Playing with a new DM who allowed either point system or roll 4d6 6 times for stats. With him there watching I rolled 10, 18, 15, 17, 17, and 18.
I was told they were to high and re-roll. I rolled poorly with 12, 10, 13, 15, 8, 12. Those I had to use. I know a DM has final say, but I thought that was ridiculous as he said we can use either option.
TOTAL BS
NirvanS wrote:
Your DM only has as much say as you allow your DM to have - and if the DM is the type to say "you can roll if you want," and then take your rolls away from you for being too good but then try to force you to keep rolls that are too low (in comparison to the point buy option you could have taken), then your DM is in need of having a reminder that being a jerk is not something a DM is entitled to do.
If the DM doesn't want your legitimately rolled high stats in the game, perhaps you can compromise buy using point buy - but I'd personally push for having my scores allowed, or just leave the game because a DM that doesn't act fairly on one thing is more likely to act unfairly in other ways.
Sadly that does just depend on your dm. I allowed the same situation for my group, and if they rolled too low then they could use points to round up the rolls to point buy standard
FrogReaver wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
You seem to be under the assumption that this situation is about how he acted as opposed to how you acted.
You could have avoided the whole problem by using point buy after he refused to let you use the highly rolled stats. Learn from that.
NirvanS wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
They shouldn't have been. But 2 wrongs don't make a right and you had control over what you did after he told u he would not accept those rolls. You also still have control over what you do and trying to find reasons to get mad at him and quit the game isn't any better than what he did.
NirvanS wrote:
True. An emotional response by me as still angry. The most mature thing is to compromise and ask to use the point system or re roll, whichever is agreed upon.
He will do something like this again. Find a different game.
He he who is without sin cast the first stone.... There is no perfect dm and you wouldn't be one either
Elfcrusher wrote:
Easy fix would have been to say/ask that you lower a few of those rolls, so you could still have exceptional starting scores, but not be so incredible, My 2 cps
Yunru wrote:
I don't think anyone has argued he was correct. But people make mistakes... so do Dms. The sky isn't falling with this one bad ruling. It can get better.
Yunru wrote:
Actually, forget what I said before.
Ask that you be allowed to compare this to point buy, and use point buy to buy 3 points worth of stat increase.
Unless this is post-racial, in which case, I wouldn't suggest playing with him.
The determining factor is, will still have fun in the group. Is the conflict going to ruin your fun? Are you the kind of person who can let it go?
If you cannot let it go and you want to stay then try to ask for a compromise for the point system.
If he does not compromise then you know where you stand and you can make your decision.
Pretty much this is spot on!
Morukai wrote:
Raegoul wrote:
I can understand not wanting those stats in the game, but then making him keep stats worse than the other players, that was just...mean. At the very least he should have been allowed point buy.
Lord knows I'm the first to defend people for being called "bad DM" on these forums, but this isn't a matter of good/bad DMing. It's a matter of simply being unfair. (If the OP's version is accurate and complete.)
Sounds like a bad DM. Part of the risk/reward of rolling your own stats is that you could get lucky or you could get unlucky. And either way, a PC with all 16s,17,and18s is not invincible or by any means a god. And a DM needs to have no bias when it comes to the roll of a die. What happens when he sets the difficulty of a task at almost imposable but for some reason the things roll in your favor and he does not like the outcome. Sounds like he would be the kind of guy who would say, "You open the door, but it was booby trapped and the cave fell in on your head." I would stay away from a game like that.
I think your 2nd set of stats are fine. You can get a 17 and a 14 with racials. That's a completely fine PC.
On the other hand if I were DM, I would have allowed you to keep your original stats. But then we use a variant rule, where anyone can use anyone's rolls (with a d4 penalty, divided across the attributes however they like). Avoids the "he rolled too good, no fair!" problem, but keeps the randomness.
Why I think 4d6 drop lowest is ridiculous because high results like this are too likely to happen. That said, your second roll was average not terrible.
