RPG Pondering: D&D Stat Generation

[Tetsubo 57]

I ask the classic gamer geek question: What is the best method of generating D&D character stats? Dice rolls or point buy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZzndDW_JAk

[Gan The Grey]

Well, from a simulationist point of view, dice roll is the best, as not all people are created equal. Some people are just better than others.

From a gamist point of view, point buy is the best, as all player-characters should start from an equal base.

Translation: I'm not exactly sure I know what I'm talking about. Move along. Nothing to see here.

[Jack Zander]

Well, from a simulationist point of view, dice roll is the best, as not all people are created equal. Some people are just better than others.

However, in a realistic team of adventurers, each person is going to be about as competent as the next, otherwise the others will kick out the one who's holding them back or the savant will leave the group to find another more close to his peers for greater gains.

[Greenish]

Well, from a simulationist point of view, dice roll is the best, as not all people are created equal.

As a counter, an adventuring group rarely is a random sample of people picked with no regards to capabilities. Otherwise, most groups would consider themselves lucky if they managed to get one non-commoner to their group.

I like point-buy, it lets me build my character as I envision him/her/it.

[Koury]

I like point-buy, it lets me build my character as I envision him/her/it.

Bug paste wielding maniac?

[Oracle_Hunter]

TSR D&D: 4d6, drop lowest; arrange to suit.

Spoiler

Show

You're looking to go on adventures, not stat out awesome dudes. There just aren't all that many mechanical options available in character building so the focus has to be more on the actual adventures (and fluffy portions of the character).

Exception: if someone just absolutely must play a MAD character, either allow minimal point transfer (i.e. +x to a score in exchange to -x from another) or just fix their "required" stats at the minimum and 3d6 & arrange the others.

WotC D&D: Point Buy

Spoiler

Show

So much of the game is focused on the mechanics of your character and stats are highly determinative of your ability to "play the game." As PC development is a major facet of the game, it is unwise to use a stat generation system that can close off major portions of the game from a Player.

Also, stats are so important to character power that using a random system will just exacerbate intra-party power inequities that are intrinsic to the system.

IMHO, no stat generation system should take more than the minimum amount of time needed to get the job done. For TSR D&D, that's usually a straight roll with minimal arranging - 30 minutes, tops, for a character. For WotC D&D this would be a point buy followed by about an hour of class, race, and feat selections. For SR, we're talking 2 hours just to spec out your cyberware

[Gan The Grey]

However, in a realistic team of adventurers, each person is going to be about as competent as the next, otherwise the others will kick out the one who's holding them back or the savant will leave the group to find another more close to his peers for greater gains.

Ehhh....not really. Sometimes you deal with what you got because it's the only thing you can trust. Sometimes you adventure with your friends. Sure, on a sufficiently long enough timeline, you would probably get rid of the losers due to them retiring or just them dying off. Besides, depending on classes, a character with a low total attribute sum can easily and successfully adventure with a character with a high total attribute sum. I mean, how many points does a wizard REALLY need to have in order to keep up with the team fighter, or rogue, or MONK for that matter?

So saying that every single character in your group will always have an equal amount of stat distribution? Negative. Statistically improbable.

EDIT I think saying total attribute sum is misleading. What I mean to say is if you convert their random roll into what it would if it was a point buy. Just didn't know how to say that.

[Kurald Galain]

Point Buy causes less arguments about (1) how exactly to roll and what qualifies for rerolls, and (2) that the char creation wasn't fair later on. That's two good arguments to use that.

[Jack Zander]

So saying that every single character in your group will always have an equal amount of stat distribution? Negative. Statistically improbable.

To have an exact equal amount of point buy is very improbable, but so is two people adventuring with two widely differing ability levels. Realistic adventuring teams would probably be within no more than 5 point buys of each other.

Of course, skill has a lot to do with it as well, so depending on class, maybe not.

[Fax Celestis]

I generally have my players roll 5d4 instead of 3d6 or 4d6b3. Sure, it's a 5-20 range, but it has a steeper bell curve, so that outlier low (and outlier high) scores are more uncommon.

[Worlok]

I would propose some sort of hybrid system: The classes they want to play are noted down beforehand. Then you have the players roll the usual 6 rounds of 4d6, adding the three highest rolls as usual, but noting the one left out. The results are applied according to the list of abilities: First roll goes to strength, second to dexterity, third to constitution, fourth int., fifth wis., sixth cha. - This way, you get a fairly random set of statistics, allowing for people who exceed others in terms of overall competence as well as people who are just plain bad at what they do. If a key ability (Such as Charisma for a sorcerer) is below ten, the added result of the left-out dice can be added directly to that score until it hits twelve in an ad hoc point buy. This functions for exactly one ability score. If you still have points left from the dice result thereafter, they are bestowed upon the character as bonus skill points, applicable to any given class skill without exceeding the standard max ranks, but with any cross-class skill they may flow into being treated as a class skill then and ever after. That way you get randomly competent characters (remember: not everyone who does something should reasonably be doing that, but most of those do it anyway.) with unique sets of talents and interests. A rather unwise druid may still exceed in the right circumstances if he knows a lot about ancient elvish architecture, and a highly intelligent fighter may save the party's lives via tactics, even though she is below par as an actual fighter. I recently recommended this one to a DM I know and from what I could gather from his players, it actually helps growing an attachment to your characters. Criticism, anyone?

[Oracle_Hunter]

I recently recommended this one to a DM I know and from what I could gather from his players, it actually helps growing an attachment to your characters. Criticism, anyone?

How, exactly, does the above method accomplish this?

The system seems fine as written, albeit terribly complicated; I'm just confused as to how stat generation like this causes players to form a greater attachment to their character.

[Radar]

The only way of Stat Generation I strongly dislike is rolling stats in order, since it takes away my decisions about the character I would like to play. Want to be a thief with a heart of gold? Not going to happen with an 8 in Dex, unless you want to be comedy gold instead. A lot of classes are completly shut down, if their stats aren't half decent. Obviously you can roll multiple times and pick the best set, but it's IMO just an unnecessary complication.

IMO point buy is much simplier, fair and doesn't require any supervision form the DM, since it's can be checked at any time. If you honestly need some more diversity, then after character creation (preferably done outside of a session) you can roll a d6 or d10 to get some bonus points to distribute before you start your first session.

[Kurald Galain]

How, exactly, does the above method accomplish this?

+1 to that.

Also, any system that can be expressed in one or two lines is preferable (to me) than one that requires several paragraphs of explanation. There doesn't seem to be an added value to the complexity, here.

[Amphetryon]

(3d4+6)x7, drop lowest. Stats from 9 - 18, with 9 and 18 both being statistically rare.

EDIT: typo

[Morty]

I'm perfectly fine with both methods, myself. Dice rolling? Okay. Point buy? Also okay. Point buy makes for more streamlined and balanced gameplay and dice rolling is pleasantly quirky. I see no reason to make a big deal out of it.

[some guy]

IMO point buy is much simplier, fair and doesn't require any supervision form the DM, since it's can be checked at any time.

Though I agree with the fairness, I disagree with the simpleness. I play a lot with persons new to the hobby. With rolling abilities, they just need to roll and assign their abilities, fairly fast done and easy.
When they had to use point-buy it took a lot longer and they needed much more explaination from the DM (who was using a home-ruled version of point-buy I wasn't familiar with, so I couldn't help as much).

I like rolling my abilities, but I'm fine with point-buy too. Rolling just feels more like a game, as if you're already playing, I find it more exciting than point-buy. Point-buy, however, has the advantage of creating your character at home and jumping directly in the adventure without wasting play time.

[Worlok]

How, exactly, does the above method accomplish this?

+1 to that.

To be perfectly honest, I'm not totally sure. Apparently, which in this case means the way i understood them, it's something about coming up with a flawed character (the exemplar intellectual fighter is a character actively played in that camapaign) and working around the resulting impediment. So, a sense-of-accomplishment-thing. Then again, I'm a homebrewer, not a psychologist, so I remain open to the idea that it's primarily a roleplaying thing. Anyway, it's sort of positive feedback, so I thought I should perhaps sneak it in.

Also, any system that can be expressed in one or two lines is preferable (to me) than one that requires several paragraphs of explanation. There doesn't seem to be an added value to the complexity, here.

I'll give you that. But I'm not exactly good at keeping things short and simple. My bad, most likely.

[Duke of URL]

It all depends on your goals. Point-buy lets you set a power level for the game that can be controlled with little variation. Random, well, adds randomness, which generally leads to a much greater variance between characters.

As to whether or not the variance is a problem, that comes down to how much of a character's power is based on his/her ability scores. In the 3.x systems, my opinion is that matter less and less at higher levels -- yes, good scores always help, but they're not absolutely vital, as there are ways to either work around them or options that don't depend (at least heavily) on them.

So in high-level games, I have no problem with random variance, as it has a much lower effect on characters, proportionally. In lower-level games, random variance may add some simulationist realism, so it can be acceptable there, as well.

On the other hand, we are playing a game, after all, and players tend to want to at least start out on somewhat equal footing. Randomness can also lead to specific character concepts being impossible or strongly nerfed, which can be an issue if a player wants to play a certain concept but just doesn't have the rolls to do it.

Mix-and-match is also a possibility. E.g., standard point buy of 25+1d6 puts the average starting PB at 28-29, with the possibility of being a little better or a little worse. You can control the range of abilities while still allowing for some variability.

[Kylarra]

I usually do a 4D6 drop lowest or pointbuy, with pointbuy as a fallback option if the first option is below some baseline (but not if they just don't like the rolls they made).

[VarianArdell]

(2d4+10)x6 ranges 12-18, with 15 being average. then again, most of our campaigns are relatively high-powered...

[bokodasu]

Although I actually prefer the randomness of rolling*, I've never played in a group without at least one cheater; point-buy all the way.

Wait, I take that back. ONCE I played in a group without any cheaters. But how often do I run games for my kids?

---
*This could also just be a throwback due to being old; I still remember the transgressive thrill from the first time we did 3d6*6 and arranged the stats in the order we wanted.

[Aotrs Commander]

I generally use a point-buy these days (point-for-point, though, not WotC's); it as just less hassle than manually ensuring everyone had a reasonable balance of stats. I think Oracle_Hunter has a point; in AD&D it was less important (and though I tended to ensure everyone had at least one good stat), while in 3.5 it's more important.

I generally use base 8 +30 points (giving you, say an 18/16/14/12/10/8 array) nowadays.

(But I'm considering actually raising that (say +6) a bit to allow for some non-stat optimised roleplaying room. (It would not, cosmicially, increase the PCs power-level.) It's kind of tedious having everyone but the party face and maybe the cleric have Cha 8, after like, three or four parties. In fact, in our latest party (though I'm not the DM this time) all SIX of us are Cha 8! (Though the DM did say it was a primarrily dungeon-crawling game.) I think the anser is with the randomised stats, we probably got generally better than the 30 points-buy I used or the fact stats were worth less emant we got more median stats. I know I had a character that was basically all twelves at one point, though that might even have been in early 3.0.)

[Oracle_Hunter]

Apparently, which in this case means the way i understood them, it's something about coming up with a flawed character (the exemplar intellectual fighter is a character actively played in that camapaign) and working around the resulting impediment. So, a sense-of-accomplishment-thing.

To be honest, this is the main concern of mine when it comes to Point Buys ("PBs") - characters usually don't have meaningful mechanical flaws. The flattening effect of standardizing a power level means that people choose their weaknesses where they can easily compensate for them, or otherwise render them irrelevant. In a pure dice roll you can end up with the sort of spread that ends up resulting in a mechanical flaw you have to deal with - but this is by no means assured.

However, I've made my peace with the fact that PBs are the way to go with WotC D&D games: the stats are simply too important to a major piece of game play (i.e. PC development) to be left up to chance.

If you want to have meaningful flaws in D&D PCs, and love to homebrew, I recommend making a d20 list of flaws for each class/type and having each player to roll twice and pick one flaw. Ideally the flaws would be equally mechanically meaningful for a class/type (e.g. cowardice for melee, easily distracted for casters) so that a bad luck doesn't cripple a character but rather provides a flaw for the Player to deal with.

[Duke of URL]

It's a delicate balance between controlling power levels, allowing players to play the characters they want (without making them incapable of doing their primary job), and avoiding min/maxing.

That why I repeat my suggestion of a point buy with a random element. It's not perfect, but it allows for a narrow range of variability around a set power level.

[El Dorado]

My DM mentioned disliking point buy because, in his view, it encourages min maxing. Meh.

That said, he usually provides a generous array of dice rolling methods. I used 5d6 (drop lowest 2) x 6 in our last campaign.

For me, I prefer point buy if I'm trying to create a specific class or am trying to roll up a character who is going to fill a needed role in the party. If I have no idea what I want to play, I let the dice rolls give me ideas.

[Crow]

4d6 drop lowest, with a fallback of 25 point buy if the roller doesn't like what they rolled.

[valadil]

I like point buy. It lets players write up their characters without a GM present. Even if you trust your players to roll stats on their own, the players might not trust each other. I like to avoid needless jealousy.

I've also seen players commit suicide when they don't like their rolls. IMO that's immature and indicative of a person with whom I don't want to game, but I don't always have full control over the group and can't go about kicking other PCs out of the party. PB avoids that situation entirely.

[Tengu_temp]

Point buy gives you more control over creating the character you want, and is more fair. If you ask me, rolling for stats is a relic from the old times, when RPGs were more like board games with the DM instead of a board. Are there any modern RPGs that use random elements in character creation, anyway? Even 4e no longer treats rolling for stats as default, and it did away with random HP.

[Dubious Pie]

Everyone uses low point buys, but 4d6b3 is a 38 point buy equiviant.