Stats: to roll or not to roll

[Ewhit]

Why do people like to roll stats
1. The enjoyment of rolling in itself with the hope of getting a few stats above 15 and that magic 18 or at least a 17.
2. But what about the player who gets the crap roll. Usually that means he will be jealous of others and unhappy coming to the game to play or trying to get his character killed to roll a new one
3. Or depending on the style of rolling everyone has God stats the 2-3 17-18 in the 2-3 main stats.
4. Or not to roll. Take the pre roll 8,10,12,13,14,15. Or point system
Which means a Demi human 15-17 stat or half elf with little better. or human varient 15-16 stat with feat
5. Everyone will have similiar stats with no risk of upset players
6 now some may say that their character are suppose to be special. Heroes who should have outstanding stats compared to basic npc.
6. Personally I agree. But I also agree with a dump stat; that flaw every hero has. A physically weak hero, a not so smart hero, a weak willed hero, a clumsy hero, an unhealthy hero or not so charismatic hero.
7. A compromise for a hero stat and still keeping the dump stat could be
Bumping each stat by 1 for pre roll
9,11,13,14,15,16 yiu still have the dump stat and same penalty but like gas prices 2.99 sounds better than 3.00 gallon. So does the 9 over the 8
The 11-13 give a med +1,but makes people happy that the 3rd lvl stats give something. 14-15 give +2 which now enters low hero stats The 14 will most likely stay 14. The 15 16 will become the 16-18 or 16-17 stat based on race and make the players feel like they have champion characters
It's a matter of perspective for the group and DM.

I remember 3d6 one column from basic which went to 2 Colums 3d6 with beginning ad&d to 4d6 one Colum 2nd ed. To 4d6 two column at 3.5 or point system

In 4th pre gen roll. and 5th from 4d6 1 column to pre gen roll Varient which is tge 9,11,13,14,15,16

What do you use

[Zman]

5e just isn't meant for rolled stats, especially high rolled stats. If you are going to roll, cap anything 15 or higher at 15. Or use alternate methods, say 9+d6 or 7+2d4.

I prefer the 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 array.

[Naanomi]

I prefer point buy, the right mix of 'even playing field', 'customizability', and 'not everyone is an identical template' for me

however I do miss having very low stats a real possibility; but it is hard to do without making 'super dump stats' in a point buy system

[djreynolds]

People talk about playing "Heroes" and for that rolling can provide you the possibility of making something different. I play in the AL, and really I'm forced to wait on feats sometimes because I'm trying to max my main stat.

Its fun to play, with high stats. It really changes the focus of character building and what a class can be.

What's it like to play wizard with a high charisma as well, etc.?

For many players medium armor master is a luxury feat tailored for specific builds, but if you rolled well now its a feasible feat.

Its just you have other people who may roll low.

Nothing wrong with everyone playing, and the DM adjusting the game, to players with higher stats. And for this I like to just give out stats. Something high for your main stat, and then something high is an odd stat, like a high dexterity for the cleric and see where it goes. If players are willing, pick a class and race, and then roll 5d6 and keep them where they lay and see where it leads your build.

[Sigreid]

I honestly don't understand this obsession in the forums with trying to convince others that rolling for stats is bad. I like rolled stats. I like keeping the good with the bad. But I don't really care if another table prefers point buy or standard array. Even if the book made the array the default I would probably do rolling in my group. Anyway, here's a summary of why I like it.


It's the way I came into the game and just feels right to me
It can give you a surprising character to learn to play rather than giving you exactly what you want every time
I like variety between characters, even if they are theoretically built to do the same thng
It gives the possibility of a different sort of character that doesn't feel gimped i.e. the Half Orc bard.


Anyway, if your groups like point buy or standard array, that's cool. Doesn't affect my table at all.

[Knaight]

I think that the structure of 5e play is generally not particularly conducive to rolled stats, but there are edge cases. If you're running a one shot anyways, go ahead. If you're running a troupe play heavy campaign where all the players are bouncing between a dozen PCs apiece in several slowly changing rosters, go for it (though if that's happening it's almost certainly in the context of a pretty ambitious project, so evaluating whether you can GM that is probably a good idea), so on and so forth. A long form game where characters are expected to last for a fair while? That's not really where rolled stats work particularly well.

[djreynolds]

I honestly don't understand this obsession in the forums with trying to convince others that rolling for stats is bad. I like rolled stats. I like keeping the good with the bad. But I don't really care if another table prefers point buy or standard array. Even if the book made the array the default I would probably do rolling in my group. Anyway, here's a summary of why I like it.


It's the way I came into the game and just feels right to me
It can give you a surprising character to learn to play rather than giving you exactly what you want every time
I like variety between characters, even if they are theoretically built to do the same thng
It gives the possibility of a different sort of character that doesn't feel gimped i.e. the Half Orc bard.


Anyway, if your groups like point buy or standard array, that's cool. Doesn't affect my table at all.

So true. Look at Artemis and his stats, that's how he kept up with Drizzt and the drow. How do you play that legendary Half Orc wizard? It is how these "Heroes" came into being, someone rolled awesome stats and this guy became viable. Otherwise its just cookie cutter builds, like my Hill Dwarf Cleric.

Everyone has to agree and the DM just has to change up the adventure and CR to make it fun.

[Knaight]

So true. Look at Artemis and his stats, that's how he kept up with Drizzt and the drow. How do you play that legendary Half Orc wizard? It is how these "Heroes" came into being, someone rolled awesome stats and this guy became viable. Otherwise its just cookie cutter builds, like my Hill Dwarf Cleric.

The mechanical incentives that would lead someone to avoid a half orc wizard apply just as much to rolled stats as picked stats; cookie cutter builds are by no means implied by use of picked stats of some sort, and while rolled stats might bump some numbers around a bit, things like the order of the attributes for any given class are going to end up just as cookie cutter as before (which will depend almost entirely on the player in question).

[Gastronomie]

I honestly hate point buy. If you try to make your characters "powerful" in a point-buy system, chances are the characters end up with really similar stats. It's just bland. It's unoriginal, cookie-cutter, whatever description you like. I prefer stat-rolling where the stats actually give you inspiration on what sort of people those characters are. More chaotic. More interesting.

And really, at least I think, characters don't need to be equal.

I mean, who cares if someone is stronger than the others? At least I as a player wouldn't care, it's a TRPG after all - you're supposed to have fun through role-playing and cooperation, not through being the best guy in combat and showing off your power-gaming skills that you ripped off the Class Guides. That's only one portion of the game, and a miniscule one at that (not saying class guides are a bad thing, just saying, it's not everything about the game). If you're so interested in just being "strong", just go play Pokemon or something, because that's probably way more suited for you.

Who cares about rules and numbers? What makes TRPG's fun? Is it that you can fire that good old Fireball with a +5 modifier stat? No, it's that you can fire the Fireball at the enemy's fortress from outside instead of during face-to-face combat with said enemy. And do you need stats to do that? Frankly, no. They don't need to be equal, really.

