Hey guys, I've played a lot of RPGs and a lot of previous editions of DnD (including the dreaded 4th edition), but my experience with 5th ed is limited.
If I wanted to start a campaign, what is the best method for stat generation?
I Generally really hate rolled stats, because someone can end up with like, 3 18s and someone can end up with nothing above a 13 (yes, this has happened to me with 4d6 drop the lowest) However, point buy and the given stat array also leave something to be desired. The stat array seems to be particularly bad if you are MAD (multi-ability-score dependent, like a monk or paladin) and the stat array could leave you with your central stat being a 15 if you, say, really have your heart set on playing that Dwarven Wizard or something.
Has anyone else come up with a different stat array that doesn't result in crazy overpowered characters or a different point buy system that is a little more forgiving?
There is an optional rule in Tashas that allows you to swap ability scores so a dwarf wizard can have a +2 in intelligence. If you do not use this a player who picks a sub optimal race /class combo is nerfing their character however you choose ability scores.
If you want players to have comparable stats but be a little more powerful than standard array or point buy you can use an enhanced array (say 16, 15, 14, 12, 10, 8) or a point buy with more points (say 31 points and 16 is available for 12 points), these are roughly the equivalent to an average rolled set of abilities.
I think Standard Array is fine, especially if I expect to reach levels where characters will get ability score improvements or feats. When it comes to rolling for stats I only have that for one-shots; if someone's starting stats are too great or small, it's only for one game, and they can still achieve great things regardless.
A Discord server I'm with uses 72 point buy, where all stats begin at 3 (but can go no higher than 18) and you can distribute 72 points before bonuses. It seems fine but I rarely use it myself.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
People really can think on these things too hard. Part of it is the illusion of power that you get in D&D; players can feel that they're in some kind of fair system, even to the extent of believing that the game world has some kind of rules.
I'd just ask your players what they want to do for stat-generation. Let them decide. If one wants to roll 4d6-Drop-Lowest, and another wants Standard Array, then let them do what they want. Honestly, the moment you start playing, nobody will even remember what stat generation system they used.
Personally I think the best system is:
All players roll 4d6 and drop the lowest. This has to be done in front of the DM.
If they don't like what they rolled, they can switch to Point Buy or Standard Array.
That way there's the chance to get a cool unique character, but nobody is obligated to play something that makes them feel useless, and everyone got the same chance.
Don't worry about "overpowered" characters. There's no such thing.
This has been debated for as long as ability scores have been around. I use 3d6 down the chain, always have, always will. The simple reason is this. Choice results in predictable outcomes. Only true randomness will produce truly unique results.
BigLizard proving the existence of the Lawful Chaotic Alignment. Using strict rules to produce utmost chaos lol.
Jokes aside, back to the question. Just to give some context, as a DM I like characters that start a little above average, bc I like to run very high fantasy games, where characters can realize their builds early. Especially since I tend to finish my campaigns around lv 11-13. So I understand wanting a different approach, here is a list of things that I tried and liked it (I switch between them depending on my appetite for chaos at the moment):
Epic Standard Array: 17, 15, 13, 12, 10, 8. I got this from the Dungeon Dudes and it's pretty neat, bc it allows balance and customization, even for MAD characters.
Roll D6+6: It produces more powerful characters, but still has that chaotic vibe to it. I like it.
Roll 4D6D1 + Reroll if sum below 70: That's the one they use in CR. I like it as well, once again, produces more powerful characters, but has even more chaos than the D6+6 method.
There are a bunch of other ways that try to mimic this (The extended point buy ones are a good example), but I felt that those where the easiest to implement in my tables.
Also, just echoing people from above, just use Tasha's optional rule for changing ability scores. Unless you are attached to the lore of what those scores represent or something like this, there is no reason not to.
Hey guys, I've played a lot of RPGs and a lot of previous editions of DnD (including the dreaded 4th edition), but my experience with 5th ed is limited.
If I wanted to start a campaign, what is the best method for stat generation?
I Generally really hate rolled stats, because someone can end up with like, 3 18s and someone can end up with nothing above a 13 (yes, this has happened to me with 4d6 drop the lowest)
I like to roll stats, but I also play with a mulligan house rule that let's you re-roll your stats if you don't have at least one stat at 15 or higher. Makes it a little more forgiving without having to fully min/max the standard array.
First off, thanks everyone for responding. A couple of notes to some comments I've gotten:
1) Remember, I'm new to 5th ed. I don't know how tight the math is. I'm coming from Pathfinder 2e where the math is EXTREMELY tight and you basically need a 16 or 18 in your class's main stat or you are going to have a terrible time. (Side note, the stat generation system in 2e is very different and each character, no matter their race, can get an 18 in their base stat if they want)
2) Sure, choosing to be say, a Dwarf Wizard would be nerfing your character, but my thought was, a character that had a +2 to a stat and started with a 15 (like the stat array in the book) would have a 17 and a +3 to their abilities (say Int). Similarly a Dwarf that just happened to start with a 16 from, say rolling, with no boost would still start with a +3, and would have the same modifier at those crucial low levels.
3)Thanks ReySeySel for the epic stat array, I might look at that one.
4) I had wondered what Critical Roll's stat generation method was. 4d6 drop 1, reroll entire array if below 70 seems nice, but you could still end up with a character with nothing but 13s and 14s (or less), which, with my luck, is what I'd get. I might do that with the added "Also if no stats are 15 or above." I dunno, still could end up with some characters way stronger than others.
The answer to the question of how to generate a character's ability scores is that it depends upon what you and your fellow players want out of the characters.
Here is what I mean: I personally have been playing D&D for about 25 years, and 90% of that has been as a DM. I take any chance I can to play in someone else's game, but generally it seems that the D&D world contains an abundance of enthusiastic players and a dearth of experienced DMs, so most new groups and players I meet ask me to be a DM rather than a player, and so here I am. As a player, I would love to play in a game where each player had a stable of 4-6 characters and played 1-3 of them simultaneously while the others rotated in and out of active play. I love making characters and exploring concepts, I rarely get attached to any one specific character, and when I do it becomes more of an archetype to which to return than an individual character. Knowing this, it should come as no surprise that I favor the 3d6 down the chain method of generating abilities, because I have lots of different possibilities in mind, and am emotionally attached to none of them.
Few of the players in games I run feel the same way. They tend to come to the table with one or two concepts in mind that are, to a greater or lesser extent, reflections of themselves. Consequently, most players I have DMed for prefer to be able to assign their high and low abilities to reflect their concept. Also, they have tended to be far more emotionally attached to their characters than I would ever be, and thus they have also tended to be less willing to move on with a new character than I would be. Furthermore, it is a rare player in my experience who is not concerned with their status relative to the other players. Even if the characters are meticulously balanced with one another, and everyone knows that, if one player has merely been rolling well that night, I expect to hear about it. If that player happens to also be playing a character whose bonuses are higher than everyone else's, I expect to hear a lot about it.
So even though I think it'd be all kinds of fun to play in a campaign that was episodic rather than epic, with high character turnover rather than recurring heros, and with 3d6 down the line character generation; the games I end up running tend to be epic and long arc with point buy characters who see very low turnover. This is because it isn't fun for me to be constantly fielding and defending against complaints. Therefore, I don't force people who want to play a high strength fighter to roll 3d6 down the line and live with it. Therefore I don't force people who want to play an awe inspiring hero in a group of awe inspiring heroes to accept that some people are born much stronger, smarter, and more charismatic than average, while others are just a little more wise.
What do you and your fellow players want out of these characters and the game? Does it matter if the party fighter is smarter than the party wizard and more dexterous than the party rogue? If it doesn't, roll stats. If it does, point buy. If strictly balanced characters aren't important, but avoiding a significantly underpowered character is, then allow mulligans. Is a 16 a high ability or is it not? Understand that character power is relative and not absolute. There is no overpowered or underpowered character that is so per se. Any character is over or under relative to a certain standard. Figure out what you are trying to achieve, and pick character generation rules with your goals in mind.
First off, thanks everyone for responding. A couple of notes to some comments I've gotten:
1) Remember, I'm new to 5th ed. I don't know how tight the math is. I'm coming from Pathfinder 2e where the math is EXTREMELY tight and you basically need a 16 or 18 in your class's main stat or you are going to have a terrible time.
5e is about as dependent on your main stat as 3.5e (not sure how it compares to PF), though the encounter system is tuned to 'easy' so I'm sure the game would be fine it everyone had a 14 in their main stat (just a problem if there's a lot of variance between PCs).
My personal preference is to remove racial attribute modifiers entirely, allow buying a 16 for 12 points, and use 34 point buy (this will get you the same results as Tasha's for a +2/+1 race where you build for a 16 and 14 in your two boosted stats, but gives a bit more flexibility). If you want some of the feel of racial ASIs without the balance issues, you can instead have 30 points and then add bonus points corresponding to racial adjustments.
Well, I'm sorry, clearly some people have some very strong thoughts vis-a-vis character creation methods for stats in DnD 5e. I didn't mean to cause a toxic thread. I just wanted to know what people thought because I don't know the system too well. I come from a viewpoint that a player shouldn't be punished for choosing a race/class combination that doesn't match up to what the designers want, or that one player shouldn't have god stats and another player nothing higher than a 13. I'm just trying to solve those two problems in any potential game I run. Sorry, didn't mean to cause a problem.
Well, I'm sorry, clearly some people have some very strong thoughts vis-a-vis character creation methods for stats in DnD 5e. I didn't mean to cause a toxic thread. I just wanted to know what people thought because I don't know the system too well. I come from a viewpoint that a player shouldn't be punished for choosing a race/class combination that doesn't match up to what the designers want, or that one player shouldn't have god stats and another player nothing higher than a 13. I'm just trying to solve those two problems in any potential game I run. Sorry, didn't mean to cause a problem.
Relax, that's how things are in this forum (no matter how many reports we send), there are toxic people that will always give the "absolute truth" about how D&D should be played.
Just ignore the trolls and harvest the good suggestions around ;)
All players roll 4d6 and drop the lowest. This has to be done in front of the DM.
If they don't like what they rolled, they can switch to Point Buy or Standard Array.
That way there's the chance to get a cool unique character, but nobody is obligated to play something that makes them feel useless, and everyone got the same chance.
Best option to me remains Point Buy as it puts everyone on the same level having equity as well as diversity, where Standard Array is too samey and Rolling too random.
... a player shouldn't be punished for choosing a race/class combination that doesn't match up to what the designers want, or that one player shouldn't have god stats and another player nothing higher than a 13.
So if you want to accomplish freedom in race/class combos, then either eliminate racial ability adjustments for your campaign, or make a new subrace as demonstrated in the DMG (how do you think we ended up with so many subraces of elves, anyway?). If you want to balance the players ability scores with respect to one another, then either use point buy, or if you want more randomness than point buy, but not 4d6 randomness, then do something like 2d4+8, or one of the many other variants suggested above.
As I've said, determine what you and your players want from the characters, and generate them accordingly.
"Use point buy, but for races that have +2 to one specific stat, and +1 to another specific stat, instead that +1 can be applied to any stat, but cannot be combined with the +2 for a total of +3."
For example, a standard dwarf would have a +2 to constitution, and a +1 to any stat other than constitution.
"Use point buy, but for races that have +2 to one specific stat, and +1 to another specific stat, instead that +1 can be applied to any stat, but cannot be combined with the +2 for a total of +3."
For example, a standard dwarf would have a +2 to constitution, and a +1 to any stat other than constitution.
a player shouldn't be punished for choosing a race/class combination that doesn't match up to what the designers want
Just pointing out that not getting an extra bonus is not they same as being “punished,” it’s just not getting an extra bonus. Furthermore, getting an extra bonus in one area but not in another is also not the same as being punished. It’s called a “bonus” and not an “entitlement” for a reason. There, I’ve said my peace.
Hey guys, I've played a lot of RPGs and a lot of previous editions of DnD (including the dreaded 4th edition), but my experience with 5th ed is limited.
If I wanted to start a campaign, what is the best method for stat generation?
I Generally really hate rolled stats, because someone can end up with like, 3 18s and someone can end up with nothing above a 13 (yes, this has happened to me with 4d6 drop the lowest) However, point buy and the given stat array also leave something to be desired. The stat array seems to be particularly bad if you are MAD (multi-ability-score dependent, like a monk or paladin) and the stat array could leave you with your central stat being a 15 if you, say, really have your heart set on playing that Dwarven Wizard or something.
Has anyone else come up with a different stat array that doesn't result in crazy overpowered characters or a different point buy system that is a little more forgiving?
There is an optional rule in Tashas that allows you to swap ability scores so a dwarf wizard can have a +2 in intelligence. If you do not use this a player who picks a sub optimal race /class combo is nerfing their character however you choose ability scores.
