Lemme put it simply, Vince.

You do not get to pass judgment on me and mine.  Neither I nor anyone else in this entire forum have to justify our games to you, just like you don't have to justify your games to us.  All this vitriol and bitterness is unnecessary.  Play your D&D whatever damn way you feel like, and stop trying to get everyone else to play your D&D instead of the D&D they enjoy and cherish.  Ne?

Quote from Stormknight >>

I feel that it's worth mentioning that using 4d6 is the only standard way to roll for ability scores in Dungeons & Dragons.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/step-by-step-characters#3DetermineAbilityScores

Roll four 6-sided dice and record the total of the highest three dice on a piece of scratch paper. Do this five more times, so that you have six numbers.

Standard array is also part of those standard rules.

Points cost is an optional "variant" rule.

As always, and as discussed in this thread, everyone is welcome to use whatever rules their group prefer for their own games.

Not espousing an opinion on which method I prefer - just dropping information.

 Thank You Storm for that post in my games I have the players roll I have 3 players and they each roll 2 attributes with the 4d6 drop lowest. The players all use the same stats that they assign in the order they wish, that way if you were to add up the base scores they are all the same but 1 fighter may have an 18 in strength but the wizard has that In Intelligence, Cleric Wisdom so on If a player later joins the game I give him/her the rolled scores for them to place where they want.

Not going to lie. Those stats sound hilarious. I would love that stat array for a character. That character would be so much fun to RP and my goal changes from whatever my character's story was going to be to make sure that the other players like my character as much as possible so when they inevitably die for one reason or another, it will be impactful to the other players.

But I also acknowledge that the way I play the game isn't the same way that anyone else plays the game.

If I am not mistaken, isn't 4d6 and drop the lowest literally the *default* first option given in the PHB with standard array being the "if you feel that's too risky" alternative and point buy being a *variant* rule.

I always use it, and never to get better numbers. It is for pure immersion in the sense that we don't get to pick what we're innately good at before we're born. Some people house rule that you get to re-roll if you don't get two numbers that are at least 15, but not everyone does it.

The way I do it as a DM is you roll for stats and if you don't like them you pick standard array, but no re-rolling. As a player I add a self-imposed limitation that the first number *has* to go into STR, the second DEX, and so on, that way I pick class on the spot and discover who that character is as I go along. Has nothing to do with optimization.

Maybe I come across as a jerk, but I think rolling dice and complaining when the results are random is like watching a Saw movie and complaining that it's graphically gory.

This reminds me of a good friend I had during our Champions days, named Andy. He would try to use his hand-to-hand killing attack, which is meant to KILL enemies, because HKAs had a higher range of possible STUN damage (to KO them) and worked against a rarer form of defense. You would roll your damage, say on 3D6, and then roll 1D6-1 (minimum 1), and multiply. What Andy was hoping for, with a 45 point power, was to roll lucky on his 3D6, getting say a 13, and then rolling a 6 on the multiplier, and do 65 STUN (13 x 5). A regular 45 point attack of 9D6 would, because of all the dice, usually roll very close to average, and do something like 31 STUN.  We called this the "STUN Lotto." 

Every once in a while it worked... enough that he kept trying it, even though he didn't get the dice to roll his way very often. And every time they didn't roll his way, he would grumble and say, "I hate these dice... They're so... so... so... RANDOM!"

Thus, literally rolling dice and then complaining that they're random.

Quote from BioWizard >>

Maybe I come across as a jerk, but I think rolling dice and complaining when the results are random is like watching a Saw movie and complaining that it's graphically gory.

This reminds me of a good friend I had during our Champions days, named Andy. He would try to use his hand-to-hand killing attack, which is meant to KILL enemies, because HKAs had a higher range of possible STUN damage (to KO them) and worked against a rarer form of defense. You would roll your damage, say on 3D6, and then roll 1D6-1 (minimum 1), and multiply. What Andy was hoping for, with a 45 point power, was to roll lucky on his 3D6, getting say a 13, and then rolling a 6 on the multiplier, and do 65 STUN (13 x 5). A regular 45 point attack of 9D6 would, because of all the dice, usually roll very close to average, and do something like 31 STUN.  We called this the "STUN Lotto." 

Every once in a while it worked... enough that he kept trying it, even though he didn't get the dice to roll his way very often. And every time they didn't roll his way, he would grumble and say, "I hate these dice... They're so... so... so... RANDOM!"

Thus, literally rolling dice and then complaining that they're random.

 This is not that much of a rare thing in Champions groups. We had a Hero named HARKA (Hand and Ranged Killing Attacks) and that's all he could do.

Quote from Vince_Snetterton >>

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

A few, from a nigh-infinite number of counterpoints:

1.) Did the DM insist on 4d6y drop lowest, without giving the player the option of using a fixed stat array?  Many DMs do, and players lament low scores because they had no option to take the enforced mediocrity of Standard Array.

2.) Is the player upset over their low numbers, or upset because their numbers are twenty to thirty points below the rest of their table's?  If the latter, perhaps the mere existence of their character is already dragging down the table's fun and they're looking for the best out they can.

3.) What other responses did the player get, other than your cherry-picked "MUNCHKINS ARE TERRIBLE! DX" selection of responses?  There are ways of playing around a Village Idiot stat array; where were the people suggesting those ways?

4.) You specifically state this is from a character optimization channel.  How, and why, does it surprise you that it's populated by optimizers, rather than by the Rules-Lite Narrative Experience(C) sorts you're looking for?

5.) Many people gamble on 4d6kh not to Munchkin The Game Away, but because using an ASI to increase a stat by two points is the most boring possible way to level up a character in all of D&D 5e.  It is boring.  Players much prefer to make interesting choices for their characters when granted the rare chance to take a feat, but if their numbers are poor to the point of hindering their party and they're playing with a killer DM who refuses to allow them to find, create, barter, or bullshit their way into a more stable position (like, say...you)?  They don't get to choose interesting feats that speak to their character's growth and personality, they get to pick a number to increase by 2.  Which is not really any different than not gaining a level at all.  And since Standard Array is a very poor numeric spread by default...well.  Take the chance on 4d6kh and hope.

I could go on, but the point has been made beautifully.  One cherry-picked story from a random Facebook feed is barely even an anecdote, let alone Conclusive Proof That All Optimizers Are Evil.

If a player feels that much constrained by the Standard Array or 27 point buy that they feel they NEED the "variation" of the 4d6 method, then the player is a bad player. The 27 point buy allows for a near infinite variation in initial stats. And it is fair to all.

Oh, and I do like your clever personal insult. My players don't have to bullshit or barter or whine about their starting stats because they ALL use the 27 point buy, and they then all start at the same level, and can build what they like within that construct, which I have already said allows for near infinite options. Only a weak player would argue otherwise.

This really rubs me the wrong way. It is bullshit and it is totally uncalled for. Just because a player has a different playstyle and preferences than you does not make them a bad player. If you do not like powergaming, then do not play with power gamers. Leave them alone and let them play how they want to play.

I do not give a rat's ass about my players' roleplaying. I like to voice my NPCs and give my own characters backstories, but I am not going to shove my personal beliefs and standards down my players' throats and tell them to get better at roleplaying or get off my table. I do not care how good or bad they are at roleplaying. I do not care how good or bad they are at optimizing their characters. I do not even really care too much about how familiar they are with the rules of the game. As long as my players are having fun and I am having fun, they are good players.

It is one thing for GMs to criticize each other in the spirit of improving each other's game for the benefit of the players, but it is a whole nother thing to attack another GM's player. You can tell me my GMing is shit and my character voices are downright horrible and annoying, and I would not give a damn. However, what you do NOT do is poke a mama bear's cubs, tell a father his daughter is ugly, or a GM their player is bad. They are not your players and you have no business telling the public that their players are horrible. If you want to complain and whine about your own players, be my guest, but you should NOT talk smack about another GM's player. Unless a GM is complaining about their players and is seeking help, mind your own freaking business and GTFO their table. Stop sticking your nose into other people's tables and telling them they are bad at playing D&D. It is absolutely annoying. It is freaking obnoxious. It is totally rude. The D&D community would be far better off without this kind negativity and toxicity.

Honestly, nobody wants to know that you barged into people's bathrooms, sniffed their back cracks, and found out their chocolates smell bad. Like seriously, just leave and close the door; let them sit on their porcelain thrones in peace. We know what brownies smell like, but I am pretty sure most of us do not want to hear you describe it. It is okay to puke and vomit, but please keep your sourness in your own bathroom.

It really says a lot about some people in the hobby that a rolling stats method from AD&D 1e is being ranted and raved about and people who used it are called unskilled or poor people. I thought tradition was important?

The gatekeeping that some players take upon them to enforce is ridiculous.

Do what you want at your table.

Stop sneering and raging about what others do at theirs, cause they sure as hell don't give a damn about what you do at yours.

I would have allowed them to use the point buy if I did restrict them to one series of 4d6 rolls.

But it would be their choice only, I'd check to see what race they wanted to run as that could help turn those rolls into a little less as awful.

For example the regular human gets +1 to all those doesn't help the 4 which would become a 5 but it would be the only one with a negative modifier so could be put in a dump stat and played on.

What class and race were they looking at when they made that series of rolls?

Okay let's see

Str 12, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 5

Human Male Cleric of either Life or Nature domain with the Acolyte background.

Born within a peasant community the small village was struck down by the Plague and most of the residents died, it was so bad that one lone child was overlooked and assumed dead.

When discovered the priests almost struck the child dead so badly disfigured he was by the disease, but a kindly friar took the child with him raising them in a remote monastery where the monks, clerics and priests lived quietly and that child grew up fully aware of his disfigurement and knowing he would never find a place to rebuild his life save within the church that provided for him when others would have willingly killed him.

Fully masked always as his facial features had been badly warped not just by disease but by the fire from the pyre he was rescued from he continues the work of his late mentor hoping one day to save others like he had been perhaps preventing them having to grow up with same disfigurements that he has to suffer through in silence.

Notes: This allows for improvement in his Charisma through level gain if wanted, but there are ways this can be improved through the game via items it just depends on how the player wants to play this character.

Will they continue as a priest of goodness or becoming as horribly warped as their physical appearance would suggest?

Would YOU run a character like this?

Because majority of new players are powergamers who come from video game / WOW mentality.  Even had a newbie play a Wiz and was so mad about his STR being low, when he should be focusing on his INT / CON .  Also Loot Mongering is another trait of power gamers, they see it....they want it. Had an old member die 3 times same campaign due to him being a loot monger. Yet every character he created was "different" 

Quote from Vince_Snetterton >>

4d6 is a legacy mechanic that should be wiped out, the same way that rolling percentile dice for Str over 18 was.

Between this and not using alignment, I think it might be time to revoke your true classic D&D card, Vince. ;) 

On a more serious note, why does it have to go? What does it matter if some tables use it? Adventurers League doesn't, so nobody's forced to go with 4d6 drop lowest. It's entirely optional. You said you'd love to use roll 3d6 in order with the right group yourself. So why should another dice-based method get banned from all D&D?

Using 4d6, I got three sets of 1s - three 3s. (Same tower and dice as everyone else.)

I took the standard array.

(The character still didn't last very long, and I often wonder how much fun we all could have had with a woefully inept character. If it ever happens again, I'll keep the character and, then, go visit a voodoo doctor to remove the obvious curse upon me.)

