Stat generation by drafting?

I figure most everybody knows the arguments for standard array/point buy vs random rolling, and various ways of making random rolling less potentially unfair.

In conversation this evening, we came up with a reasonably balanced randomizing method that I think is interesting, and that I don't recall seeing before.

Drafting -- each player generates six stats, using whatever rolling schema you like (3d6/4d6drop1/2d6+5/whatever) and then you go around the table, each player picking one stat on their turn.

For fairness, you'll need to mix up the order in some way, instead of just gong ABCD/ABCD/... (That would lead to D's stat choices being noticeably worse than A's.)

There are lots of fairer drafting orders out there. Probably the most common is reversing every round (ABCD/DCBA/AB...)

You could just have people draft numbers, and assign them to slots as they want, but you can essentially distribute the numbers automatically at that point.

And that isn't bad, but I think it's more interesting to have everyone roll specific stats at the start, and then draft stats they don't have yet. (It might also not work at all; it's not like I've tested this in any way.)

So, if you're planning to play a wizard, you'd presumably draft the best intelligence first round. After that, it gets complicated. There'll probably be a fair amount of coordination, and that's fine -- this isn't a competitive game. (But if you wanted to, you could bar table talk. It's probably a mistake, though.)

You probably need to allow for a single swap by each player, to fix undersupply of necessary stats and to help the players who got stuck with terrible constitution. (Variation -- allow trading numbers between players.)

The only thing I've spotted that needs special handling is how to add a player after the fact -- the best solution I've come up with is to let them pick one player's stat array, and order it how they want. (The worst solution I came up with is to reroll everybody's stats and draft again. :)

Thoughts? Improvements? Obvious flaws?

I don't see how this could be equitable.  What if you only had one or two high rolls?  Only one or two players would get one then? 

There would be a lot of time spent and decision paralysis involved I'm guessing.  

Also, some classes are MAD and benefit more from a higher average in 2-3 stats than one high stat.  

Creative, but I'd nope right out of that.

However you play, enjoy your game!

This is interesting but if the goal is to fix rolling stats or to more evenly or fairly distribute stats, Standard Array or Point Buy are hard to beat. 

I do think this could be a fun way to change things up though. Those occasional shakeups are sometimes refreshing, even if they aren't something the table wants to use all the time. I wonder though, if some tables might try gaming this a bit by electing a mule player to take the undesirable stats while everyone else is enjoying 90+ stats.

What happens if a, just 1, character dies? Does the new one need to come in with the same stats? Seems like they’d be kind of stuck.

It also seems like the MAD classes would have a much harder time, as they need more of the good numbers. Ditto anyone who might want/plan to multiclass.

Quote from jl8e >>

 Drafting -- each player generates six stats, using whatever rolling schema you like (3d6/4d6drop1/2d6+5/whatever) and then you go around the table, each player picking one stat on their turn.

A method I've done a couple times, including a campaign that's about to start, is to generate a 6x6 grid of stats (either by having the DM roll up six sets of stats, or having one player roll up each row in the grid.) Then players can select either a row, a column or a diagonal for their own set, with each set only getting claimed once. Choice order is determined however you want

It generally allows you to pick a set tailored to your character concept -- MAD, SAD, a himbo with a low INT, whatever

Quote from ArmorStorm>>

I don't see how this could be equitable.  What if you only had one or two high rolls?  Only one or two players would get one then? 

Quote from Erik_Soong>>

This is interesting but if the goal is to fix rolling stats or to more evenly or fairly distribute stats, Standard Array or Point Buy are hard to beat. 

I do think this could be a fun way to change things up though. Those occasional shakeups are sometimes refreshing, even if they aren't something the table wants to use all the time. I wonder though, if some tables might try gaming this a bit by electing a mule player to take the undesirable stats while everyone else is enjoying 90+ stats.

It's probably not going to pull people's relevant stats up all that much, and is anybody actually going to volunteer for that?

Quote from Xalthu>>

What happens if a, just 1, character dies? Does the new one need to come in with the same stats? Seems like they’d be kind of stuck.

It also seems like the MAD classes would have a much harder time, as they need more of the good numbers. Ditto anyone who might want/plan to multiclass.

 Maybe? Most people are into flavor picks by round 3, so I'd think they'd likely be willing to pass on a higher number to let you make your character work.

Another obvious issue, though perhaps not a problem, is that it discourages parties where too many people are building around the same stat. Which also means that the unbalanced demand on the various stats becomes relevant, and you may well have people running around being intelligent just because there was a surplus.

It's interesting but it feels needlessly complicated.

Quote from jl8e >>

Quote from Erik_Soong>>

This is interesting but if the goal is to fix rolling stats or to more evenly or fairly distribute stats, Standard Array or Point Buy are hard to beat. 

I don't disagree -- I've even advocated for them over rolling.