Apart from how, if you think the only thing that matters in the game is whether you can prove yourself worthy or not... you're only enjoying like, 1/4 or 1/5 of the game (1 divided by the number of participants). Or, if you're gonna try to matter more than that, the others will get less cameo. Either way, the belief that everyone needs to be equal in order for everyone to have fun is actually based on the power-gamers' ego that they don't want to roll up bad characters.

If you can't enjoy a game just because someone in the party is strong, then, honestly, I don't think D&D is the game for you.

[djreynolds]

The mechanical incentives that would lead someone to avoid a half orc wizard apply just as much to rolled stats as picked stats; cookie cutter builds are by no means implied by use of picked stats of some sort, and while rolled stats might bump some numbers around a bit, things like the order of the attributes for any given class are going to end up just as cookie cutter as before (which will depend almost entirely on the player in question).

But it just may be enough, to chance it. Hey this build could work. I will try it.

I play in the AL, where paladins and moon druids have whole cities full of them. Rolling increases the chance of someone coming up with something unique that is not gimped. Hey is that deep gnome paladin. Is that a duel wielding strength based Halfling whatever.

It can be fun. And unique characters and adventure ensue. Otherwise its just polearm masters. Wizard/warlock not even really feasible with standard array or gimped or a tiefling, but a half orc warlock/druid could be cool.

Rolling can create unique builds that are not gimped. And the ability cap keeps it all in the ball park.

[unglitteringold]

As someone who can't roll to save my soul (or the souls of others) I love point buy. Without fail I was always the one at the table with not a single stat over 13. When all your stats are dump stats.... Also, as a GM it makes things much easier to scale for a party. When we use a stat line, I know the range of possible modifiers, and I can adjust accordingly. It's also nice when I build villains, because I can give them the same starting stat line.

[Dimcair]

There are other options.

Instead of a 25 point buy i.e.

mastery and flaw, pick one 18, pick one 8. Roll the rest with whatever dice you find appropriate, either in order or picking.

As a player, if I roll, I'd always want the option to switch to standard stats if I am not happy with the roll. Kinda renders it useless, i know

[DaKiwiMonsta]

I'm personally a big fan of rolling 3d6 for stats in order, then deciding what kind of character that I'm going to play (race, class, background, etc). This is partly because it helps me choose classes or races when building a character, as I often find myself unable to choose. However, it also helps the idea of the neutrality of the dice and the randomness of the characters that D&D is well known for, and it boosts my creativity as it makes me think outside of the box if there is a stat that doesn't help my character to try and work around it.
As for actual scores, if I get an 18 in one score and a 7 in another, I put up with it. If my wizard only has 9 intelligence, make it that he struggles with reading, maybe because he was an urchin so he didn't learn to write as a child. Using predetermined scores ruins the game for me as it becomes too convenient to have good stats.

[Kurald Galain]

5e just isn't meant for rolled stats, especially high rolled stats.

Sure it is. 5E is intentionally designed so that rolling stats will usually give you better results than point buy or the array.

[Citan]

Why do people like to roll stats
1. The enjoyment of rolling in itself with the hope of getting a few stats above 15 and that magic 18 or at least a 17.
2. But what about the player who gets the crap roll. Usually that means he will be jealous of others and unhappy coming to the game to play or trying to get his character killed to roll a new one
3. Or depending on the style of rolling everyone has God stats the 2-3 17-18 in the 2-3 main stats.
4. Or not to roll. Take the pre roll 8,10,12,13,14,15. Or point system
Which means a Demi human 15-17 stat or half elf with little better. or human varient 15-16 stat with feat
5. Everyone will have similiar stats with no risk of upset players

What do you use
I don't like the roll stats at least as proposed by D&d because there is really too much luck involved and I really see "consistent differences" in results between different people: some REALLY have luck and other really DON'T. XD
(By the way, I suppose you will have guessed which category I'm the closest of right? ^^).

For my campaign, I decided that I would create a (potential DM)NPC and a few other NPCs that would play an important role in the campaign.
I didn't want them to be über, and I wanted to follow the rules as close as possible. Because many of them were heavily MAD, when I finished designing them up (with a single 16 pre-race bonus) and calculated the corresponding "point-buy" cost, it was 30 point buy.

So I told my players to follow the same rules: point-buy, 30 points, can go up to 16.
Beyond this being only fair (because I used it for NPC) I really think it's a nice compromise...

- People with MADness can make their build work without being that bad everywhere.

- People who would like to play with feats and accept being bad in some stats (because a 16 would cost 12 points) can grab a 18 at start (16+2) so they have more flexibility later. Or just use all-around builds.

- For the more traditional builds, it means you can bump another stat to even scores or avoid "true dump stats (8) altogether. It basically frees up the usual "I have to pick this race so I can have a good primary stat in my class".

So, overall, it allows more freedom to design a concept.
Meaning more differences between characters so each can feel unique, while avoiding any risk of significant discrepancy between players or game-breaking (good or bad) rolls. You don't break anything else either: with rolled stats, it could be easy to get not only, but even several 18.
Having a 10 instead of 8 for other stats is far from game-breaking either. ;)

[Spacehamster]

5e just isn't meant for rolled stats, especially high rolled stats. If you are going to roll, cap anything 15 or higher at 15. Or use alternate methods, say 9+d6 or 7+2d4.

I prefer the 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 array.

Problem is if 15 is your highest stat you can only get like 1-2 Feats which makes for a damn boring character so actually with 5E I would say great stats are almost a must for varied characters. :)

[Gastronomie]

Problem is if 15 is your highest stat you can only get like 1-2 Feats which makes for a damn boring character so actually with 5E I would say great stats are almost a must for varied characters. :)

I second this.

[Spacehamster]

I second this.

Also point buy makes most people choose variant human just for desperately getting a feat, decent or good stats makes for bigger variation in
race picked aswell. :)

[Telok]

- People with MADness can make their build work without being that bad everywhere.

This is my issue with my current character. Since the race/class combo doesn't align with the pre-approved sets and the character concept requires two feats to work the character is stuck with 14s in the prime stats untill level 13. That's with dumping two stats down to 8 and accepting that the character will never get to 18 in any stat. He'll just forever be -2 behind everyone else and the game math after level 12.

If I'd gone with a cookie cutter build and approved race/class combo then point buy would be fine. As it is I see lots of 8 Charisma wizards and 8 Intelligence fighters, because you need dump stats.

[Anonymouswizard]

I honestly don't understand this obsession in the forums with trying to convince others that rolling for stats is bad. I like rolled stats. I like keeping the good with the bad. But I don't really care if another table prefers point buy or standard array. Even if the book made the array the default I would probably do rolling in my group. Anyway, here's a summary of why I like it.


It's the way I came into the game and just feels right to me
It can give you a surprising character to learn to play rather than giving you exactly what you want every time
I like variety between characters, even if they are theoretically built to do the same thng
It gives the possibility of a different sort of character that doesn't feel gimped i.e. the Half Orc bard.


Anyway, if your groups like point buy or standard array, that's cool. Doesn't affect my table at all.

You see, I'll happily roll a character if the GM requests it. I just personally prefer to use point buy, because:


Most of the games I've pplayed haven't used rolled stats, so it just feels more natural to me.
It stops the annoyance of a completely average character who isn't good at anything. I never got the point of avoiding dump stats.
It stops my character concept from becoming gimpped just because I didn't roll good enough stats.


Now, I agree that rolling a character with no pre-existing concept in mind can be fun, but sometimes the group really needs a healer and if you can't get the stats for it it's not going to be a fun game. Also, my groups prefer to make characters as a group who can support each other, which means we prefer the predictableness of point buy.


I honestly hate point buy. If you try to make your characters "powerful" in a point-buy system, chances are the characters end up with really similar stats. It's just bland. It's unoriginal, cookie-cutter, whatever description you like. I prefer stat-rolling where the stats actually give you inspiration on what sort of people those characters are. More chaotic. More interesting.

Except that rolling really won't change which stats matter, it just means that Dave has a +5 in his primary stat at level 1 when I have a +3. Now, occasionally you do end up with a party with really similar stats from point buy, especially in other systems (my current GURPS game has nobody with less than a 12 in IQ, and most of the party is trying to munchkin it higher [the GM is now increasing the price in the next game]), but that's rarer than just having everybody be competent at their area of expertise.


And really, at least I think, characters don't need to be equal.

No, but they need to be equivalent. Character A has to be able to contribute as much as character B, and in 5e the main measures of 'can you contribute' are Ability Scores, Proficiency, and Spells (with other powers as a minor competency booster). That isn't to say that player A and player B have to contribute as much as each other, just that they have the ability to. And in D&D there's always the problem that mister 'all 12s' contributes less than someone with a 16, 14, 12, 11, 10, 8 array.


I mean, who cares if someone is stronger than the others? At least I as a player wouldn't care, it's a TRPG after all - you're supposed to have fun through role-playing and cooperation, not through being the best guy in combat and showing off your power-gaming skills that you ripped off the Class Guides. That's only one portion of the game, and a miniscule one at that (not saying class guides are a bad thing, just saying, it's not everything about the game). If you're so interested in just being "strong", just go play Pokemon or something, because that's probably way more suited for you.

Who cares about rules and numbers? What makes TRPG's fun? Is it that you can fire that good old Fireball with a +5 modifier stat? No, it's that you can fire the Fireball at the enemy's fortress from outside instead of during face-to-face combat with said enemy. And do you need stats to do that? Frankly, no. They don't need to be equal, really.

Apart from how, if you think the only thing that matters in the game is whether you can prove yourself worthy or not... you're only enjoying like, 1/4 or 1/5 of the game (1 divided by the number of participants). Or, if you're gonna try to matter more than that, the others will get less cameo. Either way, the belief that everyone needs to be equal in order for everyone to have fun is actually based on the power-gamers' ego that they don't want to roll up bad characters.

If you can't enjoy a game just because someone in the party is strong, then, honestly, I don't think D&D is the game for you.

You're getting dangerously close to the Stormwind Fallacy here. Maybe I want my mage to be able to cast Fireball from outside the enemy's fortress and not drop dead from exhaustion (because I might not be playing D&D). At the end of the day I believe that for most point-buy promoters the important thing is that they have stats that allow them to roleplay the character that they want to.

[KorvinStarmast]

5e just isn't meant for rolled stats, especially high rolled stats. If you are going to roll, cap anything 15 or higher at 15. .
Great idea there: be a complete jerk to your players. There are multiple ways to have fun. There's more to this game than numbers.

[Gastronomie]

Except that rolling really won't change which stats matter, it just means that Dave has a +5 in his primary stat at level 1 when I have a +3. Now, occasionally you do end up with a party with really similar stats from point buy, especially in other systems (my current GURPS game has nobody with less than a 12 in IQ, and most of the party is trying to munchkin it higher [the GM is now increasing the price in the next game]), but that's rarer than just having everybody be competent at their area of expertise.
Well, I was saying it in the sense that a lot of people will try to make it 15-15-14-10-8-8 or something similar. I personally like it when a character has 20 something and 6 something else, and those sorts of options aren't allowed in a point-buy system.

No, but they need to be equivalent. Character A has to be able to contribute as much as character B, and in 5e the main measures of 'can you contribute' are Ability Scores, Proficiency, and Spells (with other powers as a minor competency booster). That isn't to say that player A and player B have to contribute as much as each other, just that they have the ability to. And in D&D there's always the problem that mister 'all 12s' contributes less than someone with a 16, 14, 12, 11, 10, 8 array.
This is probably where my opinion differs from a lot of people in a D&D forum. I believe that the player characters don't necesarrily have to "contribute" the same amount in a particular game. I already mentioned this earlier, but if the only moment when you feel D&D is fun is when your character is kicking ass, I don't think that's a really good thing 'cause then you're only enjoying approx. 1/4 to 1/5 of the game. You need to enjoy everything. Everything, including when the other characters are kicking ass.
At least I don't mind if my characters don't excel in combat, as long as I can role-play him/her the way I intended. I get happy when other player's Barbarian goes crit + highest possible damage roll and smacks off heads and limbs, even if my necromancer is just repeating a dumb low-damage Chill Touch besides him. I get happy when the warlock casts Fly on the Halfling Beast Master's wolf and it results in an insanely badass FLYING WOLFRIDER HALFLING, even if my paladin doesn't have to do with that at all.
Characters don't need to be equivlent. At least I don't think so.

You're getting dangerously close to the Stormwind Fallacy here. Maybe I want my mage to be able to cast Fireball from outside the enemy's fortress and not drop dead from exhaustion (because I might not be playing D&D).
I don't get the reference about dropping dead after casting Fireball, so skipping that part (sorry, my INT is like, 6, and I don't have profession in any fantasy TRPGs besides D&D 5e). Oh, and don't worry - googling up Stormwind Fallacy, I find it absolutely wrong. Even if someone is a power gamer, if he's also a good role-player, he'd think up a character who can justify the power gaming and role-play like the boss he is. I don't dislike the concept of power gaming, I just think that it's not something you should do at the cost of good role-playing.
Well, I must add that I don't like it when someone is both a power gamer and a terrible role-player, but that's completely irrelevant to the topic so stopping right here for that note.

At the end of the day I believe that for most point-buy promoters the important thing is that they have stats that allow them to roleplay the character that they want to.
Well actually, in my case, most characters I think up on my own can't be represented by normal point-buy stats, due to a majority of them being extremely eccentric characters.
And in other cases (most of the time), I think up new characters based on what I rolled. The rolls give me inspiration on what sort of guy he is. I find this method much easier, actually, so I really prefer it when the stats are rolled up instead of bought.

[JumboWheat01]

Always the standard array for me. It's simple, fits all my characters, and provides a little flaw to add into the roleplay aspect of a character.

[Anonymouswizard]

Well, I was saying it in the sense that a lot of people will try to make it 15-15-14-10-8-8 or something similar. I personally like it when a character has 20 something and 6 something else, and those sorts of options aren't allowed in a point-buy system.

Eh, fair.


This is probably where my opinion differs from a lot of people in a D&D forum. I believe that the player characters don't necesarrily have to "contribute" the same amount in a particular game. I already mentioned this earlier, but if the only moment when you feel D&D is fun is when your character is kicking ass, I don't think that's a really good thing 'cause then you're only enjoying approx. 1/4 to 1/5 of the game. You need to enjoy everything. Everything, including when the other characters are kicking ass.

Please don't put words in my mouth, my current game has been 1/20 combat (if that) and I've enjoyed it. Partially because I've been able to buy the stats to be competent in social situations. I'm only the party's warrior due to character concept, most of my character's contributions have been calming down crowds.


At least I don't mind if my characters don't excel in combat, as long as I can role-play him/her the way I intended. I get happy when other player's Barbarian goes crit + highest possible damage roll and smacks off heads and limbs, even if my necromancer is just repeating a dumb low-damage Chill Touch besides him. I get happy when the warlock casts Fly on the Halfling Beast Master's wolf and it results in an insanely badass FLYING WOLFRIDER HALFLING, even if my paladin doesn't have to do with that at all.

Good for you, I've previously played a character who could not harm people while wielding a knife (I was intentionally munchkinning because it was a playtest) and who wasn't decent in a firefight, my contribution was mainly facing. It was fun, especially when my character got a rifle and started hitting occasionally, but even before then I rarely became bored in combat.


Characters don't need to be equivlent. At least I don't think so.

Can a level 20 Wizard and a level 1 Fighter be a good set of characters? If not, at least some amount of equivalence is needed.

Agree to disagree on the required amount?


I don't get the reference about dropping dead after casting Fireball, so skipping that part (sorry, my INT is like, 6, and I don't have profession in any fantasy TRPGs besides D&D 5e). Oh, and don't worry - googling up Stormwind Fallacy, I find it absolutely wrong. Even if someone is a power gamer, if he's also a good role-player, he'd think up a character who can justify the power gaming and role-play like the boss he is. I don't dislike the concept of power gaming, I just think that it's not something you should do at the cost of good role-playing.
Well, I must add that I don't like it when someone is both a power gamer and a terrible role-player, but that's completely irrelevant to the topic so stopping right here for that note.

Okay, I must have been reading it wrong.

(For the record, the dropping dead after casting Fireball comes from how, in GURPS, you can cast from HP if you run out of Fatigue Points)


Well actually, in my case, most characters I think up on my own can't be represented by normal point-buy stats, due to a majority of them being extremely eccentric characters.
And in other cases (most of the time), I think up new characters based on what I rolled. The rolls give me inspiration on what sort of guy he is. I find this method much easier, actually, so I really prefer it when the stats are rolled up instead of bought.

Eh, that's fair, I generally arrive at the table with a concept myself.

[Zman]

Sure it is. 5E is intentionally designed so that rolling stats will usually give you better results than point buy or the array.

Rolling stats is an unfortunate legacy throwback DnD will not get rid of. There is a reason the Array and Pointbuy system cap out at 15, that reason is a design decision.


Problem is if 15 is your highest stat you can only get like 1-2 Feats which makes for a damn boring character so actually with 5E I would say great stats are almost a must for varied characters. :)

We will disagree. Personally I like a touch higher Pointbuy i.e. 30 and feel at that level you can really do just about anything well enough. With bounded accuracy and Proficiency even a 16 primary stat is relevant.


Great idea there: be a complete jerk to your players. There are multiple ways to have fun. There's more to this game than numbers.

Firstly, there are different ways to have fun. Secondly, saying my/our way of having fun is being a jerk makes you a hypocrite. Thirdly, if there is more to the game than numbers why do you they concern you so? I mean, my way or having fun with friends and their numbers concerns you so much you are willing to call me a jerk. My reasons for capping rolls at 15 are valid and achieve things I find importing. Remember, no badwrongfun.

[HoarsHalberd]

Rolling stats is an unfortunate legacy throwback DnD will not get rid of. There is a reason the Array and Pointbuy system cap out at 15, that reason is a design decision.
... Remember, no badwrongfun.

They also made it a design decision at rolling would be the standard and point buy and standard array are variant options. If it was purely legacy, they could simply have made it equal and had a section called: "How to decide stats." Personally I like the randomness, and this is from a guy who rolled really low on his first 5e char, I was level 8 before I got my first 16, and I had 9 str, 9 con and 8 cha. (Party scout AT, so I needed int and wis more than con.) Rolling stats is just a form of fun to many players, and it doesn't mess with the balance as long as you have a semi-competent GM. (And don't have two Characters in the same niche, one with miles better stats than the other.)
Now it's not wrong for you to prefer PB and Array, it's perfectly fine and makes sense. But it is hypocritical for you to call the baseline option an "unfortunate legacy throwback" and then use the "no badwrongfun" defence.

[Zman]

They also made it a design decision at rolling would be the standard and point buy and standard array are variant options. If it was purely legacy, they could simply have made it equal and had a section called: "How to decide stats." Personally I like the randomness, and this is from a guy who rolled really low on his first 5e char, I was level 8 before I got my first 16, and I had 9 str, 9 con and 8 cha. (Party scout AT, so I needed int and wis more than con.) Rolling stats is just a form of fun to many players, and it doesn't mess with the balance as long as you have a semi-competent GM. (And don't have two Characters in the same niche, one with miles better stats than the other.)
Now it's not wrong for you to prefer PB and Array, it's perfectly fine and makes sense. But it is hypocritical for you to call the baseline option an "unfortunate legacy throwback" and then use the "no badwrongfun" defence.

It is an unfortunate legacy throwback that is isn't going anywhere soon. It is very problematic for many, and loved by others. Yes, it is front and center and slowly dying off. Where have I said you can't have fun by rolling stats, I certainly have played using rolled stats and had fun, but none of that changed the fact it leads to sometimes immensely prominent balance issues, inter group conflict and jealousy. I, personally don't DM games with rolling, but will occasionally play in them. Well, at least when I roll group average of better, I won't play gimped.

Snipping seperate comments together without context was rude. My comments weren't hypocritical, at least nowhere to the degree you attempted to make them appear. Bad form.

[Rhaegar]

There is no right or wrong answer for the community as a whole for what is the best system. What it comes down to is what is best for your table. In the game I'm running, I prefer point buy, and all the players at the table, at least the vocal ones prefer point buy, so we went point buy. If another group of players at another table prefer rolling for there stats, and that's what's fun for them, great.

It's not like you have to worry about anything like pvp battles between tables, and one table having stronger stats than another. Different people have different expectations coming into a game. The difficult part can be if you have half your players with completely opposed views on rolling vs point buy.

Regardless this is not something that can be won in a debate for what is better, because there is no right answer, each system has it's strengths and its weaknesses.

[Knaight]

Problem is if 15 is your highest stat you can only get like 1-2 Feats which makes for a damn boring character so actually with 5E I would say great stats are almost a must for varied characters. :)

Only if you feel that you absolutely have to maximize your core class statistic; you really don't.

[Citan]

Problem is if 15 is your highest stat you can only get like 1-2 Feats which makes for a damn boring character so actually with 5E I would say great stats are almost a must for varied characters. :)

Also point buy makes most people choose variant human just for desperately getting a feat, decent or good stats makes for bigger variation in
race picked aswell. :)
Confer my previous post: I suggest you try my variant in a next game, I think it will avoid both situations (30 points, can buy a 16 in stat for 12 points). ;)

With that said, I'd like to quote this:

I'm personally a big fan of rolling 3d6 for stats in order, then deciding what kind of character that I'm going to play (race, class, background, etc). This is partly because it helps me choose classes or races when building a character, as I often find myself unable to choose.

However, it also helps the idea of the neutrality of the dice and the randomness of the characters that D&D is well known for, and it boosts my creativity as it makes me think outside of the box if there is a stat that doesn't help my character to try and work around it.

As for actual scores, if I get an 18 in one score and a 7 in another, I put up with it. If my wizard only has 9 intelligence, make it that he struggles with reading, maybe because he was an urchin so he didn't learn to write as a child. Using predetermined scores ruins the game for me as it becomes too convenient to have good stats.
That's indeed a very nice way to transform a flaw into a great concept. :)
"Bounds don't restrain creativity, but instead free it!"

[Kurald Galain]

Rolling stats is an unfortunate legacy throwback DnD will not get rid of. There is a reason the Array and Pointbuy system cap out at 15, that reason is a design decision.
Indeed. This design decision ensures that rolled stats are usually better than bought stats, to encourage people to roll stats. Clearly the designers prefer and expect the game to be played with rolled stats.

This is why the rules say "You should Roll For Stats! (but you could use point buy if you reaaally want)" whereas earlier editions say "You should Use Point Buy! (but you could also roll if you really must)."

[Flickerdart]

Personally, I hate rolling - nothing breeds intra-party unhappiness more than playing a dude with 14 as his best stat next to someone with a 16 and 17. Point buy may be boring (if you're always doing the same thing with it, anyway) but at least it's fair.

If you insist on rolling for your games, consider one of these houserules:

Exclusive array pool: Each player rolls an array of ability scores, and so does the DM. The players decide among themselves who gets what array, and discard the worst one. This has the advantage of eliminating truly awful arrays, and gives players the chance to play the kind of character they want, rather than the character that the dice made them play.
Non-exclusive array pool: Same as above, except the DM does not roll, and multiple players can pick one array. This variation is more high-power, but it's also more fair, since everyone starts from the same point.

[smcmike]

I like rolled stats.

Other have touched on this, but freakish good luck can open up strange characters that otherwise wouldn't be viable - that low intelligence wizard who happens to have awesome physical stats, that barbarian who refuses to use weapons or armor, whatever. Yes, I'm suggesting that really high stats should be combined with some non-optimal choices for balance, but that's fun to me.

Of course, low stats happen too, and require another sort of creativity. So long as they aren't TOO low, they can still be fun, though.

[Anonymouswizard]

Indeed. This design decision ensures that rolled stats are usually better than bought stats, to encourage people to roll stats. Clearly the designers prefer and expect the game to be played with rolled stats.

This is why the rules say "You should Roll For Stats! (but you could use point buy if you reaaally want)" whereas earlier editions say "You should Use Point Buy! (but you could also roll if you really must)."

As a side note, only 4e put point buy as the primary option (secondary, primary was the Standard Array), every other edition has had rolling as the primary way. 4e is tied with Anima as the next game I run for that reason.

I am also the only person in my group who preferred the standard array to my rolled stats, even though they had been rolled using '7d20, reroll any under 7, drop the lowest' and I got a 19. I just didn't have the rolls for positive modifiers in the three stats I cared about (Wis, Str, and Con), and so I'll be joining with my Cleric using the standard array (also a bastard sword [refluffed longsword] over a mace or Warhammer, because Kelemvor).

[Kurald Galain]

As a side note, only 4e put point buy as the primary option (secondary, primary was the Standard Array), every other edition has had rolling as the primary way. 4e is tied with Anima as the next game I run for that reason.

But you're missing the important part, i.e. that in earlier editions a point buy character will generally be stronger than a rolled character, whereas in 5E a point buy character will usually be weaker than a rolled character. Incentives go a long way.

[JumboWheat01]

As a side note, only 4e put point buy as the primary option (secondary, primary was the Standard Array), every other edition has had rolling as the primary way. 4e is tied with Anima as the next game I run for that reason.

I am also the only person in my group who preferred the standard array to my rolled stats, even though they had been rolled using '7d20, reroll any under 7, drop the lowest' and I got a 19. I just didn't have the rolls for positive modifiers in the three stats I cared about (Wis, Str, and Con), and so I'll be joining with my Cleric using the standard array (also a bastard sword [refluffed longsword] over a mace or Warhammer, because Kelemvor).

I salute you for going down the Doomguide path. It's not an easy one. Though I have to say I've never heard of that 7d20 method you have there. I always heard 4d6, drop the lowest, and do it for each stat.

[Anonymouswizard]

But you're missing the important part, i.e. that in earlier editions a point buy character will generally be stronger than a rolled character, whereas in 5E a point buy character will usually be weaker than a rolled character. Incentives go a long way.

Oh yeah, my cleric will have the least pure power of the group due to using the array. I mean, a character with a Wisdom of 16 and Strength of 14 acting as secondary warrior in a party with several 19s and 20s at 3rd level? Totally weaker than the rolled stats (whereas if this was 3.X I'd likely be the only one with an 18).

My main advantage is going to be my selection of spells and buffs, as well as the fact people don't expect a Cleric to use edged weapons. Who said raw power was all there was to this game? (I'm the highest op by far with a Death Cleric and I've planned out 4 of my 5 Ability Score Increases (Wis, Wis, Str, Dex, 19th level is undecided), that'll get my modifiers to +3 for Strength, +2 for Dexterity, and +5 for Wisdom, meaning in the long run I'm not losing much power)

EDIT:

I salute you for going down the Doomguide path. It's not an easy one. Though I have to say I've never heard of that 7d20 method you have there. I always heard 4d6, drop the lowest, and do it for each stat.

Yep, I need to do more research on how Doomguides operate, but I chose Kelemvor as I wanted a Lawful Neutral death priest who defied stereotypes and an willing to roleplay it correctly.

I have never heard of it elsewhere, and I dislike it. I showed up, ready to roll some stats, dug out 4d6, and was immediately told to put them away as we were using a different method. Bare in mind that the 7d20 one causes massive power differences based on how lucky you are, which is why I settled on the standard array.

[Arial Black]

The mechanical incentives that would lead someone to avoid a half orc wizard apply just as much to rolled stats as picked stats; cookie cutter builds are by no means implied by use of picked stats of some sort, and while rolled stats might bump some numbers around a bit, things like the order of the attributes for any given class are going to end up just as cookie cutter as before (which will depend almost entirely on the player in question).

Talking about 'cookie-cutter', last week we created AL characters for Curse of Strahd. Six PCs; five have 16 Dex and 8 Str, while the cleric has 16 Str and 8 Dex.

How can we blame them? A +3 modifier is the best a level 1 PC can get, so 16 in your attack stat (or Dex for the AC if you don't want to use weapons) is the best use of your points, and spending any points at all in the other attack stat is a total waste!

So, instead of the expected bell-shaped curve around 9-12, it's a flat line with high spikes at 8 and 16.

This is one reason why I hate point-buy. It results in cookie-cutter scores, limits race/class combinations to races that give a stat bonus in that class' main stat, and unrealistic ability score arrays.