I set limits on how high you can roll (max 16, any "carryover" can be used to raise a garbage roll to max 10) to prevent just this sort of thing. I don't want people rolling too high, but I also don't want to punish the player by rerolling into garbage...Anyway, DM was being a jerkface. Shoulda allowed a third reroll option or allowed you and him to alternate picking stats (essentially giving you 3 good stats, 3 bad stats) from those two. OR! Give you two 18s and then you two work out what the rest of your stats are. I mean, you rolled in front of him, it's not like you suddenly showed up to the game with 2 18's and 3 17's and an 8 (you know, to make it "realistic" to convince the DM to keep the stats because you got an 8!)
Also, there's always the 3d6, drop lowest, add 4 method. Someone on here proposed that and I think it's genius. I haven't implemented it yet but will likely have a nice sit-down with the group and ask!
Timborama wrote:
Yunru wrote:
6+2d6 turns out better on average. Median is 13 with wild swing potential between 8-18. The mean of point buy is 13, but swing is by choice and caps at 15. If the swing on 2d6 is too much, 6+1d6+1d4 would give slightly less on the high end and pull the median to 12.something.
But the DM shouldn't have forced OP to keep crummy stats on the second roll. If the DM doesn't want to budge, bail. Otherwise, compramise with point buy.
What I like the best after trying out some methods was rolling 3d6 for all ability scores and then allowing PCs to re-roll two scores which overwrites the old result even if it was better.
FrogReaver wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Wildhusky945 wrote:
I think the best system is that you roll as many d6s up to 24d6 maximum and if you do only have 1d6 then that is all you get to roll and no borrowings. Pick use up to 3 d6s for each stat (yes you cannot re-use) then -3, -3, -3, -3, -3, -3 from each stat. Roll 12d4s (of course they must be your own dice) so that people can watch dice that do not roll and if the DM approves of your rolling technique you can keep your stats. You can appeal to the DM if your stats are garbage but again you must roll 10d20s (again no borowings) in order to prove your worth by achieving a total of 50 or more. After that the DM may adjust your scores arbitrarly by closing his/her eyes and putting his/her finger on the page three times and if s/he misses your stats entirely then tough luck.
I could go on but i got bored.
its simple that is a Dick DM get a new one.
If you roll stats and you roll high then you get to keep them. replace the DM.
IxidorRS wrote:
intently wrote:
As for 'keeping his word', no one would be mad at him if the rolls were 5.9.7.10.11.6 and he allowed a reroll.... (Now, if he would force a player to keep that poor of a choice... thats different)
Yes, he should have handled it differently, perhaps using an average, or maybe giving some other perk to the character for lowering stats or rerolling. But it is reasonable to not want such 'super stats' in the game, especially since it may reduce the fun for other players.
All of these are great reasons to disallow rolling in the first place. I really like the default slate of numbers (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).
intently wrote:
This thread has got me thinking about the best way to roll stats.
I think there needs to be a guarantee pre racial of a 15. I would balance this out by forcing a pre racial 8 as well. Then the player can roll the other 4 stats with whatever method the table uses.
I reiterate: TOTAL BS
i rolled high and felt funny about it at first but went on to choose some optimal and some less optimal things for role play. Is also went single clasd
instead of dipping for maximum power. What I did not do was get screwed into taking low stats.
That at was poorly handled. At the LEAST he should let u point buy. If he forces crappy scores on u, bail.
Elfcrusher wrote:
NirvanS wrote:
awaken_D_M_golem wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
slumgum wrote:
I'm also trying to create a system that is based off the current array but has dice rolling variation. Something like a gambling type system where a d4 can be used to simulate a -2, -1, +1, +2.
So a player rolls a d4 and either subtracts 2 or 1 or adds 1 or 2 depending on if the die rolls to 1 2 3 or 4. Start with 15 for the normal high array stat and make the roll options. This creates a range from 13 to 17 for that stat.
Do something similiar with the 14 roll and so on. My actual assumption was to let all stats go up to 17. so you can use d6 and d8 and such for this system as well. It should give stat variance without making any character too overpowered.
Elfcrusher wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
slumgum wrote:
I understand why you're doing it. I do not believe it actually accomplishes anything. If you feel a player needs a guaranteed 15 to have fun I think you can just give them the 15 and let them roll the other 5 stats. You will not have a "better" campaign because you forced an 8 on them.
I really didn't mean to single you out, the whole thread is full of people so finnicky about stats. It really doesn't make much sense. Most characters have 1 or 2 stats that really make a difference so you can't compare those stats versus their other stats and hope to strike any "balance".
An example is the following Scenario
Assume you have a Barbarian that has 15 STR / 15 DEX / 15 CON / 8 INT / 8 WIS / 8 CHA and you add up all the mods +2 + 2 + 2 - 1 - 1 -1 you get +3. Now consider you have a barbarian that has 18 STR / 18 DEX / 18 CON / 5 INT / 5 WIS / 5 CHA, +4 + 4 + 4 - 3 -3 -3 and you get +3 as well. 99% of the time the second Barbarian is going to be a singnificantly better character despite have his stats "balanced" in the same way as the first barbarian.. A better STR score is not balanced by a worse CHA score in the same way that a wizard's better INT score is not balanced by a lower STR score.
slumgum wrote:
IxidorRS wrote:
intently wrote:
Whoa !!
My last post on this thread is dated Nov 11, but today is Nov 10.
I did not know my kitty avatar's Tail could do that.
I think someone rolled a Nat 20 on the Rocky Horror Picture Show.
**
So the vegas odds on rolling, gets you:
a) ... 56% chance at one 16+ roll
b) ... ~51% chance at slightly better than point buy
c) ... << 50% chance at 2 rolls of 15+
What strategy I glean from this (I'm testifying I tell you)
in a party of 5, 2 should risk rolling, but only if
d) ... you can pick your stats before you pick your class
e) ... more well known what classes can work with bad stats
"d" is OK in previous editions, and could be rationalized
that the PC grows up 1st, then they get trained for a class.
I would have allowed it. What's the point of rolling if you're just going to say, "sorry you can't use those, roll again."
Rolling for stats is, by it's very nature, a random generator. That randomness can result in high scores or low scores, or anywhere in between, but the fact that the rolling rules as they are mean that some 18s are possible, then either accept those or don't allow rolling in the first place.
I have been a DM for a longtime. I've had players roll great (18,18,18,16,14,12) and let them keep it. I've had players roll poor and wanted to quit. I've adopted a house rule where the minimum is a 10-12 and you can keep any maximum. My players are always happy (and as a DM that is job 1). I wouldn't call them min maxers but they just don't like playing with bad scores. Personally I have and it is as much fun as you put into it. My players know I will adjust a monster here and there and I tell them that just like their characters that there are some monsters that are a cut above the norm.
If a DM is going to say you can roll the dice 4d6 6 times and you get all 18's then before you rolled your DM should have said that as DM I have a house rule that says there are table maximums and if you roll over it you need to lower it to the tables allowable high. (but if the DM is going to make a rule that is not in the book he should discuss it when everyone first sits at the table, has it written down to show the players, discussed the optional rules with the players and then went from there. The DM is not a GOD nor is he a Dictator. If he is then he has no business being DM's because DM's should be about the experience and players and not all about him).
Apologies if it sounded alittle preachy it's just I was taught this when I first wanted to be a DM back in the 1980's by my players and a fellow DM and it stuck with me.
Incredibly poor form on his part. Find a new DM.
Part of being a good DM is sticking to your rules. I've been a DM for D&D and many other games for years and years. You know what, I never care what my players' stats are. I care that everyone at my table has fun, including me. If your DM says you can roll or use point buy, then that's the way it is. The DM needs to accept that there can be very good roles and may result in a character with high stats. Since the rolls were made in front of the DM and no other house rules were in place, the stats should stand. Both the DM and the player agreed to this and that's how it needs to be.
