program - I'm a software developer as my day job) running through the full probability space to generate all possible rolls for both the 3d6 with reroll and 4d6 drop lowest methods, and the shape of the distribution curves are definitely visibly different.

The odds of getting low numbers are much lower than your simulation shows (up to half the size), and the odds of getting high numbers are higher than your simulation shows (although nowhere near double the size).

Overall, 3d6-reroll-lowest has a slightly higher mean than 4d6-drop-lowest; but its main characteristic is that it is far less likely to produce low scores, more likely to produce average scores, or produce good scores, and somewhat less likely to produce excellent scores.


Lesson: careful what you think the dice are telling you, they're tricky like that.

Lesson: Before assuming that someone else doesn't know what they're talking about because their results don't match yours, make sure your own results aren't the ones that are incorrect!

RandomNPC
2013-03-04, 07:34 PM
Between me and 2 other DMs....
4d6 drop lowest, optional reroll 1s and possibly 2s depending on story.
4d4+6 drop lowest, replaces rerolling 1s and 2s nicely.
Point buy as BESM says for BESM, often mixing up how many points we get.
Arrays and premade stats just aren't fun.

TuggyNE
2013-03-04, 10:05 PM
Lesson: Before assuming that someone else doesn't know what they're talking about because their results don't match yours, make sure your own results aren't the ones that are incorrect!

Fair enough. (To be quite frank, I tend to expect people to get probability wrong most of the time. :smallwink:)

Incidentally, the reason for separating out "reroll ties" is because it was rather tricky to get that result calculated at first; it was just an artifact of the coding.

OK, here's an updated graph (http://anydice.com/program/1ec9/graph), which should be correct, I think. High results are a bit more likely, low results are a lot less likely. Importantly, it's not any less likely to produce excellent results, except for 18s. (That is, 11 through 17 are more likely than on 4d6b3.)

Rakmakallan
2013-03-05, 11:11 AM
I use either 36-60 point buy, 1 point for +1 to any ability, all abilities starting at 8 before racial modifications, or xd6b3 where x>=5.

Zherog
2013-03-05, 11:15 AM
I have players roll 4d6 seven times, and pick the best six results, twice. Pick the set you want. If both your sets are horrid, you can use the standard elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).

Rhynn
2013-03-05, 12:35 PM
60 point buy, 1 point for +1 to any ability, all abilities starting at 8 before racial modifications

So... straight 18s? :smallconfused: