I find it strange that almost everyone else gave an option that added complexity to the die rolling method of ability score generation in lieu of using the point buy and I wonder why that is? When you add complexity it should add a definable value to the game and I just couldn't see how any of these various methods of die rolling did that, but that is just me. But I am really curious as to why so many DMs so heavily favor the die rolling method, especially in online games when it can cause issues of cheating. In table top forums that issue can be addressed by having all the players roll right there in front of the DM and everyone but that does result in needing a session 0. And while I am not opposed to session 0 in principle if I can start a game at session 1 and just get right into playing well that is a big benefit to me. So on that note I am really just looking for some solid reasons why 6 random die rolls is a better option than the point buy system.
It's simple, really. To a lot of people, D&D means rolling dice.
I get that, but for years D&D was all about a group sitting around a table and characters crawling through megadungeons with no rhyme or reason to how monsters were placed. But we have evolved from those days. Perhaps, we need to start understanding the rolling dice should be the action of last resort in a RPG.
Unfortunately, D&D 5e doesn't make that easy. You can make sure every monster has a reason for being in the PCs' way fairly easily, especially with tools like this, but D&D is, at its heart, about killing monsters, and the DMG guidelines for noncombat XP reflect that by being practically nonexistent. If you want a realistic, versatile RPG that doesn't place a high emphasis on combat, try GURPS*. If you want a simple, prepackaged medieval fantasy RPG, try D&D 5e**.
*This is a recommendation.
**This is a comparison.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I find it strange that almost everyone else gave an option that added complexity to the die rolling method of ability score generation in lieu of using the point buy and I wonder why that is? When you add complexity it should add a definable value to the game and I just couldn't see how any of these various methods of die rolling did that, but that is just me. But I am really curious as to why so many DMs so heavily favor the die rolling method, especially in online games when it can cause issues of cheating. In table top forums that issue can be addressed by having all the players roll right there in front of the DM and everyone but that does result in needing a session 0. And while I am not opposed to session 0 in principle if I can start a game at session 1 and just get right into playing well that is a big benefit to me. So on that note I am really just looking for some solid reasons why 6 random die rolls is a better option than the point buy system.
It's simple, really. To a lot of people, D&D means rolling dice.
I get that, but for years D&D was all about a group sitting around a table and characters crawling through megadungeons with no rhyme or reason to how monsters were placed. But we have evolved from those days. Perhaps, we need to start understanding the rolling dice should be the action of last resort in a RPG.
Unfortunately, D&D 5e doesn't make that easy. You can make sure every monster has a reason for being in the PCs' way fairly easily, especially with tools like this, but D&D is, at its heart, about killing monsters, and the DMG guidelines for noncombat XP reflect that by being practically nonexistent. If you want a realistic, versatile RPG that doesn't place a high emphasis on combat, try GURPS*. If you want a simple, prepackaged medieval fantasy RPG, try D&D 5e**.
*This is a recommendation.
**This is a comparison.
D&D is two systems tied together, with combat being one system and everything else being a second system. I am not suggesting eliminating die rolls, they have their place in every RPG. What I am saying is that perhaps we can start to transition to a smarter way of playing the game where the results of a random die roll are only used in those instances where there is not a better option. Combat qualifies since determining if a blow does damage or not qualifies. However I don't see where character generation via a die roll would or should be the preferred method for DMs. I get that players like it because there is a chance of getting higher scores and the players count on the kindness of DMs to let them reroll if they should generated a majority of poor scores. And I suspect that rolling would lose favor if more DMs said "Sorry I know you rolled crappy but if you want to play this game you are stuck with the 3, two 6s, two 9s, and a 14 for your ability scores.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
A big thing I've taken from learning to play d&d is there isn't a wrong way to do it. If you don't agree with someone else's methods there are tons of other people to find who like the same methods you do. And those other groups aren't doing it wrong at all. Saying things like "the community evolved" implying that it's better now than it used to be can be a problem. Nothing is wrong with just dungeon crawling and very little to no rp, and players who enjoy that aren't "worse players" for it. If that's not the game you are looking for or enjoy, you don't have to get stuck with a group who does that.
Point being, a stat array isn't better, but neither is rolling or a point buy. They all exist for a reason, because the community is so complex and the game itself has grown to realize that. I think this is why so much is open and it appeals to so many now.
