Would you rolls stats like this? Alternative Stat generation.

[Belac93]

This is an idea that came to me earlier. What if you want to roll stats the old school way (3d6 in order), but that way is dumb, and unoptimized. What if you want to make a character that is very strong, but also very weak.

So I came up with this idea.

When deciding ability scores, you put your scores into three different categories. Heroic, Average, and weak. So a archer fighter might make their Dexterity and Constitution heroic, Wisdom and Charisma average, with Strength and Intelligence being weak.

For your Weak scores, you roll the old fashioned way. 3d6, no exceptions. So they will probably be within the 6-12 range.

For your Average scores, you roll the normal way. 4d6, drop lowest. Probably within the 8-16 range.

For your Heroic scores, you roll the old Dark Sun way. 4d4+4. This gives you a minimum of 8, and average of about 14. Probability is between 13-18, with maximum being 20. Which is insane.
So, what do you think?

[The DS Acolyte]

This sounds like a fun method

I may poach this idea for the next campaign I run if my players like the idea as well

I appreciate that it kind of feels like the options and choices that point buy offers with the fun of still rolling for it

[Theodoxus]

I like it - though I think I'd make the weak roll 1d8+7... guarantees your weak rolls won't get a miraculous 18...

[bid]

Using anydice and removing the top/bottom 5% values:

output 3d6
between 5 and 15, average 10.5

output [highest 3 of 4d6]
between 7 and 17, average 12.24

output 4d4+4
between 11 and 17, average 14


An alternative is replace lowest of 3d6 with 2/4/6 for weak/average/heroic.

output [highest 2 of 3d6]
between 6 and 11, average 8.46

So average [10.46, 12.46, 14.46] for [weak, average, heroic]

[HoarsHalberd]

I like it - though I think I'd make the weak roll 1d8+7... guarantees your weak rolls won't get a miraculous 18...

Maybe 1d12+3 (or 4) to give at least a half chance of actually getting a negative stat.

[WMO?]

This makes me imagine a character with the stats 3, 18, 18, 18, 20, 20. That would be fun to role-play, pretty much no matter where you put the 3 :thog:

[ad_hoc]

No I wouldn't. Starting with stats of 18+ (after race) takes the fun out of character progression.

Side note: 3d6 in order is neither optimised nor unoptimised. There are no choices involved.

[Balyano]

I remember in the ringworld rpg different stats for different races had different dice pools.
Humans had 2d6+6 for all stats, but for every 6 you rolled in a humans luck stat you kept rolling adding them up, because humans are lucky.
2d6+6 ensures nothing lower than 8 and a good chance of higher stats.

[darkrose50]

I would like to try 3D6 + 3D4, take best three, or 4D6 + 3D4, take the best three.

[Mara]

Rolling stats is dumb.

It's even dumber when used as an excuse to get a massively large point buy value.

If you are rolling stats, you just just abandon all notions of balance or optimization. Embrace that your game is happy lala random fun land or roguelike the table top.

[DanyBallon]

Rolling stats is dumb.

It's even dumber when used as an excuse to get a massively large point buy value.

If you are rolling stats, you just just abandon all notions of balance or optimization. Embrace that your game is happy lala random fun land or roguelike the table top.

Balance is still present when rolling, but the range to which balance apply is wider and optimisation is still possible, it's just you don't have control on one of the biggest basis of optimisation :smallwink:

[Mara]

Balance is still present when rolling, but the range to which balance apply is wider and optimisation is still possible, it's just you don't have control on one of the biggest basis of optimisation :smallwink:

Pfff it's not really optimization with all those free stats. I never see anyone playing with real rolled stats. It's always things like "Gee guys I only rolled 18 20 16 13 13 12. I feel real underpower in our group. How should I build to make the best use of these crap rolls?"

3d6 down like the pioneers did. You roll 3 con? Suck it up. No stat above 10? Suicide that lump!

[DanyBallon]

Pfff it's not really optimization with all those free stats. I never see anyone playing with real rolled stats. It's always things like "Gee guys I only rolled 18 20 16 13 13 12. I feel real underpower in our group. How should I build to make the best use of these crap rolls?"

3d6 down like the pioneers did. You roll 3 con? Suck it up. No stat above 10? Suicide that lump!

While rolling 18 20 16 13 13 12 might be nice, by experience, 4d6 drop lowest gives you stats closer to standard array. Sometimes a bit more, some time less.

[EvanescentHero]

This is intriguing, though I feel it needs a little tweaking. It might be slightly better in a system where abilities don't have a hard cap of twenty though.

[Mr.Moron]

I like the idea of this approach. If I was doing something like this though I'd probably implement it at as:



Weak: 2d4+3 ( Minimum: 5, Average: 8, Max: 11) On average this is below average at -1. It can never be above average capping at +0.
Average: 2d4+6 (Minimum: 8, Average: 11, Max: 14) On average this average at +0. It can never be worse than below average at -1 and at most can be above average at +2.
Strong: 2d4+9 (Minimum: 11, Average: 14, Max: 17) On average this is above average at +2. It can never be worse than average at +0 and can at most be very good at +4.
Heroic 2d4+12 (Minimum: 14, Average: 17, Max: 20) On average this is very good at +3. It can never be worse than above average at +2 and can at the very most be the most at 20.



Players would get:

One Weak Score
One Average Score
Two Strong Scores
Two Heroic Scores

[Finieous]

3d6 down like the pioneers did. You roll 3 con? Suck it up. No stat above 10? Suicide that lump!

Right on. Only thing is, ability scores didn't matter as much in Classic D&D. In B/X:

3 = -3
4-5 = -2
6-8 = -1
9-12 = 0
13-15 = +1
16-17 = +2
18 = +3

In OD&D, ability scores had even less of an impact. That's why rolled stats worked fine for those games. AD&D cracked it a little and the editions since have broken it worse, but for whatever reason they won't jettison the mechanic when it no longer fits the rest of the game design.

[darkrose50]

Rolling can be fun when you get the unexpected. Some people like the unexpected, and some do not.

I like the combination of the two. 4D6K3 (keep the best three), in order, and replace one score with a 15. That way you should be able to play what you want. You may have some hard choices, and that can be fun as well, or not.

[EvanescentHero]

Players would get:

One Weak Score
One Average Score
Two Strong Scores
Two Heroic Scores


That's so generous. I'd probably do one weak, two average, two strong, and one heroic. But hey, whatever works for your table!

[Pex]

While the luck factor is inherent in dice rolling which I can accept, the proposed method is too risky for me because you have dedicated score randomness. If I want Dex high rolling 4d4 + 4 can still get me a too low a number that I'm stuck with. 3d6 in order is not a terrible way because of the 11s, though that is a factor, it's terrible because it's "in order". An ability score I care about it too dependent on luck. 4d6 arrange as desired is appealing not because of the higher average, though that is a factor, it's attractive because I can "arrange as desired". Luck gives me high, medium, and low scores, but I get to control where they go. The ability score(s) I care about will always get the high rolls.

[Rhaegar]

I never much liked the idea of random rolls for stats, invariably you end up with some players more powerful than others, and you potentially get stat rolls you don't like, or terrible for the class you want, so you end up suiciding. You could roll 4d4+4 heroic stat could easily end up being 8, and your 3d6 weak score could be 18. So you have this young lad that wanted to be a strong powerful warrior, and worked out every day, but somehow ended up being the weakest man in town despite lifting weights 8 hours a day, but the most intelligent person in the city despite never cracking open a book.

[Finieous]

So you have this young lad that wanted to be a strong powerful warrior, and worked out every day, but somehow ended up being the weakest man in town despite lifting weights 8 hours a day, but the most intelligent person in the city despite never cracking open a book.

Sounds like the germ of a cool character concept!

[JNAProductions]

Sounds like the germ of a cool character concept!

Not if you wanted to play a Barbarian instead of a Wizard.

[Finieous]

Not if you wanted to play a Barbarian instead of a Wizard.

Well, I think it's still the germ of a cool character concept, just not the one you wanted. But then, if you want this kind of control over character creation, that sounds like a really good reason not to randomly generate ability scores.

[Mr.Moron]

Not if you wanted to play a Barbarian instead of a Wizard.

If you wanted to play a barbarian that deals high damage in melee combat. I've certainly been in games where people have enjoyed characters with stats not really filling their combat niche. Sometimes as a result of rolled stats, other times because they chose to assign them that way.

Heck once we did a game where EVERYTHING was rolled randomly race, class, stats (in order!), backstory (from a table of seeds). Players literally had zero input on character creation save being able to re-roll caster classes if they lacked a positive score in the casting stat. Though, one player chose to keep their wizard result despite having like INT 11. Everyone enjoyed the heck out of it, including the CharOP guy who thought it was a really stupid idea and just went along because the group liked the idea.

EDIT: It was a pathfinder game, for context.