If you want players to have comparable stats but be a little more powerful than standard array or point buy you can use an enhanced array (say 16, 15, 14, 12, 10, 8) or a point buy with more points (say 31 points and 16 is available for 12 points), these are roughly the equivalent to an average rolled set of abilities.
I think Standard Array is fine, especially if I expect to reach levels where characters will get ability score improvements or feats. When it comes to rolling for stats I only have that for one-shots; if someone's starting stats are too great or small, it's only for one game, and they can still achieve great things regardless.
A Discord server I'm with uses 72 point buy, where all stats begin at 3 (but can go no higher than 18) and you can distribute 72 points before bonuses. It seems fine but I rarely use it myself.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
People really can think on these things too hard. Part of it is the illusion of power that you get in D&D; players can feel that they're in some kind of fair system, even to the extent of believing that the game world has some kind of rules.
I'd just ask your players what they want to do for stat-generation. Let them decide. If one wants to roll 4d6-Drop-Lowest, and another wants Standard Array, then let them do what they want. Honestly, the moment you start playing, nobody will even remember what stat generation system they used.
Personally I think the best system is:
That way there's the chance to get a cool unique character, but nobody is obligated to play something that makes them feel useless, and everyone got the same chance.
Don't worry about "overpowered" characters. There's no such thing.
BigLizard proving the existence of the Lawful Chaotic Alignment. Using strict rules to produce utmost chaos lol.
Jokes aside, back to the question. Just to give some context, as a DM I like characters that start a little above average, bc I like to run very high fantasy games, where characters can realize their builds early. Especially since I tend to finish my campaigns around lv 11-13. So I understand wanting a different approach, here is a list of things that I tried and liked it (I switch between them depending on my appetite for chaos at the moment):
There are a bunch of other ways that try to mimic this (The extended point buy ones are a good example), but I felt that those where the easiest to implement in my tables.
Also, just echoing people from above, just use Tasha's optional rule for changing ability scores. Unless you are attached to the lore of what those scores represent or something like this, there is no reason not to.
I like to roll stats, but I also play with a mulligan house rule that let's you re-roll your stats if you don't have at least one stat at 15 or higher. Makes it a little more forgiving without having to fully min/max the standard array.
First off, thanks everyone for responding. A couple of notes to some comments I've gotten:
1) Remember, I'm new to 5th ed. I don't know how tight the math is. I'm coming from Pathfinder 2e where the math is EXTREMELY tight and you basically need a 16 or 18 in your class's main stat or you are going to have a terrible time. (Side note, the stat generation system in 2e is very different and each character, no matter their race, can get an 18 in their base stat if they want)
2) Sure, choosing to be say, a Dwarf Wizard would be nerfing your character, but my thought was, a character that had a +2 to a stat and started with a 15 (like the stat array in the book) would have a 17 and a +3 to their abilities (say Int). Similarly a Dwarf that just happened to start with a 16 from, say rolling, with no boost would still start with a +3, and would have the same modifier at those crucial low levels.
3)Thanks ReySeySel for the epic stat array, I might look at that one.
4) I had wondered what Critical Roll's stat generation method was. 4d6 drop 1, reroll entire array if below 70 seems nice, but you could still end up with a character with nothing but 13s and 14s (or less), which, with my luck, is what I'd get. I might do that with the added "Also if no stats are 15 or above." I dunno, still could end up with some characters way stronger than others.
Anyway, thanks everyone for responding.
The answer to the question of how to generate a character's ability scores is that it depends upon what you and your fellow players want out of the characters.
Here is what I mean: I personally have been playing D&D for about 25 years, and 90% of that has been as a DM. I take any chance I can to play in someone else's game, but generally it seems that the D&D world contains an abundance of enthusiastic players and a dearth of experienced DMs, so most new groups and players I meet ask me to be a DM rather than a player, and so here I am. As a player, I would love to play in a game where each player had a stable of 4-6 characters and played 1-3 of them simultaneously while the others rotated in and out of active play. I love making characters and exploring concepts, I rarely get attached to any one specific character, and when I do it becomes more of an archetype to which to return than an individual character. Knowing this, it should come as no surprise that I favor the 3d6 down the chain method of generating abilities, because I have lots of different possibilities in mind, and am emotionally attached to none of them.
Few of the players in games I run feel the same way. They tend to come to the table with one or two concepts in mind that are, to a greater or lesser extent, reflections of themselves. Consequently, most players I have DMed for prefer to be able to assign their high and low abilities to reflect their concept. Also, they have tended to be far more emotionally attached to their characters than I would ever be, and thus they have also tended to be less willing to move on with a new character than I would be. Furthermore, it is a rare player in my experience who is not concerned with their status relative to the other players. Even if the characters are meticulously balanced with one another, and everyone knows that, if one player has merely been rolling well that night, I expect to hear about it. If that player happens to also be playing a character whose bonuses are higher than everyone else's, I expect to hear a lot about it.
So even though I think it'd be all kinds of fun to play in a campaign that was episodic rather than epic, with high character turnover rather than recurring heros, and with 3d6 down the line character generation; the games I end up running tend to be epic and long arc with point buy characters who see very low turnover. This is because it isn't fun for me to be constantly fielding and defending against complaints. Therefore, I don't force people who want to play a high strength fighter to roll 3d6 down the line and live with it. Therefore I don't force people who want to play an awe inspiring hero in a group of awe inspiring heroes to accept that some people are born much stronger, smarter, and more charismatic than average, while others are just a little more wise.
What do you and your fellow players want out of these characters and the game? Does it matter if the party fighter is smarter than the party wizard and more dexterous than the party rogue? If it doesn't, roll stats. If it does, point buy. If strictly balanced characters aren't important, but avoiding a significantly underpowered character is, then allow mulligans. Is a 16 a high ability or is it not? Understand that character power is relative and not absolute. There is no overpowered or underpowered character that is so per se. Any character is over or under relative to a certain standard. Figure out what you are trying to achieve, and pick character generation rules with your goals in mind.
5e is about as dependent on your main stat as 3.5e (not sure how it compares to PF), though the encounter system is tuned to 'easy' so I'm sure the game would be fine it everyone had a 14 in their main stat (just a problem if there's a lot of variance between PCs).
My personal preference is to remove racial attribute modifiers entirely, allow buying a 16 for 12 points, and use 34 point buy (this will get you the same results as Tasha's for a +2/+1 race where you build for a 16 and 14 in your two boosted stats, but gives a bit more flexibility). If you want some of the feel of racial ASIs without the balance issues, you can instead have 30 points and then add bonus points corresponding to racial adjustments.
Actually, in the 5e world, per the PHB, rolling is the standard. Point buy and array are optional variants.
Well, I'm sorry, clearly some people have some very strong thoughts vis-a-vis character creation methods for stats in DnD 5e. I didn't mean to cause a toxic thread. I just wanted to know what people thought because I don't know the system too well. I come from a viewpoint that a player shouldn't be punished for choosing a race/class combination that doesn't match up to what the designers want, or that one player shouldn't have god stats and another player nothing higher than a 13. I'm just trying to solve those two problems in any potential game I run. Sorry, didn't mean to cause a problem.
Roll vs point buy has been a holy war since at least 3.0. Racial ASIs have been a holy war for only about a year or two.
Relax, that's how things are in this forum (no matter how many reports we send), there are toxic people that will always give the "absolute truth" about how D&D should be played.
Just ignore the trolls and harvest the good suggestions around ;)
That’s the system I use as well.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Best option to me remains Point Buy as it puts everyone on the same level having equity as well as diversity, where Standard Array is too samey and Rolling too random.
So if you want to accomplish freedom in race/class combos, then either eliminate racial ability adjustments for your campaign, or make a new subrace as demonstrated in the DMG (how do you think we ended up with so many subraces of elves, anyway?). If you want to balance the players ability scores with respect to one another, then either use point buy, or if you want more randomness than point buy, but not 4d6 randomness, then do something like 2d4+8, or one of the many other variants suggested above.
As I've said, determine what you and your players want from the characters, and generate them accordingly.
How about:
"Use point buy, but for races that have +2 to one specific stat, and +1 to another specific stat, instead that +1 can be applied to any stat, but cannot be combined with the +2 for a total of +3."
For example, a standard dwarf would have a +2 to constitution, and a +1 to any stat other than constitution.
The stat swapping is what is in Tasha's.
Just pointing out that not getting an extra bonus is not they same as being “punished,” it’s just not getting an extra bonus. Furthermore, getting an extra bonus in one area but not in another is also not the same as being punished. It’s called a “bonus” and not an “entitlement” for a reason. There, I’ve said my peace.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Being denied a bonus that other people receive is a punishment.