As for why i suggest dice rolling at the beginning, I enjoy the randomness of rolling dice for scores, I am also a gambler. The opportunity of greatness with a larger risk of failure is worth more to me than the guarantee of always having the same thing. I want to win/want to have high scores but in reality the real rush comes from the failures and how you rebound from them.
I find it strange that almost everyone else gave an option that added complexity to the die rolling method of ability score generation in lieu of using the point buy and I wonder why that is? When you add complexity it should add a definable value to the game and I just couldn't see how any of these various methods of die rolling did that, but that is just me. But I am really curious as to why so many DMs so heavily favor the die rolling method, especially in online games when it can cause issues of cheating. In table top forums that issue can be addressed by having all the players roll right there in front of the DM and everyone but that does result in needing a session 0. And while I am not opposed to session 0 in principle if I can start a game at session 1 and just get right into playing well that is a big benefit to me. So on that note I am really just looking for some solid reasons why 6 random die rolls is a better option than the point buy system.
Because he asked for advice about rolling. If he had asked for advice about point buy, he'd have alternate point buy methods. If he asked about standard array, he'd have alternate standard array methods.
As for not adding a definable value to the game: 1) randomness can help get people out of their comfort zone (if using the assign stats as they are rolled method) 2) rolling can help assure everyone isn't cookie cutter stat-wise (maybe that barbarian doesn't have a negative score to throw into Intelligence and thus is played completely differently) and 3) depending on the method, the averages can be made higher (for a more heroic feel) or lower (for a more gritty feel) based on the method used. Now, all but the first of these things can be done by changing the other systems as well (adding more points to the point buy or changing the arrays), but again, he was asking about rolling.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
A big thing I've taken from learning to play d&d is there isn't a wrong way to do it. If you don't agree with someone else's methods there are tons of other people to find who like the same methods you do. And those other groups aren't doing it wrong at all. Saying things like "the community evolved" implying that it's better now than it used to be can be a problem. Nothing is wrong with just dungeon crawling and very little to no rp, and players who enjoy that aren't "worse players" for it. If that's not the game you are looking for or enjoy, you don't have to get stuck with a group who does that.
Point being, a stat array isn't better, but neither is rolling or a point buy. They all exist for a reason, because the community is so complex and the game itself has grown to realize that. I think this is why so much is open and it appeals to so many now.
As for why i suggest dice rolling at the beginning, I enjoy the randomness of rolling dice for scores, I am also a gambler. The opportunity of greatness with a larger risk of failure is worth more to me than the guarantee of always having the same thing. I want to win/want to have high scores but in reality the real rush comes from the failures and how you rebound from them.
You are 100% correct that there isn't a wrong way to do it, so long as the DM and the players know about the way it is done ahead of time and are still having fun. I always find it strange when people get into edition wars (except those who defend THAC0, because that was a stupid system then and is a stupid system now!).
However, I do disagree with your inference about "evolution". Evolution isn't about being better or worse; evolution is about acclimating to the environment.
In D&D's case, it is a business who makes more money the more people that play it (buy the books), so the evolution is about getting more players involved. The older editions are STILL THERE (something that the edition war people seem to never understand) and those who like things about the older systems can feel free to use those things (for example, I still use the moving out of an area that is threatened provokes an attack of opportunity, even if you are moving from one threatened area to another; I also use 4e skill challenges every once in a while).
The only time you are limited to what game you can play is during AL games, but anything else is fair game.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
I find it strange that almost everyone else gave an option that added complexity to the die rolling method of ability score generation in lieu of using the point buy and I wonder why that is? When you add complexity it should add a definable value to the game and I just couldn't see how any of these various methods of die rolling did that, but that is just me. But I am really curious as to why so many DMs so heavily favor the die rolling method, especially in online games when it can cause issues of cheating. In table top forums that issue can be addressed by having all the players roll right there in front of the DM and everyone but that does result in needing a session 0. And while I am not opposed to session 0 in principle if I can start a game at session 1 and just get right into playing well that is a big benefit to me. So on that note I am really just looking for some solid reasons why 6 random die rolls is a better option than the point buy system.
It's simple, really. To a lot of people, D&D means rolling dice.
I get that, but for years D&D was all about a group sitting around a table and characters crawling through megadungeons with no rhyme or reason to how monsters were placed. But we have evolved from those days. Perhaps, we need to start understanding the rolling dice should be the action of last resort in a RPG.
Even back then, at the core it was about dice rolling, it was just the DM doing the rolling behind the screen and telling the players what happened.
The idea that a method of play "should be" something is blatantly false. Outside of AL games, you can STILL play any way you see fit. To some people, rolling the dice is the best part of the game. Many aren't comfortable with the role playing, but enjoy board games enough that they view this as a more interactive board game. "Should" we be telling these players that they aren't welcome because this is a game where rolling dice is the last resort, or should we let them play the board game, hoping they will eventually become comfortable enough to turn into a RPer (and even if they don't they should still feel able to have a good time playing the game they want to play)? Again, you are welcome to play your way, and those types of players might not want to play THAT style of RPG, but to say that "we need to" implies the entire community needs to change to your way of playing, and that's just not cool.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
I find it strange that almost everyone else gave an option that added complexity to the die rolling method of ability score generation in lieu of using the point buy and I wonder why that is? When you add complexity it should add a definable value to the game and I just couldn't see how any of these various methods of die rolling did that, but that is just me. But I am really curious as to why so many DMs so heavily favor the die rolling method, especially in online games when it can cause issues of cheating. In table top forums that issue can be addressed by having all the players roll right there in front of the DM and everyone but that does result in needing a session 0. And while I am not opposed to session 0 in principle if I can start a game at session 1 and just get right into playing well that is a big benefit to me. So on that note I am really just looking for some solid reasons why 6 random die rolls is a better option than the point buy system.
Because he asked for advice about rolling. If he had asked for advice about point buy, he'd have alternate point buy methods. If he asked about standard array, he'd have alternate standard array methods.
As for not adding a definable value to the game: 1) randomness can help get people out of their comfort zone (if using the assign stats as they are rolled method) 2) rolling can help assure everyone isn't cookie cutter stat-wise (maybe that barbarian doesn't have a negative score to throw into Intelligence and thus is played completely differently) and 3) depending on the method, the averages can be made higher (for a more heroic feel) or lower (for a more gritty feel) based on the method used. Now, all but the first of these things can be done by changing the other systems as well (adding more points to the point buy or changing the arrays), but again, he was asking about rolling.
I need to quickly point out I'm not a guy lol, but thank you my particular question was about Dice Rolling, point buy is pretty specific but like I said, most of my players were super honest about rolls and high rolling. It's just been one player, they are an awesome person and friend but very competitive and I think they are just trying to stack their deck as high as they can. This is also the same player that has asked me multiple times how I (the DM) will have fun (I have lots of fun making puzzling and getting the plot in) and how DMing is lame and how they themselves will never do it. Like I said, I know the player and I know that they are highly competitive I had just hoped they wouldn't fudge their initial dice. I know the roll system they used (they didn't have a set of dice yet and they wanted to start making the character immediately so I gave them an online dice roller). Multiple people I have given it to have never rolled those scores, the only person who got higher rolls did it with their own set of personal dice then they told me about it because they were afraid I'd think they were cheating. My problem player does not have a stat below 13, that's where I was concerned. My high rolling players have at least one stat that's lower than 12.
In the future, I will probably go with strictly point buy systems. I'm just kind of worried if this players character dies how they will react, they have also been asking me how I will prevent character death and I won't really be doing anything to prevent character death.
I find it strange that almost everyone else gave an option that added complexity to the die rolling method of ability score generation in lieu of using the point buy and I wonder why that is? When you add complexity it should add a definable value to the game and I just couldn't see how any of these various methods of die rolling did that, but that is just me. But I am really curious as to why so many DMs so heavily favor the die rolling method, especially in online games when it can cause issues of cheating. In table top forums that issue can be addressed by having all the players roll right there in front of the DM and everyone but that does result in needing a session 0. And while I am not opposed to session 0 in principle if I can start a game at session 1 and just get right into playing well that is a big benefit to me. So on that note I am really just looking for some solid reasons why 6 random die rolls is a better option than the point buy system.
Because he asked for advice about rolling. If he had asked for advice about point buy, he'd have alternate point buy methods. If he asked about standard array, he'd have alternate standard array methods.
As for not adding a definable value to the game: 1) randomness can help get people out of their comfort zone (if using the assign stats as they are rolled method) 2) rolling can help assure everyone isn't cookie cutter stat-wise (maybe that barbarian doesn't have a negative score to throw into Intelligence and thus is played completely differently) and 3) depending on the method, the averages can be made higher (for a more heroic feel) or lower (for a more gritty feel) based on the method used. Now, all but the first of these things can be done by changing the other systems as well (adding more points to the point buy or changing the arrays), but again, he was asking about rolling.
