Post/Author/DateTime	Post
xanadu 09-23-04, 11:33 PM	Wonder if you can help me out here. After a long break from D & D (2nd ed.!), we decided to start up a 3.5 campaign. I hate the concept of point buy as cookie cutter characters are blah and I like the element of uncertainty which comes with rolling the dice. So we do 4d6 drop lowest. The first players first 3 rolls are: 18, 14, 16. He already has 32 points and has 3 rolls to go :weep: Of course, he doesn't get an 8 or something but finishes up with a 12, 12, and 16. Now he is running around with a 50 point buy. Another player rolled a commoner. Go ahead, roll again. Another commoner. 3rd time's the charm. Well: 10, 14, 13, 15, 11, 12. He understands this is a normal character; he is just upset because player #1 is superman and the other 4 players all rolled well (their point totals were in the high 30s.) I imagine you folks who roll dice have come across this. Any helpful advice in dealing with the disgruntled player? He isn't exactly known for making the best of a bad situation.
Araciel 09-23-04, 11:38 PM	well sometimes those are the breaks...is what i'd say what you could have done, was what i used to do..have the players roll a matrix, that is roll 6 sets of stats, and put them all into a chart, and then choose any line in any direction, diagonal, up, down, whatever...of course this still sometimes leaves people wanting more, but you'll have closer average scores for all the characters.
Duvanok 09-24-04, 12:18 AM	Perhaps I am confused. . . you say you don't like point buy because you like the uncertainty of dice rolls. Yet, when a player rolls higher than average you ask for advice on how to fix it. :confused: 4d6 drop the lowest usually produces slightly higher scores for characters but anytime you leave the ability scores up to luck there is always going to be a player who (believe it or not) gets luckier than the others. That's why point buy was invented, it sort of starts everyone off on an even playing field. My advice would be to scrap it and go with the point buy, or at very least just give them a set amount of points to distribute to their attributes (i.e. 78 points to divy up among their attributes without going over 18 or below 8 before racial adjustments). I don't think you will find the outcome as "cookie-cutter" as you assume it will be. And of course you won't have to worry about imbalance because let me tell ya: that character with the equivalent of a 50 point by is going to steal the show every session.
Griogre 09-24-04, 01:59 AM	As a DM I learned a long time ago, never give a player a roll if you aren't willing to accept it. Next time, don't use dice rolling if it really bugs you. I'm like you though, I always have characters roll stats, myself. My experience is that super characters often have low survival rates in this sense. They often try things and succeed where the more normal characters can't or won't. This encourages them to take more risks. Finally, they try something so tough, when they fail it is often fatal to them. There are some things you can do, though. Encourage the player with the good rolls to run a hybrid class. Most hybrids need at least 3 above average rolls to do well. They often are not as powerful as the base classes (Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue) but are interesting to run. If you encourage you other players with "average" rolls to play prime classes that will level out some of the differances between the characters. When you run the game, take the super character into account and try adding a few more creatures to encounters so the party feels a little intimidated. If you do this right, the other players might be happy to have the super character around because he is saving their bacon and generating more ep for them (point this out tactfully). Don't go overboard with this and wipe out the party, though. On the disgruntled player. You are never go to make him happy about the stats. If you want to make him happy, or at least less unhappy, give him some type of edge in the campaign so he can feel his character is important too. IE his character's dad is a Lord or he has a special pet or friend or ability or a in with important / powerful NPC's. Give his character an in campaign roleplaying type edge. Don't go overboard with this, but make it real. The idea is to make it neat or cool and unique not necesary real powerful.
flowerew 09-24-04, 02:07 AM	teh way i do it is more 3.0 ed... 3d6 7 times, drop one score, and let the player design his ability scores. i never liekd point buy, it catered too mcuh to the player and made me feel like the players could be god.
Sphyre 09-24-04, 07:45 AM	I developed this method for giving players a level of control over their stats so they can't complain about them but at the same time it keeps the spirit of being random. I love it and use it for all my campaigns I DM now. It even has a few statistics posted by tierra star on the expected (average) values when using the method. Give it a try!
amethal 09-24-04, 08:27 AM	My players used the 4d6 drop lowest method, but I told them in advance that I was looking for a party with similar stats in order to be fair on everybody. The first people to roll got pretty good characters, and that set the standard for the rest. Any characters which weren't up to the standard were re-rolled. In the end, I also gave the worst character (a ranger) a free +2 boost to his wisdom (from 10 to 12). What would be the reaction if you asked the player of the super character to lower some of his stats? (I can imagine, but it might be worth a try!) At the very least, you might consider letting the worst character re-roll his stats. From the experience of our half-celestial paladin - lowest score 14, can't seem to roll higher than an 8 during play - then stats are not everything. If you play them as rolled, it may not prove too unbalancing in practice. Also, our NPCs tend to follow the rule of "take out the leader" in combat. If a PC looks significantly better than his comrades he is going to attract most of the opposition's attention. If that opposition is energy draining undead things can get evened out very quickly. This tactic works especially well if the high stat PC is played in a cocky manner. "Of course they are going for you George. They are not going to waste their time attacking your lowly sidekicks. They know that once they've got you down they'll easily mop up the rest of the party." (Our halfling gets away unscathed from most combats simply by making sure he is standing next to the half-orc barbarian with the ridiculous strength; by the time the NPC realises the halfling rogue is also a threat it is usually too late.)
CrippleMrOnion 09-24-04, 08:35 AM	I was with you, Xanadu, for a long time. I loved 4d6 drop stat generation. Then, more and more frequently, I noted that there was always one player (not the SAME one, but at least one) who had rolled in front of me significantly better than the others. Since the player who did this changed, no one player ever turned into a cocky little punk, but there was always an air of unfairness in the fact that one play was so statistically better than the others. So I moved to a high point buy; I think my FIRST was 32. That campaign, though, went down the drain real fast. The next time I went to 28. Even there, the two players I had in that campaign were taking on equal CR creatures with only a challenge--they should have been taking on CR-2 creatures since they were only half a party. Finally, I moved to 25 point buy, which I swear by now. It's the system the creatures were designed to go up against, so it's less work for YOU to figure out what a true "challenge" is. It also, while it DOES make for "cookie cutter" characters, preserves in-party balance. If you want less cookie-cutter and more ice creamy characters, let them take a single stat down to 6 (and, thus, to 4 if they have racial adjustments) to earn an extra two points to spend. That'll differentiate the characters enough while preserving the ever-important party balance. When that party balance is lost, the game will slowly disintegrate. It has nothing to do with your DMing; the Players will slowly build up a resentment for the one strong one and that will play out both in and out of game. It's interesting to me that you went the other way: from 25 point buy to 4d6. Perhaps this is more proof that the grass always SEEMS greener on the other side. To deal with your players who already rolled, just tell them, "Look, sorry, my mistake. You're going to have to go with (pick a number) point buy here." They won't be happy, but, if they're worthy players, they'll respect your decision as DM and adhere to it.
Aricandor 09-24-04, 01:12 PM	One should go with what the players like. Of course, you shouldn't let them decide stoopid things like "10d6 drop 7 lowest" or something equally obscene. We began with standard 4d6 drop lowest, and moved on to three arrays of 4d6 drop lowest and you pick whichever you feel is the most appropriate. We then went on to 32 point buy. The players always wanted more points to spend though, and eventually we moved back to 3 three arrays of 4d6 scrap lowest. Works nice, though sometimes a player is more than dissatisfied with their rolls. I judge on a case by case basis whether or not they may reroll all the arrays.
Stuntman 09-24-04, 02:01 PM	It sounds like the player is upset because he rolled low compared to the others not because of the uncertainty of the 4d6 method of generating characters. I would highly doubt that he would have had any issue if he rolled high. Them's the breaks. If he had an issue with this method, he should have stated this before anyone rolled anything. If none of the players had any issue with rolling stats, then they should accept the stats that they rolled. Complaining after the fact is too late and gives me a bad impression of the player in question. The player and the DM knew ahead of time that it is likely there will be some PC's with higher stats than others. Someone could have rolled all 18's and another person could have rolled 14, 10, 10, 10, 10, 8. If you and your players are not willing to live with such a possible outcome, or even one less extreme, then you should have chosen another method of generating the characters before anyone rolled their stats. If you want some randomness, but keep the power level relatively even, then you could have said that you need to reroll if your point buy equivalent is not between X and Y. Then everyone ahead of time knows the power level and that anything that is higher or lower must be rerolled. Changing rules after the fact sets a dangerous precident for the game.
danielinthewolvesden 09-24-04, 03:00 PM	Well, you don't have that problem with "point buy". Why not do this? Allow folks to roll their PC's and then take the result OR a 32 point buy? Thus, no one gets a real sucky PC, but some lucky ones get a great PC. 25 point buy sucks. Sorry, it just doesn't feel "heroic".
Shadowmagyk 09-24-04, 03:30 PM	When I have the players roll stats, they are allowed 4D6, drop the lowest, and reroll 1's. This makes it better on everyone, and prevents one PC from being superman. I sometimes allow a free 18, but it depends upon everyone's scores. I let them know that I grant the 18, as long as they do not already have an 18, and I never had any complaints. If I dont allow the free 18, and the player does not like his roll, I will let him decide if he wants to let me roll for him, but if I roll, he has to keep those numbers. It can work both ways for the player. The stats usually range from 11-17 with this method, This array is most common that I have seen: 17, 15, 14, 14, 14, 13 So, there are times when one of the characters has two 18's, but he will most often have some 10's and 11's. I dont know why this happens, but it always seems to work this way. Anyway, I like this method for abilities, because I can get a good idea of what they will be, but there is still the randomness from the dice. I am not AGAINST point-buy. I just think that the players will complain less, and wont feel cheated, if I do it this way. (It also means that I get to create my NPCs in this way!) :smirk: :devil: :thumbsup:
Captain Obvious 09-24-04, 04:09 PM	As a DM I learned a long time ago, never give a player a roll if you aren't willing to accept it. Next time, don't use dice rolling if it really bugs you. I totally agree. If rolling is your rule, stick with it. Just make sure your players are rolling in front of the group. Everybody sees the roll, and there's no unjustified resentment of someone's good rolls. Anyone will lie about a die roll if they get to do it in private. Personally, I love the point buy system, because it eliminates the problem xanadu is now faced with. Randomness is well and good, but when you're setting up attributes that will last as long as the character does (as well as help lengthen the PCs life) its hard for a player not to resent being stuck with lousy rolls. Plus, players can make their characters at home, since their stats can be audited at the first session. You'll hear a lot people talk about how they enjoy playing characters with flaws, but In my eighteen years of DMing, I've yet to meet a player who will cheerfully play a character with nothing above a 12. My group tried the choose your method (buy or roll) option, but we gave it up after a few character sessions. We gave it up primarily because the mid range point buy is a better deal than rolling 4d6 is. The one time you beat the odds isn't going to balance off the numerous times your stats didn't. Giving a player who elects to roll the safety valve of taking the point buy, just means everybody should roll first. We experimented with everybody gets a mid range point buy, and a person who has rolled first then chooses the point buy gets less points to buy. Well we wrote the rule, but we never use it - everyone does the point buy. Added: If you think about it - all of the many schemes for rolling (adding dice to drop the low, assigning scores out of sequence, arrays, moving points around) are all just ways of raising the average scores and giving the player more choice. Why not just skip the randomness and have everybody start from a common baseline?
LiXinjian 09-24-04, 04:12 PM	If you want to add a little spice to the old point-buy method, how about granting your players an extra die to roll? I give my players 77 points to divy up among their six scores (nothing lower than 8, nothing higher than 18 before racial adjustments), then grant them 1d4-1 extra points. The beauty of point-buy systems is that it's easy to see if your NPCs are within the power-level of the PCs. Otherwise, if only one of your PC has superhuman stats, then it becomes harder for you to evaluate challenges. But to address your little problem, I can only tell you that the initial "hype" of getting good (or poor) stats fades over time. In my group, it's hardly an issue except during the first game. However, when there is such a significant gap, it's hard not to notice the many advantages enjoyed by the player whose stats are exceptional. I think you should up that character's stats a bit if, after a bit of play, it becomes evident the others are outshining him.
Wayne 09-24-04, 04:26 PM	I don't like using a point buy (since it basically necessitates min-maxing-- fine for me, but most of my players are more casual and like the interesting factors of having higher "dump stats" and the like), personally. So instead I simply let all my players roll, find the total for each, and then the player that has the highest average sets the baseline. I give the other players who didn't roll as well a few extra points, but let them pick them (so the "winner" has the highest stats, but the others get a bit more customization to make up for their lower stats overall). For example, one of my players rolled a total of 92 attribute points (all 18's is 108, for comparison), far above the runner-up (87); most of the others ranged from 78-84. So I gave everyone a bonus six points (except for the runner-up, who got 3, to keep the other players even)-- capped at 18 still, of course-- which gave them a bit more relevant power but still not as high stats overall as the winner (and she, in a pretty smart move, picked a MAD-Monk). I find that it works great-- the people who rolled low get something for their effort, and the people that roll really high still win. If I played a heavy-combat hack-and-slash game I probably wouldn't do that, since fewer stats are important; but that's not the case. And I haven't had anybody complain about that system yet. *chuckles*
jagggar 09-24-04, 07:00 PM	I don't like using a point buy (since it basically necessitates min-maxing-- fine for me, but most of my players are more casual and like the interesting factors of having higher "dump stats" and the like), personally. So instead I simply let all my players roll, find the total for each, and then the player that has the highest average sets the baseline. I give the other players who didn't roll as well a few extra points, but let them pick them (so the "winner" has the highest stats, but the others get a bit more customization to make up for their lower stats overall). Do you have an rules about how many extra points they get, or have you just gotten a feel for it? I just started an online game. I rolled up a couple of sets of stats (5d4, drop 2 lowest, reroll 1's) and gave them all the same scores from what I thought the best was.
Sildatorak 09-24-04, 07:23 PM	If you want to keep uncertainty but keep everyone in the same ballpark you could have players do a 25+1d6 point buy (27+1d4 wouldn't be bad either). 26-31 means that if anyone can have one 18 and no penalties, and that no one will have two 18's. There is still a pretty good amount of variation on the stats, but not enough to be really overpowering, IMO.
Heron_Marked_Blade 09-24-04, 07:45 PM	One other stat-generating method I haven't seen presented in this thread (did I miss it?) is to give all your players the same spread. A spread I've seen used quite a bit is 17, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11. Individual players can assign those stats as they see fit. This spread even allows the possibility of a decent monk or hybrid character. It is, of course, a rather high powered spread (82 points vs. standard 78), but that isn't anything a good DM can't handle.
Sphyre 09-24-04, 08:26 PM	Shakespeare Played D&D v3.5 :rofl: :bow: :D
xanadu 09-24-04, 10:08 PM	Duvanok - Its not that I'm bothered he got a 50 point buy (well I am but I can deal with this in various ways as others mentioned), it is the fact that there is a player who feels his PC is inadequate because his stats are noticably inferior to the rest of the group even after 3 rolls. Everyone else - Thanks for the advice/tips. I agree sticking to my guns here was best and your feedback was good. I think he was more bummed at the time than he is now. Part of it was he is new to 3.5. I told him to think in A D&D terms, you know when you needed a 15 to get a +1 modifier. So he realized his 12's and 13's still give his character bonuses and the 14's was like an old 16. Sphyre - that's quite the link there. I'll have to look over that more carfeully. It looks like many of you do point buy so I guess maybe I should give it a shot again. It just bothered me that all fighter's had the common sense of a bowling ball, Wizards the stength of a 10 year old, and Druids investing no points in their physical attributes because they knew they didn't really need them. I did talk to a friend and he recommended that if I like to use dice, have the players "draft" their scores (i.e. the players roll all attributes separetly and go into a pool which the players select). He said this allows customization, some varience from stereotypes, and, best of all, that everyone is basically equal. Sounds interesting...anyone every do anything like this?
Wayne 09-24-04, 10:24 PM	Do you have an rules about how many extra points they get, or have you just gotten a feel for it? Sort of both. In the most recent example the high score was a 92 and the second best an 87 (the others beyond that). I gave the guy with 87 +3 (to 90), the two people that were [I think] 85 and 83 a +4, and the rest (78-81) +6... something like that. The worst player ended up with a total of 84-- a ways below the best rollers but with more points in her specialty. I concede that it's a bit more of a hassle than simple straight rolling or point buy, but my players don't like point buy (nor do I) and with a group large enough (8) that chance would've caused too much stratification in stats, evening things out seemed fairest. (I would not recommend this to DMs who have players dedicating to abusing the system no matter what, heh-- if you have someone who takes a lower roll on his dice spread just to get bonus points for an 18, I would think twice about it. :/)
Burgundy Lotus 09-24-04, 11:19 PM	I once let the PCs each roll one of the stats, then I added any to make up the 6 and let them use those as desired. Everyone is equal and there still is a rrandom feel to it. This is as close as we've come to point buy.
D+1 09-25-04, 02:15 AM	From 1E through 3E there are 24 official options for creating character ability scores. My first suggestion would be to take a second look at the ones mentioned in 3E, specifically the Organic Method. 3/4d6 for all abilities IN ORDER; pick one to reroll; then finally switch the position of any two ability scores. A few other interesting unofficial options are: Players make 7 rolls using the best 3 of 4d6, then drop one of the 7 and arrange as desired. Each player uses the same set of 18 individual die results, adding as many to an ability as desired so long as no leftover points are wasted (similar to 3E Method VII) and results for all scores are between 3 and 18. A typical pool would be 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 1 1, though it could be weighted as the DM sees fit. Its only real drawback is again the complete removal of the random element making the exercise a sterile and calculating one encouraging clone, formulaic characters. A slight modification would be to only allow 3 "dice" to be combined for any ability score. A logical modification of the above method where 18d6 (or perhaps more or fewer dice) are rolled all at once and then combined into 6 ability scores of between 3 and 18. Somewhat better as it reintroduces the random element. A further modification would be that only 3 dice can be combined together to create a given score. Yet again it retains a lot of the sterility and unoriginality in character design of free-arrangement methods. Use playing cards. This method is commonly executed with playing cards though it essentially is a Dice Pool method. The way it works is that cards from a standard poker deck are used to represent dice rolls. Ace=1, deuce=2, etc. In one option there are 4 of each suit from ace to 6. They are shuffled and six seperate "hands" of 4 cards each are dealt. The best three cards are kept in each hand and the total value of the hands equals the ability scores and they are then assigned as desired. Other options generally just alter the available pool values (and may require more than one deck of cards). This gives you random stat values but ensures that all characteristics are derived from EXACTLY the same pool. Not really a method on its own as such but a combination of two or more random generation methods. A player uses one method to generate ability scores and then is allowed to go through using a second, often entirely different method and keeping the best results. I've seen it presented as either the players choice between the two different sets of numbers that each method creates, or generating one score at a time and keeping the best of the two results for a given ability score. 21d6 are rolled. The best 18 dice are kept. The remaining dice are freely combined; 3 to each ability score. Obviously modifiable to any number of d6, not just 21. Using best 3 of 4d6 (or strait 3d6 or whatever), generate six sets of six ability scores each, putting them into a 6x6 matrix. For example, using 3 of 4d6 I got: - A B C D E F A 7 14 10 16 9 13 B 9 14 15 15 12 10 C 13 15 10 13 11 12 D 13 11 10 10 9 17 E 15 13 10 13 18 10 F 13 12 14 9 17 10 The player may then select a set of 6 ability scores by reading in a straight line anywhere on that matrix, whether that be reading a row forwards or backwards, reading a column up or down, or one of the two diagonals backwards or forwards. That gives 28 seperate combinations that a player can choose from 36 generated scores. This is an interesting method and one of the things I like most is the innate "handicapping" that it requires. In finding the best set of stats for your desired character you almost certainly have to make some compromises, but you have a choice among which set of compromises you prefer. In that respect it is like the Organic Method, which I still prefer, but this is a good second option and I personally would have no trouble using it. I've seen another method (with variations) mentioned a couple of times now: Make three stat rolls using best 3 of 4d6. For the last three stats subtract your first sets of rolls from 25. Maximum of 18 on any stat So if you roll an 18 one of your stats will be 7 (25-18). 7 will be the lowest mirror score you'll get from a high initial roll. But if you roll a 7 - or LOWER - your corresponding stat from that will be 18, making 18's much more common. I'd personally adjust this due to the inordinate number of 18's that are certain to be generated; say subtract from 23 instead of 25. General Modifications that could be applied to almost all of these: Rerolling die results of 1. Another is the free assignment of the rolls may be rescinded. Players can either record the rolls in the order they are generated in the same order as the ability scores are presented, or a second slight variation to that is that as each ability score is generated the player must immediately assign it to an ability score (thus the player must gamble on what his remaining dice rolls may or may not produce in assigning a result to an ability score). Then, of course, there are the minimums that can be set for any method. The 3E default is that a character may be rerolled if before adjusting for race there is no score above 13 or the ability mods add up to 0 or less. But it's easy to add to or adjust those standards. For example it could be added that no score may be below 9. Scores that are below 9 could either simply become 9, allow a reroll of that ability score only, or allow rerolling the entire character. Instead of needing at least one score above 13 or mods above 0, it could be at least one score above 14 and mods totalling more than +3. One final idea could be applied to a situation as the original post describes after the fact. That is, after characters are generated one PC appears to really shine and another appears to be very mundane. Normally I would say. "That's what random generation MEANS - learn to live with it." But at time of creation those seemingly "weak" PC's could be compensated with some equipment, money, magic items, NPC contacts, or even a head start on XP. Type and amounts of such compensation is naturally going to have to be largely played by ear with the DM simply giving out what he feels is right. There's a notable danger of going overboard with that sort of thing. Oh yeah, one more thing. I was going to add in a snide, truly flame-bait comment about people who use point-buy, but I decided instead I'll just say this: D&D has been around for 30 years. For perhaps 4 of those years point buy has been a commonly known option, but also it's only in those 4 years that I've seen people insist that anything but absolute equity in ability scores is somehow not just unfair but also unfun. Neither is true. Random methods are just that - random. Neither random nor point-buy is inherently better, they're just different. They both have advantages and drawbacks. Random methods require up front the acceptance of UNEVEN results for both a given set of ability scores and in comparing ability scores between characters. Even if ability scores are IDENTICAL it's a virtual impossibility to get two characters who are actually equal. For nearly 30 years now _I_ have assumed that seeing characters of inherently differing ability score totals was part of the interest and challenge of playing the game (including the part of the game known as character creation). Player maturity is a major factor in much of this as well. Mature players are more intrigued by the possibilities of what they can do with their own characters and much less bothered by what someone else can do with theirs.
Degobah 09-25-04, 03:26 AM	My group uses point buy, and we'd never go back to random rolling- it is unfair, and furthermore it can stop a player getting the character they want to play because the stats may not be suited to it. Random rolling ability scores is primitive and unfair. A point option should at least be available if the players don't wish to roll. Of course now you've started with rolling, it is a bit late. Get the player to play their piece of poo- natural selection should get it wiped out soon enough.
flowerew 09-25-04, 04:23 AM	My group uses point buy, and we'd never go back to random rolling- it is unfair, and furthermore it can stop a player getting the character they want to play because the stats may not be suited to it. Random rolling ability scores is primitive and unfair. A point option should at least be available if the players don't wish to roll. Of course now you've started with rolling, it is a bit late. Get the player to play their piece of poo- natural selection should get it wiped out soon enough. well, i'd have to disagree to a point there with you, are all acolytes cut out to be clerics/priests? arethey all molded to fit the profile? are all fighters strong enough to make the emperor proud?
DinubaBear 09-27-04, 04:10 PM	Well, when we first switched from 2nd ed, the stats rolled up were = to point buys of 40, 39, 32, 19 and 18. The 40 & 39 were very pleased. The 32 was OK. I allowed the 19 & 18 to reroll. The 19 became 17 & the 18 became 19! The now 17 was unhappy, but the 19 was willing to live with it. I suggested they place their scores & then adjust them until they = 32 points (with stats under 8 costing 1 per to raise, and no bonuses for a low stat) Everyone was happy with this except the 40 point character, who started complaining bitterly. So I agreed he was right. Everyone should be able to buy up to 40! :devil: It eventually wound up being the right decision, since 40 continued to try to take advantage of the other players. I suggest having him place his stats & point buy to the lowest character. Or higher.
lantzer 09-27-04, 04:30 PM	Some folks over-obsess about stats. I find that the randomness from using the D20 really overwhelms the 5-15% bonus a PC gets from having higher stats. I use random rolls when I make characters. I've had 'low'-stat characters, that others would sneer at, become party leader because they were the longest-lived, toughest in practice, and best all-round leader in the party. I say 'low' because any legal character is above average and quite playable with the 3.x rules. Stat envy will never go away. Some people will always want more plusses. There isn't much you can do for them except guarantee that they have the best stats of anyone or anything they meet. And that isn't much of a heroic challenge is it?
Tifus Artwin 09-27-04, 04:51 PM	Myself, i prefer the rolling method, it feels more organic, and gives a diverse group. Up until Recently my players rolled 4D6 drop lowest reroll 1s ect. until they had 3 lines with 6 stats each, they was then aloud to pick what set they wanted to use. This tended to have characters with stats at 12-18, with 15 and 16 the most common, The system worked wonders for my more powerful games, but it also got the characters away from roleplaying as well. So now they roll 4D6 drop lowest and reroll 1s. Im thinking i will drop the 3 sets, but it worked really good for the more combat oriented groups. What other methods have you guys/girls used or made for your own homebrew? Added: Oh, and as to a player playing a character with a stat under 12. Im currently playing a mage that started with a con 8, str 10, the rest of his stats was higher, upto 17 for int. At first i didnt think he would live long, but he is now traveling to other worlds (yes worlds not planes) and is doing quite well and i cant wait to play him again.
RealMad 09-27-04, 05:44 PM	I'm against point buy myself, as is most of my party. Being old-timers, we're used to rolling and we're used to some people doing better than others, I suppose. In the nineties though, we starting using this system, which has worked great so far. 1. Using 4d6 method, roll 24 times. Assigning 4 to each attribute is possible but optional. 2. Assign players 1 to 4 and then have them take turns taking a stat. Go from 1 to 4 then go from 4 back to 1 and then up again and then down again, so on... Everybody comes out pretty even with this method and it's still random. Include a couple of extra rolls if you want, it's all good. All I need to do after is figure out, at the start of the campaign, how to adjust the monsters but that's not really tough. Usually it just means 1/2 to 1 CR up.
Rerednaw 09-27-04, 09:47 PM	I have been playing since boxed sets and usually went with the 4d6 best 3, simply because it was about the only way to get a decent chance of a characteristic score that actually had an impact on the game. And for the record, I do not really like random rolling simply because as mentioned before by others not everyone is lucky. One of my favorite characters was the party cleric. His highest stat was a 9. The rest were 3, 4, 5, 6, 8. Yes on 4d6 best 3. I also mentioned to the DM before I rolled that I tend to roll screwy and would prefer an alternate method. Funny thing I also rolled a 1 on his hit die at level 1. With a con of 3 (old rules) he was techincally stillborn. But we made him live anyway. As a consolation we made him a 0 level everyclass. He never advanced except as a cleric, but since he was the only one with thief skills it got very funny. With 3.0 I allowed dice rolling again. To make sure everyone would have a decent character, I said use 4d6 best 3, and roll as many times as you want. Well one guy rolled 150 times (the old Master Tools CD that came with the PHB) and it still wasn't high enough for him. But then he had other issues too. :D After that campaign ended, I went with point buy and everyone in the group liked it because of its fairness. In 3.5 I pretty much swear by point buy. To give the players a bit of an edge, I do use a 32 point buy. To emphasize that stats aren't everything, I use substandard arrays or point buys for my villains and I still usually whomp the party with superior tactics or at least give them a run for their money. Once the group learns some more, I will start using by the book villains. (I still have to tone down the npcs from the core modules as it is). But if you want to stick with rolling I'd suggest the following: Everyone rolls 4d6 best 3 one roll only. Go around the table and do this until you have 6 rolls. (or 7 if you want a mercy roll). This becomes the stats (assign rolls as desired) that EVERYONE uses. Or simply go with the best rolls a player gets and everyone gets to use his set. Cheers.
darczero 09-28-04, 12:04 AM	So we do 4d6 drop lowest. The first players first 3 rolls are: 18, 14, 16. He already has 32 points and has 3 rolls to go :weep: Of course, he doesn't get an 8 or something but finishes up with a 12, 12, and 16. Now he is running around with a 50 point buy. If you are rolling for attributes, don't worry about their final point value. The Point Buy system is (as far as I know) an option to reduce the amount of dice rolled, and to eliminate arguments over "He rolled better than me!" and "She's a professional craps player from Reno, she shouldn't be allowed to roll." (I've actually heard the latter once; the former is quite common.) Besides, even the "High Powered" (32 point) point buy still leaves player characters somewhat lacking in the long run; the one character I ever created using that system was for an RPGA game (where the point buy system is mandatory, due to the above first complaint), and he ended up with 2 stats at 18, 3 at 13-17, and one stat (his intelligence) a 6. It allows a fair average, but not much in the way of heroic. Of course, "Heroic" means (at least to me) above even the exceptional, so I always suggest that characters are rolled, not bought with points.
darczero 09-28-04, 12:24 AM	Also, in my own games, I prefer high-powered characters. My players learned from an extreme power-gamer (we don't game with him anymore), but unfortunately his influence has rubbed off on the entire group. So, of course, I use my own method of rolling stats; the point-buy system doesn't generate the types of characters I create adventures for, since I count on every player having their character survive until Epic levels (raised a few times if necessary) and generally write up adventures as long-term games (lasting more than a few sessions; often months or more). The method I use is 4d6, reroll 1's and 2's, drop the lowest die. The average is higher; the potential for high stats is also higher. Players can still roll low scores, and those are usually just looked at as a roleplaying challenge (one player rolled 2 scores of 6 on one character using that method; another always seems to average 12, no matter what). As I said, it's high powered.
DeWayne 09-28-04, 12:34 AM	I've got to ask: Is the whining player a newbie? The reason I ask is that people who have played for a while have all had to deal with playing 'less than god-like' characters at one point or another. The better players quickly realize that player skill often make the stats irrelevant. As for how to handle him right now, I suggest pointing out that you let him re-roll his character twice so he needs to grow up and learn to deal with it.
Deekin 09-28-04, 12:45 AM	Never roll with a lucky player 18 17 18 16 16 14 I have player roll 3d6+1d4 then convert to points. it may be comlicated but no-one has an over powered or under powered char.