Point-buy is also a zero-sum game (obviously), and a character who wants to be stronger can achieve this by figuratively hitting his head against a wall until he loses enough intelligence! How does this make sense? But it is how things work in point-buy!

[Knaight]

Talking about 'cookie-cutter', last week we created AL characters for Curse of Strahd. Six PCs; five have 16 Dex and 8 Str, while the cleric has 16 Str and 8 Dex.

How can we blame them? A +3 modifier is the best a level 1 PC can get, so 16 in your attack stat (or Dex for the AC if you don't want to use weapons) is the best use of your points, and spending any points at all in the other attack stat is a total waste!

So, instead of the expected bell-shaped curve around 9-12, it's a flat line with high spikes at 8 and 16.
Had there been rolling instead, this particular group would have had five PCs with high dex scores (which varied a bit), and low strength scores (which varied a bit), and one with the reverse. That the exact numbers are slightly different doesn't matter. The problem here isn't point buy, it's that the game is deliberately designed so that each class has very few stats they care about, and there's a "best" stat ranking on a per class basis, with maybe a few minor variations. That ranking holds for rolls or point buy, and while it can be deliberately ignored*, it has effectively the same effect regardless of whether or not one rolls.

On a side note, while there is a curve (although with the standard best 3 of 4d6 it's not a clean bell shape and it isn't around 9-12), once you get stat assignments that breaks down a bit. Instead, you get 5 characters with Dex that is probably in the 14-17 range** and Str that is probably in the 5-11 range**, and one character with the reverse. That's still pretty cookie cutter, it's just now some of them baked better than others after being cut into identical shapes.


Point-buy is also a zero-sum game (obviously), and a character who wants to be stronger can achieve this by figuratively hitting his head against a wall until he loses enough intelligence! How does this make sense? But it is how things work in point-buy!
It makes sense if you look at character creation not as a character accomplishing what they want to be, but as a player designing a character for insertion into the game. A character can't choose to be a particular race, probably isn't in position to choose to be a particular class, etc. Again, this is no different than rolling. Similarly, it's an arbitrary balance mechanism - the same way that characters generally start at the same level, or that everyone is using the same attribute rolling system, etc. Because of what D&D specifically is as a game, and because of its focus, these things are relevant to it, and so some balancing method or other pops up.

*In my experience it has been to some extent, but then, the D&D I've played has generally been with people who mostly play things other than D&D and as such have different habits.

**As for where these numbers come from, here's some anydice code:
output [highest 1 of 6d[highest 3 of 4d6]]
output [lowest 1 of 6d[highest 3 of 4d6]]

If you look at that and then pick the numbers that have the highest percentage chance of happening until there's less than a 10% probability left, you get the ranges described. It's a bit of an arbitrary way of defining it, but it's either that or mean and standard deviation for two curves that aren't normally distributed, with the high attribute sufficiently distorted that standard deviation gets pretty screwy (it's not bad for the low attribute curve).

[Waazraath]

As far as earlier editions are concerened: I think rolling stats had a specific function there. In one of the earlier editions (I think AD&D, but it's a long time ago), you needed idiotic high stats to play certain classes. I remember a paladin whith riquirements in strength, con, wis and no less then 17 charisma. The (i presume intended) effect: paladins were very, very rare.

In 3.x, I don't know if it was intended, but there were certain classes that were only playable if you rolled exceptionally well. I won't go into the balance issues 3.x has, they are well known; if you started at level 1, and used point buy, MAD classes like monk and paladin were unplayable. Already they weren't too strong, but if you ended up with a monk with 12 str, 14 dex, 12 con and 14 wis, you were not just buggered, but completely buggered. While, on the other hand, a roll of 16 16 18 17 on those stats could keep you competetive through quite some levels (of course also depending on lots of other stuff).

Also, in 3.x, if you rolled really ****ty, it didn't matter too much, you just cheesed some nice race (dragonborn mongrelfolk, water-orc, warforged, lesser aassimars, etc.) that was appropriate, or choose a class that was strong and SAD (wizard, druid, etc.). A party that worked together just took incorporated the various rolls in character creation, ending up with a balanced party despite having characters with high and low ability scores.

In fifth... well, classes are much closer together. If there is in one party a char with 10 10 10 10 12 14, and another with 18 14 14 16 16 10, the inter party balance is destroyed beyond hope of repair from the beginning of a campaign. Imo, that's a bad thing, although there will be plenty of parties who can deal with it (like the ones with a strong focus on role play, and less on combat / mechanics)

[Ewhit]

The best way I see it is either 4d6 1 column move as needed.
Which on average will give you 1-3 7-10 stats, 2-3 11-15 stats, and 1-2 16-18 stats with a lesser possibility of 2-3 7-10 stats, 3-4 11-15 stats, 1 16-18 stat or the god stats 2 7-10, 2 11-14, 3 15-18
Based on mathematical equations. of quantitative statistical variable

Or take 9,11,13,14,15,16 pre made which is adding 1 to each of the pre made 8,10,12,13,14,15

[Rhaegar]

Point-buy is also a zero-sum game (obviously), and a character who wants to be stronger can achieve this by figuratively hitting his head against a wall until he loses enough intelligence! How does this make sense? But it is how things work in point-buy!

Point buy isn't banging your head until you're dumb enough to get stronger, it's a matter of where you spent your training growing up. Everyone spends the same amount of time training, it's just a mater of what attributes the spend the most time training. When I look at the point buy system I see it as a potential warrior spend his time working out his muscles, and the wizard spends his time in the library or at school working his brain. And they increase their stats based on their training.

To me the rolled stats make no sense. Rolled stats are like the guy who spend 8 hours a day at the gym lifting weights every day because he wants to be a big strong warrior, and never spent a day in school, can't even read, yet somehow has an 8 strength and 16 int, because that's what the dice say. How exactly does that make sense?

[Ewhit]

Only if you can't move stats around which I find the MOST damaging form for play

[KorvinStarmast]

Thirdly, if there is more to the game than numbers why do you they concern you so? I mean, my way or having fun with friends and their numbers concerns you so much you are willing to call me a jerk.
Not to mention pointless and arbitrary.
Great features in a DM.
Wait, no they aren't.

Why have them roll if you are then toing to slap an arbitrary cap on them?

[pwykersotz]

I like rolled stats, but I like equity. So I have each one of my players roll 4d6 drop the lowest just once (I usually don't have six players, so I roll once too!), and the resulting array from all the rolls is what all players get to use to make their characters for that game. It's the best of both worlds in my mind. It provides the full spectrum of possibility, but keeps players on an even footing with each other.

[N810]

Isn't rolling the default method mentioned in the players handbook and stat arrays the alternate method ?

[Dimcair]

What is the playgrounds opinion on giving MAD classes a default +2 on CON if using point buy?

Will it create great imbalance?

And will we agree on which classes are MAD? Can you even limit it to a class?

/edit: MAD: Paladin, Monk, Cleric? Sigh this is way too complicated to fix such an issue.