I need to quickly point out I'm not a guy lol, but thank you my particular question was about Dice Rolling, point buy is pretty specific but like I said, most of my players were super honest about rolls and high rolling. It's just been one player, they are an awesome person and friend but very competitive and I think they are just trying to stack their deck as high as they can. This is also the same player that has asked me multiple times how I (the DM) will have fun (I have lots of fun making puzzling and getting the plot in) and how DMing is lame and how they themselves will never do it. Like I said, I know the player and I know that they are highly competitive I had just hoped they wouldn't fudge their initial dice. I know the roll system they used (they didn't have a set of dice yet and they wanted to start making the character immediately so I gave them an online dice roller). Multiple people I have given it to have never rolled those scores, the only person who got higher rolls did it with their own set of personal dice then they told me about it because they were afraid I'd think they were cheating. My problem player does not have a stat below 13, that's where I was concerned. My high rolling players have at least one stat that's lower than 12.
In the future, I will probably go with strictly point buy systems. I'm just kind of worried if this players character dies how they will react, they have also been asking me how I will prevent character death and I won't really be doing anything to prevent character death.
Damnit, I am usually pretty good at the pronoun game too (unless it's completely obvious like someone with the screen name Hank or Gertrude)...
As for "preventing character death" I only do that when I feel like it's something I did wrong (or the dice are just being ********). Like, if I know they are at low health and the monster crits, I will just make it hit regularly as to not risk instant death from massive damage. However, I WILL still make the monsters act realistically.
Last session I had a player fall to 0 due to a Grick's tentacle attack. Normally, I don't attack players once they've reached 0 hit points as I feel monsters tend to want to make sure everyone else is out of the way before starting to eat (except the jerk ones that drag the body away while the rest of the party is busy fighting other things - like the Grell they are going to encounter later will try to do if it gets the chance). But, in this case, it already used the tentacle attack to pull him in, so I made it make a beak attack as well, ruling that the monster wouldn't have known the player fell unconscious right away and its natural instinct is to make the follow-up attack immediately after the tentacle attack succeeds.
Though (back to the "preventing character death" topic) I didn't make it an automatic crit like the rules say for attacks against unconscious targets within 5 feet (I ruled that he technically hadn't "fallen" yet, for the purpose of the attack), I did give it advantage on the attack and, when it hit, the player DID get an automatic death saving throw failure.
I find a good middle ground to always be the right approach as a DM. Try to run your monsters the way they would normally be run (aka use everything in their arsenal and try your damnedest to kill the players), but don't make your goal as DM to kill the players. Any DM can put a 1st level party up against a Tarrasque if they want to kill the players. It takes an especially good DM to make a mid-level party worry about encountering a goblin because they are played correctly (see: Goblins are dangerous - a post by Thain a fellow D&D Beyond user).
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Egh don't sweat the pronoun thing to much, I like drawing spooky Nosferatu kinda characters and using them as my avatar so it makes it harder lol.
Not out to kill my players, I like them too much, But I'll keep that idea with the Grick (they might face that) in mind. We're running "Lost Mines of Phandelvar" and I think that's one of the monsters on the encounter list. I watched Matt Colville's video about when he killed his bosses character, and I really like how he said he handled the situation. I'm still excited to do this, going to schedule a session zero for rolling practice soon, and post some videos to the group I made for them.
I simply have mine roll when i can watch them roll, when my most trusted player can watch them roll, or when a third party I trust can watch them. And to be fair, I have someone witness my rolls when I'm not DM.
If all else fails you can always have them record all the rolls in a continuous video on their phone. As long as they aren't video editors for a living, they'd be there all day to get all good rolls consecutively.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
A big thing I've taken from learning to play d&d is there isn't a wrong way to do it. If you don't agree with someone else's methods there are tons of other people to find who like the same methods you do. And those other groups aren't doing it wrong at all. Saying things like "the community evolved" implying that it's better now than it used to be can be a problem. Nothing is wrong with just dungeon crawling and very little to no rp, and players who enjoy that aren't "worse players" for it. If that's not the game you are looking for or enjoy, you don't have to get stuck with a group who does that.
Point being, a stat array isn't better, but neither is rolling or a point buy. They all exist for a reason, because the community is so complex and the game itself has grown to realize that. I think this is why so much is open and it appeals to so many now.