When I see something like this, it reminds me of the one big DM/player relationship that I always avoid, adversarial. A DM who does something like this tends to see the game as me vs you rather than a group experience. That just leads to a bad experience for everyone at the table. So if you feel like you got a raw deal for being asked to re-roll or use a different method of stat generation, you should talk it over with the DM. Let them know that you created the character by the DM rules, right in front of the DM and you didn't do anything wrong. So why be punished for being lucky one time?
The other thing I've learned as a DM is that there are plenty of ways to challenge a party both in and out of combat. So if the group has high stats, you can adjust accordingly. Even if it's just a basic using highter CR monsters. Just be creative. In a straight fight, sure the numbers give an advantage and the group may not be challenged. In a fight on a rope bridge over a volcano, there will be other challenges beyond the fight to worry about. My point, a good DM will work with the group and find creative ways to challenge them that will be fun. Insisting that players only get certain stats or that their character's are "too good" just leaves a bad taste in a player's mouth. Here's the thing, the DM is not supposed to "win". The entire group comes together to tell a collaborative story and have fun. The players are ultimately supposed to come out victorious and that's ok.
Besides, stats in 5e cap at 20 anyway. So what's the big deal if they roll well and get high stats. That just means that they can delve in something like feats more. If a player has a feat or two, so what? It's not going to break the game any. The PCs are heroes, so it's perfectly fine if they are heroic.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Blade'lock maybe?
Yunru wrote:
Yeah. Right now I'm definitely favoring Half-Elf. And because I won't be turning over the DM chair until everyone is 3rd-level, I'll get to start off at 3rd. So my current idea is to blatantly steal something from someone, who posted an idea around here not too long ago, that really piqued my interest.
Rogue-1/Monk-1/Archfey Warlock-1
Eventually growing into Assassin/Shadow Monk/Bladepact respectively. Top end probably will look like Rogue-11/Monk-6/Warlock-3 (if I make it that far). We are committed to taking the campaign all the way to 20th, but that doesn't mean this particular PC survives to see it, right? 
Not sure I'm a fan of such spread out levels though, as it delays a few key things quite a bit, but the mix is so tantalizing it's hard not to want to kick the tires and drive it around the block.
Stats would be:
STR 9
DEX 18
CON 14
INT 15
WIS 18
CHA 18
Meh. Stunning strike can be cool and all. But it isn't really my goal. Or the focus of my concept.
Also, you must be forgetting how many skills you get when starting out as a Half-Elf Rogue...
So here's what I've come up with...
Le'thael, the Pallid Ghost
Half-Elf Male, Rogue-1/Monk-1/Archfey Warlock-1, Lawful Neutral
STR 9 (-1)
DEX 18 (+4)
CON 14 (+2)
INT 15 (+2)
WIS 18 (+4)
CHA 18 (+4)
Saves
Dexterity +6, Intelligence +4
Skills
Acrobatics +6, Athletics +1, Insight +6, Investigation +4, Perception +8, Persuasion +6, Religion +4, Stealth +8
Tool Proficiencies
Forgery Kit, Thieves' Tools
Languages
Common, Celestial, Elvish, Fey
Spells
Cantrips: Friends, Minor Illusion
1st-level: Hex, Sleep
Personality Traits
“I quote sacred texts and proverbs in almost every situation.”
“I am always calm, no matter what the situation. I never raise my voice or let my emotions control me.”
Ideal
Faith. “I trust the church knows what is best. I have faith that my obedience will lead to a better world.”
Bond
“Everything I do, I do in the name of the church.”
Flaw
“Once I set upon a goal, I become obsessed with it. Sometimes to the detriment of everything else in my life.”
Background (brief synopsis)
Le’thael was born to an elven mother and human father nearly 40 years ago. He has no memory of his parent. He was taken in and raised by the high elf priests and monks of the church on Velanthomyr, the Golden Isle. The monks and priests of his order have always refused or avoided speaking to the circumstances surrounding his birth and subsequent adoption by the church.
