Looks like we aren't the only ones discussing it recently!
I find it interesting that the DM kept asking for re-rolls since the stat blocks were too high. 27 point buy makes that entire problem go away.
A set Array will do that too. As a DM running Pay-2-play games for a FLGS I find, everyone starts with the exact same numbers, the most fair to all involved.
The problem with 4d6 isn't the randomness, it's the standard deviation. It's too easy for one person to roll really well and another to roll poorly. If the DM forces everyone to stick with their rolls it's likely that either one person will outshine everyone or that one person will lag significantly behind everyone else.
Allowing rerolls defeats the entire purpose of the 4d6 method. That still doesn't make standard array the best option in all scenarios. It's the most fair, yes, but character generation becomes pretty bland with it if you're trying to optimize in any way (and there's nothing wrong with optimizing). Thankfully Tasha's at least encourages more creative racial options with floating stat bonuses but that still doesn't fix why 4d6 is bad.
Unfortunately when it comes to making "randomness" more fair, there's no official options for it. But if someone out there is willing to homebrew a new rolling rule that's both random and "more fair" than 4d6, then use this method:
All stats start at 6. Roll 10d4 (or 11 if you want a slightly better average than 4d6). Add each individual d4 to your stats. The only rules are: 1. You can't go over 20 and 2. You can't split the number on a d4 to add to multiple stats. The math behind this is simply that smaller die sizes and more dice rolled at once reduces the standard deviation and having a base of 6 ensures that no one starts with a character ending up with 10's across their array even after racials. Of course, this method isn't perfect, it's obviously homebrew, and it kind of makes ridiculously weak or strong characters extremely unlikely (if you're in to those kinds of things).
Rolling for stats is nice. 4d6 is just not the best way at doing it. It's simple and a lot of people are happy with it, but there's plenty of homebrew ways out there that I feel are "more fair" for the table.
Alternatively, just use a point buy calculator and increase the points available or alter it to allow for higher and lower starting values. Yay.
Looks like we aren't the only ones discussing it recently!
I find it interesting that the DM kept asking for re-rolls since the stat blocks were too high. 27 point buy makes that entire problem go away.
Or, you know, you just don't make a problem of it. ;-)
You can't wish away or ignore glaring faults like the 4d6 method.
You may think I'm ignoring something, I just don't consider it much of an issue. Since solving challenges is based more and more on character abilities than on player problem solving skills, I'm looking at characters and party composition in order to tailor/include/exclude challenges anyway. Parties with two poor to mediocre but proficient characters will have as good as or a better chance of passing a check than parties with good to great but non-proficient characters, for instance. The flip side of the fact that good stats matter more in WotC D&D than in TSR D&D is that bad stats matter more as well, and every official method is going to result in players having less than good stats in some areas - in other words, I'm considering the strengths of weaknesses of the PCs in my campaign regardless, which results in their stats possibly having an impact on my prep but in practice not on the game, and the amount of work is the same. 4d6 doesn't have a significant flaw for me, as the DM. I'm sure it does to you, and I accept that that makes it a method not suitable for your table. It'd just be nice if you could accept your table and mine are different.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The problem with 4d6 isn't the randomness, it's the standard deviation. It's too easy for one person to roll really well and another to roll poorly. If the DM forces everyone to stick with their rolls it's likely that either one person will outshine everyone or that one person will lag significantly behind everyone else.