But a downside of those systems is that they tend to produce very samey stat distributions. (Is it a big deal? Not really, but it is a thing.)

I do think this could be a fun way to change things up though. Those occasional shakeups are sometimes refreshing, even if they aren't something the table wants to use all the time. I wonder though, if some tables might try gaming this a bit by electing a mule player to take the undesirable stats while everyone else is enjoying 90+ stats.

It's probably not going to pull people's relevant stats up all that much, and is anybody actually going to volunteer for that?

 

 Yes, the class clown would volunteer for that because their goal is not to have power overwhelming, but to be a walking joke. The player that wants to play the sentient loaf of bread floating around on its own mage hand is such a player and if you have one player taking all the dump stats, you definitely could have the rest of the party rocking top tier stats. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it is something people should be aware of before trying something like this.

Also, isn't the goal is produce more even and more fair stat blocks? Samey is the goal then.

Seems adversarial and would cause more problems than just rolling randomly. 

I think a good alternative when wanting to do rolled stats but different, and equal or equitable is understand what everyone at the table is looking for first. I personally don't enjoy playing the noticeably weakest PC on the team. That is almost never a problem when you have a SAD PC. MAD PCs though, often underperform until they hit some milestone. Same with multiclassing; they underperform until they can achieve some specific target, like the 5e Sorcadin at around level 8 or so.

So if you know what the players want (say high performance) and you know you wont reach the necessary milestone where they can shine, because your campaign will end before that, maybe have them roll but then manually max out a key stat for the MAD/multiclasser. 

I have heard of a group having each player roll stats then everybody can choose which set of numbers they want.

But Standard and Point Buy are the most fair. Unless the players are new in which case point buy isn't the best.

No matter which rolling technique you come up with there's going to be the chance that one (or more) of the PCs ends up handicapped or a demigod among his peers. If you must roll, the real solution is to just resign yourself to the fact that you're going to be picking a range of results you find acceptable for each PC, and then rejecting any rolled arrays that fall outside of that range. 

Or conversely, if your group finds material inequities to be fun (for some reason), then you can let the chips fall where they may.

Quote from Wysperra >>

I have heard of a group having each player roll stats then everybody can choose which set of numbers they want.

But Standard and Point Buy are the most fair. Unless the players are new in which case point buy isn't the best.

Something worth trying is standard 3d6 to get an array, and give an extra 5 points to distribute. Stats start a bit lower, but the extra points make it easy to tweak for class choices.  

This immediately brought to mind the character generation method used by the Amber Diceless Roleplaying Game back in the early 90's.  Very similar in the sense that each player had an opportunity to decide at the campaign's outset which of them was "the best" in specific categories.  It fit the setting and books quite well.

Quote from jl8e >>

 

I figure most everybody knows the arguments for standard array/point buy vs random rolling, and various ways of making random rolling less potentially unfair.

In conversation this evening, we came up with a reasonably balanced randomizing method that I think is interesting, and that I don't recall seeing before.

Drafting -- each player generates six stats, using whatever rolling schema you like (3d6/4d6drop1/2d6+5/whatever) and then you go around the table, each player picking one stat on their turn.

For fairness, you'll need to mix up the order in some way, instead of just gong ABCD/ABCD/... (That would lead to D's stat choices being noticeably worse than A's.)

There are lots of fairer drafting orders out there. Probably the most common is reversing every round (ABCD/DCBA/AB...)

You could just have people draft numbers, and assign them to slots as they want, but you can essentially distribute the numbers automatically at that point.

And that isn't bad, but I think it's more interesting to have everyone roll specific stats at the start, and then draft stats they don't have yet. (It might also not work at all; it's not like I've tested this in any way.)

So, if you're planning to play a wizard, you'd presumably draft the best intelligence first round. After that, it gets complicated. There'll probably be a fair amount of coordination, and that's fine -- this isn't a competitive game. (But if you wanted to, you could bar table talk. It's probably a mistake, though.)

You probably need to allow for a single swap by each player, to fix undersupply of necessary stats and to help the players who got stuck with terrible constitution. (Variation -- allow trading numbers between players.)

The only thing I've spotted that needs special handling is how to add a player after the fact -- the best solution I've come up with is to let them pick one player's stat array, and order it how they want. (The worst solution I came up with is to reroll everybody's stats and draft again. :)

Thoughts? Improvements? Obvious flaws?

 neat idea, use to do something similar. 

1st as a DM, I want 1 stat at 8, one stat at 18. I tell people to roll 4d6 reroll 1's drop the lowest. I then use an array I made 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8 I put that face down and if I see a player was unlucky I ask if they want to use the DM rolled stats. (I fuax the rolling behind the screen) 

Generally I am not bothered by minmaxed players, IMO D&D is Heroic Fantasy, and I want to put the players against difficult challenges. I want them to have fun, and tell stories of how they slew a red dragon in 2 turns.