Early in his youth, it became apparent he was a uniquely gifted child. Even more striking given his "deluded" blood. Marked by the gods, Le’thael (meaning “Given of the Gods” in elvish) was soon swept into the Order of the Unseen to train, and later serve, as an esteemed Hand of the Gods. Even in such an exclusive and demanding faction as the Unseen, he continued to excel. His skills and dominance eventually earned him the nickname, the Pallid Ghost.
Now, Le’thael serves as a clandestine agent of the church, eliminating problems and maintaining the status quo. The needs of the church demand it. And Le’thael knows only to serve. Unquestioningly.
I know I'm going to get hate for this, but as a DM, I agree with his decision. Hitting level 4 and having four 18s is too much. I'm sorry. I believe the DM did that only because stats like those make your character good at just about everything. It not only makes your character the board-sweeper in a battle, but they have no weaknesses. It makes other players feel inadiquite because their awesome rogue that's got that 20 dex is only a stone's throw away from the Barbarian who can also pick up and throw a small human as an improvised weapon.
The GM was entirely out of order.
Personally I think rolled stats in such a stat-bonus swingy game is a stupid move in the first place, but they did go for it.
GMs who change the goalposts like this are ones to avoid imo.
Likewise if the results are too low we reroll some of the lower dice.
transcendantviewer wrote:
I, for one, think characters with a poorly rolled stat or two offer new role playing opportunities that might be missed with characters possessing higher stats. Take those low stats and have a good time. They aren't even really that low; they're only two pips away from the standard array, so you're only really losing a single +1 on average. (On the other hand, your original roll was a full 28 pips higher than the standard array at the very least. That's over twice as many points as your friends using point buy would get.)
In this scenario, I can't chide the DM too much as I understand that those rolls were ridiculously high; it is harder on the DM to design an adequate challenge when one character is leaps and bounds above the others. Additionally, I am sure he would have never imagined that someone would have actually rolled that high; I suspect he would have also granted a reroll if your second roll was truly as exceptionally bad as your first roll was exceptionally good.
I definitely sympathize in losing those numbers, though. It would definitely feel unfair to have such great stats and see them ripped away.
Elfcrusher wrote:
It stopped players maxing a couple of stats and completely dumping the rest, but still allowed a bit of variation, from mostly mid range with one high, one low, to a couple high, a couple mid range and a couple low, to all mid range. It worked very well, and everyone liked using it.
Elfcrusher wrote:
I'll say it is not well handled by the DM, but to be fair those stats are ridiculously high and would probably make other players feel worthless in combat situations.
While you can certainly be upset you should ask what the maximum allowed scores are and lower your original scores instead, having a non-optimized character concept to show for might help ease his reluctance to grant you high scores, high constitution for +2 to hit and damage doesnt quite steal as much spotlight from your players than having an additional +2 to hit and damage and AC all the time.
Perhaps he wants to limit the highest scores at 16 tops, just try to negotiate common ground that holds true for all the players equally.
5E encourages high scores. Even with point buy you're going to have 16s or 18s in your primary stats. He's either gotta "roll" with that fact or he should have taken that into account prior to having folks roll their characters. To ask players who roll too high to arbitrarily reroll is uncalled for, especially if the rule of the game doesn't also provide players with a safety net where they can only roll so low. If they can't have more than one 17 or 18, for instance, then they also can't have more than one low score.
I'm a fan of point buys myself simply because every time you ask your players to roll up there's a bit of discord. You always have that one guy whose rolls are unbelievable, and that other guy who rolls hideously. The funny thing is, players seem to prefer to roll, but they also seem emotionally unequipped to deal with the fallout when that solid block of 18's they were expecting didn't materialize. Of course, when I say no to a reroll, now I'm the bad guy and I have a sulky player.
This DM should do 2 things. First off, make point buy mandatory, and secondly, reduce the number of points each player gets. The default in the PHB is a 27 point buy, but perhaps he should go with a 23 or 24 point buy or something.That would probably leave you with scores around what you ended up with, and all players would be in the same boat.
Yunru wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
The DM had a fair point, but he handled it poorly.
Can we agree on that?
Elfcrusher wrote:
Yunru wrote: