generating ability scores

[DareTheRogue]

Well I am thinking about different ways to generate characters. I mean my groups have got their own ways that they like but I feel like there is some skimming and lying to it. For example we use a 4d6 drop lowest and reroll all 1s for one game, 4d6 drop lowest for another, 3d6 roll 2 sets and choose one. All feel like valid ways but somehow all the players except myself and one other end up with some broken stats. So I was considering adding a small twist to the generation of stats. Pre-rolled scores, unplaced, and balanced out by a modifier that is added to the stats. To determine the modifier you take a set of numbers and find the total of the modifiers, lets take an example set 9,10,12,14,15,15 which is a 6, or 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13 which is a zero. The first set is exceptional but not overpowered, while the second in an average. Lets say the heros should have an exceptional set at least, they are heros of course, well we give the average set a bonus, lets say (idea from a player) a free step up on vision, normal to lowlight, lowlight to dark vision, a nice bonus but not game breaking, the player was just born with a bit more sensitive eyes. But what happens when a set is inherently overpowered lets say like 10, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18 a 12 total, a very high bonus. Well we give a penalty, lets say for this person a loss of 5 feet of movement, or a negative reaction to magical effects.

Is this a valid way to set up a party, a GM randomly generating scores and then setting them up with proper benefits and restrictions to make everyone balanced?

And if so any suggestions on benefits and penalties?

[RTGoodman]

I'd probably never trust a DM to come up with my stats and random drawbacks because I might have stats that are TOO good. Some might like it, though.

Personally, if you want a balanced party, I'd just use Point Buy, which can be found somewhere in the DMG (and various places online, though that's illegal frowned upon by WotC). For a "standard party," I think it's 25 points; 28 is considered strong, and 32 is "very strong" or something.


EDIT:

No it isn't. You can't copyright game mechanics.

@\/: Hmm. I thought it was of the things they didn't put in the SRD specially so it wasn't allowed to be reprinted all over the place (like leveling rules and such). I'm not big on copyright law, though, so I might be wrong.

[Emperor Tippy]

though that's illegal

No it isn't. You can't copyright game mechanics.

[Vortling]

I wouldn't penalize players for rolling high on their stats. If you don't like the "broken" stats you should use point buy instead of random rolling. Also the bonuses and penalties you're talking about don't really help out someone who has low stats or truely penalize someone who has high stats unless you take that "negative reaction" to magic to the extreme.

If you must have balance and randomness, I suggest you use point buy to build the stats but then assign the scores randomly to abilities. For example a player could make a character with 8,10,12,14,14,16 but he'd then have to roll a die to assign which number goes to which stat.

[DareTheRogue]

I know point buy but i never see anyone who likes it, i personally don't care, a balanced party works for me, but when you have the spotlight stealer i lose interest, and a few of us have looked at ways to smooth that out, point buy may be an answer though, just currently not considered

[darkzucchini]

I will tell you the method that I use, and my players seem to like it.

First, I have my players roll 4d6b3 7 times for stats, keep the best 6 rolls. If the end total modifier is below +6 or if you have no stats above 14, you can reroll (I tend to like hide modifiers for my games, but this part can be modifier according to your desired result). I take the character with the highest totaled score (add all their stats up) and compare all the other character's totaled score to the highest totaled score and award each player the difference between their score and the high score in points that they can use to increase their stats through the point by method.

For example, if Player A has a 90 point total, Player B has a 87 point total, and Player C has a 65 point total, than Player A would get 0 points, Player B would get 3 points, and Player C get 25 points.

This method keeps much of the randomness provided by die rolling while allowing for some of the balancing and customization of point buy.

[Tengu_temp]

No it isn't. You can't copyright game mechanics.

I agree, at least in this one particular case. It's just a very small table, goshdangit. Let's not go crazy, there is nothing bad or illegal by letting someone know of such a small thing! In fact, I'm doing it right now.

X point buy means that you have X points to distribute between your attributes (before racial modifiers), each value costing a different amount of points:
8 - 0 points
9 - 1 point
10 - 2 points
11 - 3 points
12 - 4 points
13 - 5 points
14 - 6 points
15 - 8 points
16 - 10 points
17 - 13 points
18 - 16 points

[Emperor Tippy]

I agree

There is nothing to agree or disagree about, the law is pretty clear. You can't copyright any game mechanics (you can trademark things but that isn't relevant at the moment).

[Chronos]

@\/: Hmm. I thought it was of the things they didn't put in the SRD specially so it wasn't allowed to be reprinted all over the place (like leveling rules and such). I'm not big on copyright law, though, so I might be wrong.

In fact, they left it out of the SRD precisely because they can't copyright game mechanics. A lot of the things in the SRD can, in fact, be protected by copyright law. The SRD, and the OGL in general, is a sort of carrot-and-stick approach: WotC explicitly gives you permission to use, copy, share, etc. the material released under the OGL, under condition that you don't copy or share certain other information. Most people like the convenience of the SRD, so they voluntarily agree to this restriction. But a person could choose not to accept the Open Game License, and such a person could then reproduce things like the Point Buy table (but then wouldn't have permission to use the material in the SRD which is copyrightable). Theoretically, Hasbro's crack team of elite law ninjas could go after someone who shares both the Point Buy table and SRD material, but in the eyes of the law, the actual violation wouldn't be the point-buy table, it'd be the other material.

[Tallis]

Penalties for high scores and bonuses for low is an interesting idea, but it would be waaay too easy to create even more imbalance. A player may find more uses for a bonus than intended or a penalty might be more of a hinderance than you realize.

The most balanced approach would be using a set array of scores (like 4e does as a default method). I personally like to roll though, so I can see where the other players are coming from.

The method I usually use is: 4d6 drop the lowest 7 times (drop the lowest). I sometimes also give a minimum net bonus of +5. This tends to give everyone above average stats of course. There is still the chance of one character outshining the others, but the chances are reduced.

If you feel like the other players may be fudging their rolls make characters as a group. This way the DM can keep an eye on the rolling. It also gives the group the opportunity to make a group that fits together better since you can talk to each other as you're creating them. This also makes a good excuse if you want to avoid offending anyone.

[Tempest Fennac]

I like using a 32 Point Buy to be honest. If using dice rolls, I'd probably use the "roll 4d6, drop the lowest" method. If you wanted to use a set array, would 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 10 be balanced enough? (It's a 30 point buy.)

[RTGoodman]

[Info on copyright stuff, the SRD, and such.]

Ah, okay, thanks.

The most balanced approach would be using a set array of scores (like 4e does as a default method). I personally like to roll though, so I can see where the other players are coming from.

We've used a method sort of like combination of these before with pretty good results. Basically, every player rolls 4d6 drop lowest and comes up with a set of 6 stats. As a group, the party has to choose one set, which everyone gets. It's great when players argue for ten minutes over whether they need the set that has a high number and consecutively lower ones (18 16 15 13 10 9) or the set that's generally better overall but with no 17s or 18s (16 16 15 14 13 13).

[ghost_warlock]

I like using a 32 Point Buy to be honest. If using dice rolls, I'd probably use the "roll 4d6, drop the lowest" method. If you wanted to use a set array, would 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 10 be balanced enough? (It's a 30 point buy.)

I also prefer point buy...but more in the realm of 40 points.

As a DM I've been known to throw 3rd-level parties against CR 8+ creatures, though.

[Tempest Fennac]

High stats would definitly help there. I don't know if I'd want my stats to be that high (to be fair, I'm not sure what my gamestyle is apart from strategist: I'm not really a power gamer due to not wanting my characters to be powerful enough to upstage people, but my RPing is poor so I tend to focus more on making my characters as powerful as possible).

[Mastikator]

I always go with point buy, 28 points and keep them dirt poor. hehe
Though I've been thinking of rolling 20d6 drop 2, then assign each ability 3 dice. Less overpowered than 4d6 drop 1 and still more versatile.

Now that I think of it, maybe just rolling 3d6's might work too. I prefer to keep the game low powered, to prevent cheese.

[Tallis]

Though I've been thinking of rolling 20d6 drop 2, then assign each ability 3 dice. Less overpowered than 4d6 drop 1 and still more versatile.

Now that I think of it, maybe just rolling 3d6's might work too. I prefer to keep the game low powered, to prevent cheese.

Both those methods work fine, but less dice means more randomness. Characters would tend to be less powerful overall, but that one that gets good rolls would stand out even more because of it.

[Jorgo Mono]

Elite Array, every time. Much to my player's and DM's dismay. 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

I started favoring the array when one of my players ruled 4 18s.

[Viruzzo]

I agree that dice rolls are too random, and will cause either one member of the group to be too strong or one to be too weak, and that's a bad way to start. Either use a limited point buy (25-28) or use a standard array (like the elite one).

[Tempest Fennac]

I always found the name "Elite Array" to be ironic due to how weak it is. Does it work that well? I'd that thought that it would be a liability for a lot of classes.

[Viruzzo]

I always found the name "Elite Array" to be ironic due to how weak it is. Does it work that well? I'd that thought that it would be a liability for a lot of classes.

That depends on the level of difficulty of your campaign: the problem usually lies in the fact that players always find a way to maximize their primary stat getting around 18, but if you use 25 points they would either average near the elite array or get a single powerful stat by sacrificing the others.
A nice idea may be to make some (two or three, from more to less specialized) arrays yourself by point buy based on your desired value and give those to the players.

[Tempest Fennac]

That could work (if I was DMing, I'd probably give a choice between a 32 PB ot rolling 5d6 while dropping the 2 lowest).

[Skjaldbakka]

I normally do 32 pt. buy anymore, just so the first session is actual game time. Most of my players have been playing with me for a while, and like to have a few months to play with building their characters.

[Viruzzo]

The problem I see with those many points is that it encourages specialization instead of variety: the extra points are almost certainly going in their primary stat. The idea behind the array and the point-buy systems is to make them have as few dump stats as possible.

[Cainen]

4d4+4. I'm sure at least some of you remember where this is from.

[Chymist]

I usually have pretty high-powered games, but I have a rather unusual ability generation scheme. It's mostly based on the 3x3 grid, where you have

Int Wis Cha
Str
Dex
Con

and you roll 4d6 drop the lowest 9 times, going across the rows. Then you can only choose something for each stat from its row or column. Finally there is a final random d20 roll which can be used to replace any stat.

It keeps the rolling fun and random, plus adds a bit more strategy into the choices. Plus any time you have a barbarian with 16 charisma, but only 13 strength, it helps the rping.

[Grynning]

I personally prefer point buy, as I think it's the most equitable and balanced. However there are times when I like rolling my stats...an odd spread of stats can help provide role playing inspiration, or can sometimes change the entire theme of the character.

The d20 Conan RPG by Mongoose suggests a "Heroic" ability generation method for high powered parties (appropriate to the genre) which consists of starting every score at 10 and adding 1D8. Keeps anyone from having a really low score, but can end up being unfair, as it's more likely you'll have one player who rolls a string of high numbers while another rolls low.

We did something similar for one of our D&D campaigns, where every stat started at 6, then you rolled 3d6 and took the best two and added it to that.

One thing that should never happen is the DM allowing multiple methods to be used, though. I'm a bit annoyed with the 4th edition game I'm playing in at the moment, because I made my character with point buy because the DM told me to, then I found out that several of the other players used rolled stats (with mysteriously high scores, go figure) and he told them it was ok. My character's total bonuses are a good 4 points lower than the party wizard's...grrr...

[Tempest Fennac]

Isn't specialisation often more realistic, though? (Eg: you'd expect a Wizard to have high Int and low Str due to what they spend their time doing, while you'd expct the opposite from a Barbarian.)

[Viruzzo]

However there are times when I like rolling my stats...an odd spread of stats can help provide role playing inspiration, or can sometimes change the entire theme of the character.

That's also true, and it can be interesting to try a campaign where you roll for the scores in order (I think it's also on the 3.5 DMG). That means that you have to choose you class depending on that, and probably will have a rstat outline that really differs from the one you would choose. Hard to play with (especially in 2e where you don't get extra stats), but with a good group (roleplaying oriented) can be a lot of fun.

Isn't specialisation often more realistic, though?

Probably, but makes the character a lot more shallow.

[Grynning]

Isn't specialisation often more realistic, though? (Eg: you'd expect a Wizard to have high Int and low Str due to what they spend their time doing, while you'd expct the opposite from a Barbarian.)

I don't think that's necessarily true. A) Nothing about ability scores is very realistic, as many of them represent things that aren't quantifiable in real life and B) Many people choose careers that don't necessarily play to all of their natural talents. I work at a software company, where you might expect everyone to be "high Int/Wis types" or something, but there are a lot of people there who are tough, strong and/or athletic, a lot of people that are charming, some are perhaps intellectually behind the curve, etc. It's more "realistic" to have random scores in many ways, because the genetic hand you're dealt isn't the only thing that determines the kind of person you'll be, and it's not something you have control over.

[ericgrau]

You can copyright gaming rules. The free 3.5e SRD is provided as a courtesy, and contains only core rules. Whether or not point-buy is legal or anyone really cares, I dunno.