As for why i suggest dice rolling at the beginning, I enjoy the randomness of rolling dice for scores, I am also a gambler. The opportunity of greatness with a larger risk of failure is worth more to me than the guarantee of always having the same thing. I want to win/want to have high scores but in reality the real rush comes from the failures and how you rebound from them.
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
As for not adding a definable value to the game: 1) randomness can help get people out of their comfort zone (if using the assign stats as they are rolled method) 2) rolling can help assure everyone isn't cookie cutter stat-wise (maybe that barbarian doesn't have a negative score to throw into Intelligence and thus is played completely differently) and 3) depending on the method, the averages can be made higher (for a more heroic feel) or lower (for a more gritty feel) based on the method used. Now, all but the first of these things can be done by changing the other systems as well (adding more points to the point buy or changing the arrays), but again, he was asking about rolling.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
In D&D's case, it is a business who makes more money the more people that play it (buy the books), so the evolution is about getting more players involved. The older editions are STILL THERE (something that the edition war people seem to never understand) and those who like things about the older systems can feel free to use those things (for example, I still use the moving out of an area that is threatened provokes an attack of opportunity, even if you are moving from one threatened area to another; I also use 4e skill challenges every once in a while).
The only time you are limited to what game you can play is during AL games, but anything else is fair game.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
The idea that a method of play "should be" something is blatantly false. Outside of AL games, you can STILL play any way you see fit. To some people, rolling the dice is the best part of the game. Many aren't comfortable with the role playing, but enjoy board games enough that they view this as a more interactive board game. "Should" we be telling these players that they aren't welcome because this is a game where rolling dice is the last resort, or should we let them play the board game, hoping they will eventually become comfortable enough to turn into a RPer (and even if they don't they should still feel able to have a good time playing the game they want to play)? Again, you are welcome to play your way, and those types of players might not want to play THAT style of RPG, but to say that "we need to" implies the entire community needs to change to your way of playing, and that's just not cool.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
My problem player does not have a stat below 13, that's where I was concerned. My high rolling players have at least one stat that's lower than 12.
As for "preventing character death" I only do that when I feel like it's something I did wrong (or the dice are just being ********). Like, if I know they are at low health and the monster crits, I will just make it hit regularly as to not risk instant death from massive damage. However, I WILL still make the monsters act realistically.
Last session I had a player fall to 0 due to a Grick's tentacle attack. Normally, I don't attack players once they've reached 0 hit points as I feel monsters tend to want to make sure everyone else is out of the way before starting to eat (except the jerk ones that drag the body away while the rest of the party is busy fighting other things - like the Grell they are going to encounter later will try to do if it gets the chance). But, in this case, it already used the tentacle attack to pull him in, so I made it make a beak attack as well, ruling that the monster wouldn't have known the player fell unconscious right away and its natural instinct is to make the follow-up attack immediately after the tentacle attack succeeds.
Though (back to the "preventing character death" topic) I didn't make it an automatic crit like the rules say for attacks against unconscious targets within 5 feet (I ruled that he technically hadn't "fallen" yet, for the purpose of the attack), I did give it advantage on the attack and, when it hit, the player DID get an automatic death saving throw failure.
I find a good middle ground to always be the right approach as a DM. Try to run your monsters the way they would normally be run (aka use everything in their arsenal and try your damnedest to kill the players), but don't make your goal as DM to kill the players. Any DM can put a 1st level party up against a Tarrasque if they want to kill the players. It takes an especially good DM to make a mid-level party worry about encountering a goblin because they are played correctly (see: Goblins are dangerous - a post by Thain a fellow D&D Beyond user).
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Egh don't sweat the pronoun thing to much, I like drawing spooky Nosferatu kinda characters and using them as my avatar so it makes it harder lol.
Not out to kill my players, I like them too much, But I'll keep that idea with the Grick (they might face that) in mind. We're running "Lost Mines of Phandelvar" and I think that's one of the monsters on the encounter list. I watched Matt Colville's video about when he killed his bosses character, and I really like how he said he handled the situation. I'm still excited to do this, going to schedule a session zero for rolling practice soon, and post some videos to the group I made for them.
I simply have mine roll when i can watch them roll, when my most trusted player can watch them roll, or when a third party I trust can watch them. And to be fair, I have someone witness my rolls when I'm not DM.
If all else fails you can always have them record all the rolls in a continuous video on their phone. As long as they aren't video editors for a living, they'd be there all day to get all good rolls consecutively.