Cheers

[N810]

I was thinking some sort of hybrid point buy/rolling system would be interesting.... :vaarsuvius:

[Anonymouswizard]

I was thinking some sort of hybrid point buy/rolling system would be interesting.... :vaarsuvius:

Like that 2e one? 'Every stat begins at 8, roll 7d6. You can add the results of dice to ability scores of your choice. No, you cannot split dice, it's the entire dice to a single score. Maximum Score of 18+.'

[Democratus]

At a given home table, anything goes. Feel free to roll using any method everyone at the table enjoys.

But for League play, I really prefer using the array. It is the most fair and leaves no room for amazing stat rolls witnessed by the player's brother who was also his first League DM.

Two characters are only cookie-cutter if you play them exactly alike in game. Two thieves could have the exact same stat block and be unrecognizably different from each other in outlook, demeanor, dress, tactics, voice, race, background...the list goes on and on.

You don't need snowflake stats to have a snowflake character.

[Anonymouswizard]

At a given home table, anything goes. Feel free to roll using any method everyone at the table enjoys.

But for League play, I really prefer using the array. It is the most fair and leaves no room for amazing stat rolls witnessed by the player's brother who was also his first League DM.

Two characters are only cookie-cutter if you play them exactly alike in game. Two thieves could have the exact same stat block and be unrecognizably different from each other in outlook, demeanor, dress, tactics, voice, race, background...the list goes on and on.

You don't need snowflake stats to have a snowflake character.

I'm still waiting on an official snowflake D&D race, looks like I'll have to homebrew it :smalltongue:

[N810]

Like that 2e one? 'Every stat begins at 8, roll 7d6. You can add the results of dice to ability scores of your choice. No, you cannot split dice, it's the entire dice to a single score. Maximum Score of 18+.'

that's more of a array/rolling hybrid...

I was thinking something like roll as normal.
but then allow you to move like 2 points from one stat to another.
or add 3 points to 3 separate stats or something like that...
would probably have to put a 18 cap on stats so it doesn't get too silly.

[Sigreid]

No, but they need to be equivalent. Character A has to be able to contribute as much as character B, and in 5e the main measures of 'can you contribute' are Ability Scores, Proficiency, and Spells (with other powers as a minor competency booster). That isn't to say that player A and player B have to contribute as much as each other, just that they have the ability to. And in D&D there's always the problem that mister 'all 12s' contributes less than someone with a 16, 14, 12, 11, 10, 8 array.


I disagree here. I don't think that they need to be equivalent. They do need to be complimentary. I've several times played the character that was over all the weak link, but brought a skill or ability to the party that was needed and contributed just as much as anyone else.

[smcmike]

Point buy isn't banging your head until you're dumb enough to get stronger, it's a matter of where you spent your training growing up. Everyone spends the same amount of time training, it's just a mater of what attributes the spend the most time training. When I look at the point buy system I see it as a potential warrior spend his time working out his muscles, and the wizard spends his time in the library or at school working his brain. And they increase their stats based on their training.

To me the rolled stats make no sense. Rolled stats are like the guy who spend 8 hours a day at the gym lifting weights every day because he wants to be a big strong warrior, and never spent a day in school, can't even read, yet somehow has an 8 strength and 16 int, because that's what the dice say. How exactly does that make sense?

Nah, rolled stats are the attributes the gods gave ya.

[Zman]

Not to mention pointless and arbitrary.
Great features in a DM.
Wait, no they aren't.

Why have them roll if you are then toing to slap an arbitrary cap on them?

A pointless and arbitrary cap on abilities scores... like the maximum 20 in any ability?? Why, because balance. And picking the well established starting maximum from Pointbuy and the Array is not arbritrary and pointless, its reasoned, rational, and deliberate.

And now you are insinuating that I am not a good DM. You are an insulting jackass. My table is full and we all have a great time, not that it is any of your business. Go troll somewhere else please.

[jas61292]

Rolling for stats is always something I have a hard time deciding my opinion on. On the one hand, I completely agree with people who talk about point buy leading to cookie cutter characters. On the other hand, I consider allowing players to start with higher than a 15 (pre-racial bonus) to be unbalancing. My first major 5e character started with super high rolls, and I was just ridiculous compared to everyone else. 1 or 2 points doesn't seem like a lot, but enemies are not balanced to be facing +7 attack rolls and DC 15 saves at level 1. I would love to have a rolling method that allows for stats to be capped like they are with point buy, but I have yet to find any method that is reasonable for this.

That said, I am not nearly as worried about the variance that rolling allows. Balance is most important for PvE, not PvP, as this is not a PvP game. If you are too strong for what the game anticipates, that is bad, but if you are stronger than your friend, that is fine. You work together, not apart. I have played characters who rolled good stats, and I have played characters that have rolled bad stats. My favorite character ever rolled probably around average stats in a party where everyone else rolled fantastic stats. So long as the party has a team mindset, and are not in it for themselves, I don't think this is ever a problem. Obviously, not all players can deal with it, and so it doesn't work for all groups. But it has always worked for me an my group.

Really, I don't think there is any ideal method. I wish their was, but ultimately, I don't think it is possible for a single method to have everything I want.

[KorvinStarmast]

A pointless and arbitrary cap on abilities scores... like the maximum 20 in any ability?? That's a deliberate design feature related to the bounded accuracy ... which was not arbitrary. (Not to mention that there are a few ways to get over 20 in the game, but they generally involve magic items and as such are well beyond the scope of this discussion).

Both your further protestations, and tantrum, are noted.

[Arial Black]

Had there been rolling instead, this particular group would have had five PCs with high dex scores (which varied a bit), and low strength scores (which varied a bit), and one with the reverse. That the exact numbers are slightly different doesn't matter. The problem here isn't point buy, it's that the game is deliberately designed so that each class has very few stats they care about, and there's a "best" stat ranking on a per class basis, with maybe a few minor variations. That ranking holds for rolls or point buy, and while it can be deliberately ignored*, it has effectively the same effect regardless of whether or not one rolls.

I've just come back from AL, and the groups have been adjusted. I'm now part of a six-man party, and every single PC has a Dex of 16; some get +1 from race, some get +2, but why waste 2 useless points to get 17?

The strongest among us is a Halfling with 10 Str, and some have 9 and some 8. I won't say anything to them, but there is no doubt whatsoever that those with 9 or 10 Str would be more effective if they reduced their Str to 8 and spent those 1 or 2 points to boost a stat they would need.

This leads to an evolutionary pressure to have 8 Str and 16 Dex (or vice versa). This is not the same as 'generally low Str and high Dex' from rolling and assigning stats. It takes away verisimilitude to have 8/16 in nearly everyone, in a way that assigning low/high rolls does not.

Further, those stats cannot evolve (at character creation) beyond assigning the lowest to Str and the highest to Dex. You cannot take one or two points from your lowest stats in order to raise your highest even further in a way that you can in point-buy, and this avoids the drift into identical stats.

A good set of rolls can give you possibilities beyond those available with point-buy, giving you new ideas. Even low rolls can give you new challenges. Point-buy gives you no surprises, limiting your possibilities. Some of my favourite PCs have only been imagined after random rolls.

[KorvinStarmast]

Indeed. This design decision ensures that rolled stats are usually better than bought stats, to encourage people to roll stats. Clearly the designers prefer and expect the game to be played with rolled stats.

This is why the rules say "You should Roll For Stats! (but you could use point buy if you reaaally want)" whereas earlier editions say "You should Use Point Buy! (but you could also roll if you really must)."
I may not have the math purely right, but ... the book's Variant 27 point buy can get you a 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13 which is six points worth of bonus (before racial add - ons) which you see on page 8 of the basic rules. They also offer the 15, 15, 15, 8, 8, 8 as an example, which for a var human can set up 3 +3 bonus stats with some risks in having three dump stats.

Back to the 13, 13, 13, 12, 12, 12 line up. That is an average stat of 12.5.
From this article on anydice (http://anydice.com/articles/4d6-drop-lowest/) again, the average over time of 4d6drop1 is 12.25. (I had seen it presented as 12.5 elsewhere).

That said, 4d6d1 has enough variation that spikes can make for some interesting combinations of rolled stats. The linked article arrives at a prediction of 16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 9 which is a bit over the standard array of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8). The standard array ends up with +5 bonus total (+6, -1) before racial bonuses arrive. The predicted array, +6. (+7 -1)

A bit different, but hardly game breaking.
The actual numbers take the moaning and weeping about "balance" in rolled stats and see it off to bed without supper.

My nephew did something interesting. He gave us a window.
4d6d1. If total bonus was less than 3 re roll all. (Or not, player option).
If no score of 16 or above was generated, option to reroll was given.
If roll ended up with +10 (someone gets a hot hand) then he and the player would adjust so that max bonus was worked down to +10. (Or re roll, player option).

As expected, the results were mixed. Oddly enough, not a single peep from any player about "balance" but maybe that's because we (all of us but one) began playing the game in the mid 70's.

[Zman]

Rolling for stats is always something I have a hard time deciding my opinion on. On the one hand, I completely agree with people who talk about point buy leading to cookie cutter characters. On the other hand, I consider allowing players to start with higher than a 15 (pre-racial bonus) to be unbalancing. My first major 5e character started with super high rolls, and I was just ridiculous compared to everyone else. 1 or 2 points doesn't seem like a lot, but enemies are not balanced to be facing +7 attack rolls and DC 15 saves at level 1. I would love to have a rolling method that allows for stats to be capped like they are with point buy, but I have yet to find any method that is reasonable for this.

That said, I am not nearly as worried about the variance that rolling allows. Balance is most important for PvE, not PvP, as this is not a PvP game. If you are too strong for what the game anticipates, that is bad, but if you are stronger than your friend, that is fine. You work together, not apart. I have played characters who rolled good stats, and I have played characters that have rolled bad stats. My favorite character ever rolled probably around average stats in a party where everyone else rolled fantastic stats. So long as the party has a team mindset, and are not in it for themselves, I don't think this is ever a problem. Obviously, not all players can deal with it, and so it doesn't work for all groups. But it has always worked for me an my group.

Really, I don't think there is any ideal method. I wish their was, but ultimately, I don't think it is possible for a single method to have everything I want.

If you want to roll but want to cap out at 15 for balance purposes try these. The two rolling methods I've thought of that allowing rolling and variability yet cap out at 15 are 9+d6, 7+2d4. Here are a couple others that could work as well.

9+d6 is an average of a 12.5 Stat but is highly variable. It also doesn't allow for the possibility of a stat lower than a 10, if you want to be able to start lower than this on won't do it.


d6+9
d6+9
d6+9
d6+9
d6+9
d6+9


7+2d4 is an average of a 12 and allows for a minimum of a 9, but hitting minimums and maximums are harder ie 1/16 or 6.25% chance.


2d4+7
2d4+7
2d4+7
2d4+7
2d4+7
2d4+7


7+d8 is an average of 11.5, allows for a stat of an 8, and you get minimum and maximum rolls 12.5% of the time.


d8+7
d8+7
d8+7
d8+7
d8+7
d8+7


Only potential problem with using these rolling methods is you will end up with characters far more around the average range and players will not be guaranteed a 15, though most would get a 14 or 15.

Now that I got working on this and playing with the math I find this the best method for rolling stats.

5+ 2D10(Best One) It yields a mean of 12.15, an average standard deviation of 2.35 with a range of 6-15.

5+2d10b1
5+2d10b1
5+2d10b1
5+2d10b1
5+2d10b1
5+2d10b1



Lots of other options if you are willing to have anything that is 15 or higher count as a 15.

Edit: Super odd none of the rolls worked considering I didn't preview them or do anything that should have broken the code...

[Kurald Galain]

To me the rolled stats make no sense. Rolled stats are like the guy who spend 8 hours a day at the gym lifting weights every day because he wants to be a big strong warrior, and never spent a day in school, can't even read, yet somehow has an 8 strength and 16 int, because that's what the dice say. How exactly does that make sense?

It's the nature-vs-nurture debate. Point buy is basically "you choose where you spend your training", whereas rolled stats are "the talents you were born with".



Back to the 13, 13, 13, 12, 12, 12 line up. That is an average stat of 12.5.
From this article on anydice (http://anydice.com/articles/4d6-drop-lowest/) again, the average over time of 4d6drop1 is 12.25. (I had seen it presented as 12.5 elsewhere).
But the average, or the sum of all your modifiers, is not what matters. Your best two or three stats matter (mechanically speaking) whereas the others don't. And those will usually be markedly higher when you roll.

And of course this isn't a big deal. But it's still an incentive to roll for stats, and it's clear from this that the designers intended players to roll for stats.

[KorvinStarmast]

And those will usually be markedly higher when you roll.

Not markedly higher -- see the comparison above -- based on the actual averages, but potentially higher when you get a burst of good luck. (Swingy, just like combat at low levels is swingy). The article at any dice showed a 9% chance or so of getting an 18.

[Knaight]

It's the nature-vs-nurture debate. Point buy is basically "you choose where you spend your training", whereas rolled stats are "the talents you were born with".

This only even applies if you're thinking of it terms of the character making the choice, as opposed to viewing stat assigning as a purely metagame, preparatory step one does while making the character so as to get to play later.

[Pex]

I like rolling because:

1) It offers interesting arrays I couldn't get in Point Buy.
2) It's boring that every wizard has 8 CH, every paladin has 8 IN, etc. because Point Buy forces you to for mathematical competency. Dice rolling can still give you an 8 to dump but not all the time. More so you won't have dragonborn wizards or halfling barbarians in Point Buy because of math. Dice rolling allows for the possibility. It doesn't guarantee it, and I don't need a guarantee. I'm happy enough it's mathematically sound possible.
3) I do not think it's an abomination a 1st level character has an 18. I do not demand one, but I abhor and condemn forever the absolute forbiddance of the possibility. This is 5E Point Buy specific not against Point Buy in general as other systems allow for an 18 even if it takes a racial modifier to do it.
4) I dislike 5E makes you choose between increasing an ability score or take a feat. Having a better than Point Buy array at start makes taking a feat more palatable earlier for more interesting things to do without the math of the game getting in your way.
5) Point Buy inherently hurts MAD classes because to be mathematically good at one thing forces being poor in other of your class features. Otherwise, you're just mediocre in all of them.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Thread locked for review.