A more effectively built character will outshine a lesser one, and a mediocre or even poor one will still outshine a strong one if it concerns a strength of the former and weakness of the latter. I mean, at level 1 a ranger with 10 Wis who's proficient in Survival is just as good at navigating the wilds and foraging for food as a 15 Wis fighter who isn't proficient, and at higher levels the ranger will be better. In other words, those imbalances are relative and how much they matter in practice depends on party composition and the types of challenges the DM presents to the party. They can also be addressed by giving players who were less fortunate when rolling their stats better equipment or an extra proficiency or some nebulous background quality that gives them a bonus to certain checks, for instance. To me, these discrepancies are very easy to address. I appreciate doing any of those things might not suit every DM's style, but that's no skin off my nose. ;-)
While many of the skill check issues sound "right" in that they balance, the combat ones simply don't and won't. 2 of your players are getting +3 to hit and the other 2 are not, means in combat, those lacking the bonus will, soon enough, feel useless in combat, unless the DM leaps through some hoops and customizes encounters/monsters and other situations to "balance" the unbalanced party.
Many who claim it's not a big deal for a DM to adjust are obviously not doing much DM work. Trying to make combat fair when there is a 3-5 point difference in "to hit" numbers, and AC and HP is a genuine challenge. Making sure the high stats are somewhat challenged, while not killing off the low stats isn't the simple task many believe. Randomness is great where applicable, but balancing the game when the party ranges from strong like ox to meek as mouse can put a true damper on the DM's fun, as he/she struggles to offer an immersive and interesting experience for ALL involved.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
The problem with 4d6 isn't the randomness, it's the standard deviation. It's too easy for one person to roll really well and another to roll poorly. If the DM forces everyone to stick with their rolls it's likely that either one person will outshine everyone or that one person will lag significantly behind everyone else.
A more effectively built character will outshine a lesser one, and a mediocre or even poor one will still outshine a strong one if it concerns a strength of the former and weakness of the latter. I mean, at level 1 a ranger with 10 Wis who's proficient in Survival is just as good at navigating the wilds and foraging for food as a 15 Wis fighter who isn't proficient, and at higher levels the ranger will be better. In other words, those imbalances are relative and how much they matter in practice depends on party composition and the types of challenges the DM presents to the party. They can also be addressed by giving players who were less fortunate when rolling their stats better equipment or an extra proficiency or some nebulous background quality that gives them a bonus to certain checks, for instance. To me, these discrepancies are very easy to address. I appreciate doing any of those things might not suit every DM's style, but that's no skin off my nose. ;-)
Again and I'm just pointing out the obvious here, you are working under the assumption of experienced GM's and players. Under those circumstances sure, players who know how to optimize, a DM that knows how to work around low scores. Yeah I can see how it can be a minor issue at best. You have to assume however that a bulk if not majority of DM's and players are not experienced. What happens when players don't know how to optimize and DM's don't know how to deal with the discrepancy. Would you still recommend 4d6?
One of my points is that players not knowing (how) to optimize is somewhat comparable to 4d6' power discrepancies. One rolls up a barbarian or some other fairly straightforward class, the other goes for a sorcerer - I'll give pretty good odds the sorcerer player is going to have more difficulties carrying their weight than the barbarian player. A group with nothing but newbie players and an inexperienced DM is going to have some challenges in any case. On the other hand, when everyone's new it's not like the standard array will feel tired, played-out and uninspired already so the main downside (to me) won't really matter. So sure, why not make it simple and non-random?
But that doesn't make random methods worse in general, or non-random ones "dummy" methods. They both have advantages and both have disadvantages. Pick what works best for you. Pick something else if the first you try doesn't work out. Or stick with it and try some houserules to deal with whatever you didn't like about it the first time. There's some advice about finding your groove interspersed in the PHB and particularly the DMG, but I don't think it's suggested strongly enough.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Trying to make combat fair when there is a 3-5 point difference in "to hit" numbers, and AC and HP is a genuine challenge.
They're numbers. That makes these differences by definition not just quantifiable, but already quantified. And thus easy to fix, if you really want to be rid of them. To hit number too low? +X magical weapon. AC too low? Angel looking out for you gives you an unnamed +X bonus to AC. HP too low? Free Toughness feat. The entire game is choc full of things specifically meant to manipulate those numbers. Take your pick.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Trying to make combat fair when there is a 3-5 point difference in "to hit" numbers, and AC and HP is a genuine challenge.