Quote from CSTLS >>

Because majority of new players are powergamers who come from video game / WOW mentality.  Even had a newbie play a Wiz and was so mad about his STR being low, when he should be focusing on his INT / CON .  Also Loot Mongering is another trait of power gamers, they see it....they want it. Had an old member die 3 times same campaign due to him being a loot monger. Yet every character he created was "different" 

People who cut their teeth on computer games -- or heck even those who started playing table-top but have gotten very used to the computer-RPG model -- will try to powergame in this way, in part, because they are used to the heartless computer with pre-programmed dungeons being their "DM." They are not used to having a human controlling the bad guys in real time -- a human with a heart, a soul, and most importantly, a sense of narrative, which a computer cannot ever have. In many video games you have to max everything out to the Nth degree or your entire raid team will wipe. People get /kicked from pickup groups if they don't have the "right build." This is partly smugness on the part of the other group members, but partly a nod to the reality of the situation, which is that if you have people with sub-optimal characters, they might not be able to keep up with the pre-programmed level of the adventure, which a computer is not able or willing to adjust to suit the party.

This mentality that if you are not optimized you will fail then just becomes part of the psyche many gamers have. I remember having this conversation with my friend who plays in my group. He was trying to super-optimize and expressed what happens if his character has this or that imperfection and I stopped him and said, "What you do is you trust your DM." And he took a second and said, "OK, fair point." He'd gotten so used to video games that he forgot, I was going to be running the game, and I'm not going to just "do what it says in my notes" mindlessly (and heartlessly) the way a computer does.

I think players get so used to "playing against the computer" that it is almost innate now. It's hard to step away from that mind set once it's ingrained.

In terms of rolling 4D6/drop lowest -- I did not do that in this campaign I am running. I did an improved stat array (17-15-13-12-10-8). I did not do point buy because one of the players was new, and I did not want her to have to figure out the points. Stat array is simple and easy. The improved one allowed them to pick feats at the ASI levels rather than feeling like the "have to" pick the +2 stat the first couple of times. So far, in fact, everyone has picked a feat that just gave a +1 to something. Which is awesome, because the feats make the characters more unique and interesting. For instance, the Cleric picked up Ritual Casting with Wizard spells because he had spent a lot of time with a Centaur divination wizard and gotten interested in her spell book. He might not have done so this early, or perhaps at all, with the standard array.

I see potential advantage to rolling, and that is if you do it Coleville's way (recognize that again, with the DM as a human with a heart, no DM will allow this process to produce unplayable characters). Coleville makes his players roll 4d6 in order -- they cannot move the stats around. He has rules to account for bad luck -- you must have at least 1 roll above 14, and can't have more than 1 roll below 9, I think... and your total has to be a certain amount (probably equal to point buy). If you got bad luck you roll the whole array over again. But you keep the stats where they fall, and this allows players to "discover their character" rather than sitting down at the table saying "I am playing Bill the Sorcerer." He finds that it helps prevent players from bringing their baggage to his table. I think I might do this in the future -- if I ever run another D&D campaign after this one.

Quote from BioWizard >>

"What you do is you trust your DM." And he took a second and said, "OK, fair point." He'd gotten so used to video games that he forgot, I was going to be running the game, and I'm not going to just "do what it says in my notes" mindlessly (and heartlessly) the way a computer does.

I think players get so used to "playing against the computer" that it is almost innate now. It's hard to step away from that mind set once it's ingrained.

 🛎  DINGDINGDING 🛎 

I don't really care for "Trust your DM" as the answer to everything.  Obviously you should, and in fact if you do not you can't play D&D at that DM's table, but this particular usage of "trust your DM" often comes with connotations of one's issues as a player being dismissed or ignored.  It's the same reason I don't care for Colville's infamous chargen method or the "Discover your character at the table" games in general - they often feel like a DM simply handwaving away the player's issues with a "Don't worry, I'll just fix it myself later".

A good DM can fix a player's problems for them.  A great DM can assist and empower the player into fixing their own problems.  Or, to answer one pithy saying with another, a DM should also "trust your players".  Which is the bit of DMing advice nobody ever gives that they really, truly should.