They're numbers. That makes these differences by definition not just quantifiable, but already quantified. And thus easy to fix, if you really want to be rid of them. To hit number too low? +X magical weapon. AC too low? Angel looking out for you gives you an unnamed +X bonus to AC. HP too low? Free Toughness feat. The entire game is choc full of things specifically meant to manipulate those numbers. Take your pick.
At which point why are you bothering with stats at all?
Trying to make combat fair when there is a 3-5 point difference in "to hit" numbers, and AC and HP is a genuine challenge.
They're numbers. That makes these differences by definition not just quantifiable, but already quantified. And thus easy to fix, if you really want to be rid of them. To hit number too low? +X magical weapon. AC too low? Angel looking out for you gives you an unnamed +X bonus to AC. HP too low? Free Toughness feat. The entire game is choc full of things specifically meant to manipulate those numbers. Take your pick.
At which point why are you bothering with stats at all?
Why does D&D bother with stats? I mean, from personal experience using the standard array doesn't exactly result in a wealth of diversity, and give or take a +1/-1 here or there neither does point buy, so I could ask the same question to groups using those methods.
Also note that a +X weapon doesn't help with Athletics checks, a bonus to AC doesn't improve your Dex save and Tougness doesn't help with Concentration checks. I'm saying there are ways to address the more egregious discrepancies if you think that's really necessary, not telling you to stamp a uniform mold on all characters to make them equal.
Point buy is kinda crappy and will force players to use ASIs and skip feats that are pretty cool. I am a bigger fan of 4d6 drop the lowest and reroll 1's. Having a character's primary stat need at most one ASI to max out allows for a lore more flavor and customizing. In games where I have DMd point buy and played in AL, there are rarely feats before tier 3 and even then players complain about it. With rolling, everyone seems happier and ability scores aren't even a discussion at those tables, at least ones that I play and DM. Who wants to play an average character? You are role playing a Wizard, not a farm hand, you are supposed to be epic. When I have a table to super high ability score players, I turn back the magic items that are given out and that scales the encounters back a bit. I'd rather have it that way than hear moaning and complaining about how they want a feat but can't bla bla bla...
Point buy is kinda crappy and will force players to use ASIs and skip feats that are pretty cool. I am a bigger fan of 4d6 drop the lowest and reroll 1's. Having a character's primary stat need at most one ASI to max out allows for a lore more flavor and customizing. In games where I have DMd point buy and played in AL, there are rarely feats before tier 3 and even then players complain about it. With rolling, everyone seems happier and ability scores aren't even a discussion at those tables, at least ones that I play and DM. Who wants to play an average character? You are role playing a Wizard, not a farm hand, you are supposed to be epic. When I have a table to super high ability score players, I turn back the magic items that are given out and that scales the encounters back a bit. I'd rather have it that way than hear moaning and complaining about how they want a feat but can't bla bla bla...
Thank you for confirming that 4d6 is for power-gamers who care about stats. For the 17th time, there is no other reason to use the 4d6 method. BTW, epic scores are 16.
I mean, Vince, you can say that all you want, and I think you’re generally right, but the fact remains that I and at least one of my groups roll because it’s fun and don’t complain if we get screwed over by the dice. Power gaming (of both methods) annoys me as much as anyone else, but it’s not the only reason to roll.
Vince, you continue to espouse both overly rigid and egocentric viewpoints that overgeneralize thousands of players into a category that you then assign a negative connotation to. You are not the arbiter of D&D, nor do your viewpoints affect how anyone else enjoys or plays the game. 4d6 drop lowest is used by many groups of people for many different reasons, and it is the "default" as it were, of character generation in the PH and has been for years through multiple iterations of the game.
D&D is a game. It is played for fun/enjoyment. If people like 4d6 because its variability allows for more easily defined PC strengths and flaws/weaknesses, that is fine so long as they and their table have fun. If people like 4d6 because it allows them to optimize a heroic character in a fantasy game and feel powerful when they play, that is also fine so long as they and their table have fun. If people like 4d6 because that's how they learned and they simply like doing it that way, that is, again, fine so long as they and their table have fun. People are allowed to play D&D for practically any reason and with any goal in mind, and those reasons and goals are valid so long as they and their table are having fun.
If fun for you and your table is standard array, 3d6 in order, 4d6 drop lowest, point buy, or anything else, then fine, play the way you want. No one is stopping you or judging you for doing that. But likewise, don't belittle, denigrate, demean, mock, or gatekeep when others do things differently. The only "correct" way to play D&D is the way that allows people and their tables to have fun doing it.
Vince, you continue to espouse both overly rigid and egocentric viewpoints that overgeneralize thousands of players into a category that you then assign a negative connotation to. You are not the arbiter of D&D, nor do your viewpoints affect how anyone else enjoys or plays the game. 4d6 drop lowest is used by many groups of people for many different reasons, and it is the "default" as it were, of character generation in the PH and has been for years through multiple iterations of the game.
D&D is a game. It is played for fun/enjoyment. If people like 4d6 because its variability allows for more easily defined PC strengths and flaws/weaknesses, that is fine so long as they and their table have fun. If people like 4d6 because it allows them to optimize a heroic character in a fantasy game and feel powerful when they play, that is also fine so long as they and their table have fun. If people like 4d6 because that's how they learned and they simply like doing it that way, that is, again, fine so long as they and their table have fun. People are allowed to play D&D for practically any reason and with any goal in mind, and those reasons and goals are valid so long as they and their table are having fun.
If fun for you and your table is standard array, 3d6 in order, 4d6 drop lowest, point buy, or anything else, then fine, play the way you want. No one is stopping you or judging you for doing that. But likewise, don't belittle, denigrate, demean, mock, or gatekeep when others do things differently. The only "correct" way to play D&D is the way that allows people and their tables to have fun doing it.
For the 18th time. There is only one reason to use the 4d6 method. That is to get better stats. Any other reason can be done with any all other systems.
For the 18th time. There is only one reason to use the 4d6 method. That is to get better stats. Any other reason can be done with any all other systems.
You can't get random results without a random generation system.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
For the 18th time. There is only one reason to use the 4d6 method. That is to get better stats. Any other reason can be done with any all other systems.
You can't get random results without a random generation system.
A 27 point can easily emulate one. The only difference is the stats of a 27 point buy can't be as high, which is what it is all about.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/lyl72x/anyone_else_ever_feel_bad_when_they_roll_stats
Looks like we aren't the only ones discussing it recently!
I find it interesting that the DM kept asking for re-rolls since the stat blocks were too high. 27 point buy makes that entire problem go away.
A set Array will do that too.
As a DM running Pay-2-play games for a FLGS I find, everyone starts with the exact same numbers, the most fair to all involved.
Or, you know, you just don't make a problem of it. ;-)
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
You can't wish away or ignore glaring faults like the 4d6 method.
The problem with 4d6 isn't the randomness, it's the standard deviation. It's too easy for one person to roll really well and another to roll poorly. If the DM forces everyone to stick with their rolls it's likely that either one person will outshine everyone or that one person will lag significantly behind everyone else.
Allowing rerolls defeats the entire purpose of the 4d6 method. That still doesn't make standard array the best option in all scenarios. It's the most fair, yes, but character generation becomes pretty bland with it if you're trying to optimize in any way (and there's nothing wrong with optimizing). Thankfully Tasha's at least encourages more creative racial options with floating stat bonuses but that still doesn't fix why 4d6 is bad.
Unfortunately when it comes to making "randomness" more fair, there's no official options for it. But if someone out there is willing to homebrew a new rolling rule that's both random and "more fair" than 4d6, then use this method:
All stats start at 6. Roll 10d4 (or 11 if you want a slightly better average than 4d6). Add each individual d4 to your stats. The only rules are: 1. You can't go over 20 and 2. You can't split the number on a d4 to add to multiple stats. The math behind this is simply that smaller die sizes and more dice rolled at once reduces the standard deviation and having a base of 6 ensures that no one starts with a character ending up with 10's across their array even after racials. Of course, this method isn't perfect, it's obviously homebrew, and it kind of makes ridiculously weak or strong characters extremely unlikely (if you're in to those kinds of things).
Rolling for stats is nice. 4d6 is just not the best way at doing it. It's simple and a lot of people are happy with it, but there's plenty of homebrew ways out there that I feel are "more fair" for the table.
Alternatively, just use a point buy calculator and increase the points available or alter it to allow for higher and lower starting values. Yay.
You may think I'm ignoring something, I just don't consider it much of an issue. Since solving challenges is based more and more on character abilities than on player problem solving skills, I'm looking at characters and party composition in order to tailor/include/exclude challenges anyway. Parties with two poor to mediocre but proficient characters will have as good as or a better chance of passing a check than parties with good to great but non-proficient characters, for instance. The flip side of the fact that good stats matter more in WotC D&D than in TSR D&D is that bad stats matter more as well, and every official method is going to result in players having less than good stats in some areas - in other words, I'm considering the strengths of weaknesses of the PCs in my campaign regardless, which results in their stats possibly having an impact on my prep but in practice not on the game, and the amount of work is the same. 4d6 doesn't have a significant flaw for me, as the DM. I'm sure it does to you, and I accept that that makes it a method not suitable for your table. It'd just be nice if you could accept your table and mine are different.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A more effectively built character will outshine a lesser one, and a mediocre or even poor one will still outshine a strong one if it concerns a strength of the former and weakness of the latter. I mean, at level 1 a ranger with 10 Wis who's proficient in Survival is just as good at navigating the wilds and foraging for food as a 15 Wis fighter who isn't proficient, and at higher levels the ranger will be better. In other words, those imbalances are relative and how much they matter in practice depends on party composition and the types of challenges the DM presents to the party. They can also be addressed by giving players who were less fortunate when rolling their stats better equipment or an extra proficiency or some nebulous background quality that gives them a bonus to certain checks, for instance. To me, these discrepancies are very easy to address. I appreciate doing any of those things might not suit every DM's style, but that's no skin off my nose. ;-)
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
While many of the skill check issues sound "right" in that they balance, the combat ones simply don't and won't. 2 of your players are getting +3 to hit and the other 2 are not, means in combat, those lacking the bonus will, soon enough, feel useless in combat, unless the DM leaps through some hoops and customizes encounters/monsters and other situations to "balance" the unbalanced party.
Many who claim it's not a big deal for a DM to adjust are obviously not doing much DM work. Trying to make combat fair when there is a 3-5 point difference in "to hit" numbers, and AC and HP is a genuine challenge. Making sure the high stats are somewhat challenged, while not killing off the low stats isn't the simple task many believe. Randomness is great where applicable, but balancing the game when the party ranges from strong like ox to meek as mouse can put a true damper on the DM's fun, as he/she struggles to offer an immersive and interesting experience for ALL involved.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
One of my points is that players not knowing (how) to optimize is somewhat comparable to 4d6' power discrepancies. One rolls up a barbarian or some other fairly straightforward class, the other goes for a sorcerer - I'll give pretty good odds the sorcerer player is going to have more difficulties carrying their weight than the barbarian player. A group with nothing but newbie players and an inexperienced DM is going to have some challenges in any case. On the other hand, when everyone's new it's not like the standard array will feel tired, played-out and uninspired already so the main downside (to me) won't really matter. So sure, why not make it simple and non-random?
But that doesn't make random methods worse in general, or non-random ones "dummy" methods. They both have advantages and both have disadvantages. Pick what works best for you. Pick something else if the first you try doesn't work out. Or stick with it and try some houserules to deal with whatever you didn't like about it the first time. There's some advice about finding your groove interspersed in the PHB and particularly the DMG, but I don't think it's suggested strongly enough.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
They're numbers. That makes these differences by definition not just quantifiable, but already quantified. And thus easy to fix, if you really want to be rid of them. To hit number too low? +X magical weapon. AC too low? Angel looking out for you gives you an unnamed +X bonus to AC. HP too low? Free Toughness feat. The entire game is choc full of things specifically meant to manipulate those numbers. Take your pick.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
At which point why are you bothering with stats at all?
Why does D&D bother with stats? I mean, from personal experience using the standard array doesn't exactly result in a wealth of diversity, and give or take a +1/-1 here or there neither does point buy, so I could ask the same question to groups using those methods.
Also note that a +X weapon doesn't help with Athletics checks, a bonus to AC doesn't improve your Dex save and Tougness doesn't help with Concentration checks. I'm saying there are ways to address the more egregious discrepancies if you think that's really necessary, not telling you to stamp a uniform mold on all characters to make them equal.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Point buy is kinda crappy and will force players to use ASIs and skip feats that are pretty cool. I am a bigger fan of 4d6 drop the lowest and reroll 1's. Having a character's primary stat need at most one ASI to max out allows for a lore more flavor and customizing. In games where I have DMd point buy and played in AL, there are rarely feats before tier 3 and even then players complain about it. With rolling, everyone seems happier and ability scores aren't even a discussion at those tables, at least ones that I play and DM. Who wants to play an average character? You are role playing a Wizard, not a farm hand, you are supposed to be epic. When I have a table to super high ability score players, I turn back the magic items that are given out and that scales the encounters back a bit. I'd rather have it that way than hear moaning and complaining about how they want a feat but can't bla bla bla...
Thank you for confirming that 4d6 is for power-gamers who care about stats. For the 17th time, there is no other reason to use the 4d6 method. BTW, epic scores are 16.
I mean, Vince, you can say that all you want, and I think you’re generally right, but the fact remains that I and at least one of my groups roll because it’s fun and don’t complain if we get screwed over by the dice. Power gaming (of both methods) annoys me as much as anyone else, but it’s not the only reason to roll.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Vince, you continue to espouse both overly rigid and egocentric viewpoints that overgeneralize thousands of players into a category that you then assign a negative connotation to. You are not the arbiter of D&D, nor do your viewpoints affect how anyone else enjoys or plays the game. 4d6 drop lowest is used by many groups of people for many different reasons, and it is the "default" as it were, of character generation in the PH and has been for years through multiple iterations of the game.
D&D is a game. It is played for fun/enjoyment. If people like 4d6 because its variability allows for more easily defined PC strengths and flaws/weaknesses, that is fine so long as they and their table have fun. If people like 4d6 because it allows them to optimize a heroic character in a fantasy game and feel powerful when they play, that is also fine so long as they and their table have fun. If people like 4d6 because that's how they learned and they simply like doing it that way, that is, again, fine so long as they and their table have fun. People are allowed to play D&D for practically any reason and with any goal in mind, and those reasons and goals are valid so long as they and their table are having fun.
If fun for you and your table is standard array, 3d6 in order, 4d6 drop lowest, point buy, or anything else, then fine, play the way you want. No one is stopping you or judging you for doing that. But likewise, don't belittle, denigrate, demean, mock, or gatekeep when others do things differently. The only "correct" way to play D&D is the way that allows people and their tables to have fun doing it.
For the 18th time. There is only one reason to use the 4d6 method. That is to get better stats. Any other reason can be done with any all other systems.
You can't get random results without a random generation system.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A 27 point can easily emulate one. The only difference is the stats of a 27 point buy can't be as high, which is what it is all about.