I think under any circumstance the PCs should be able to choose where they put their stats. Nothing is worse than wanting to play x class and end up with an 8 in that stat and then having to play something else. Especially if everyone ends up with an 16 in str and 12- in the other class important stats.
I prefer point-buy. It gives everyone an equal baseline to adjust from and prevents people from getting completely screwed by random chance. We prefer a higher powered game where the characters are epic adventurers, so we do 32 point buy with a hard cap at 15 for every stat.
I'm a proponent of not committing the Stormind Fallacy, so min/maxing is fine and as the DM I encourage my players to do so for a few reasons: it lets me throw some big stuff at them, it gives them the opportunity to do cool things, and it ensures that no one is is terrible at their role in the party because they had a crap roll.
From a role-play perspective, I'm not going to want a fighter running around with me and having my back if they can't hit worth a damn or a spellcaster who can never land a spell because it gets resisted every time. If I were a person in that world and I was going up against dangerous creatures of imaginable strength, I would leave the really funny rogue who can't pick a lock or hit an ankheg with his dagger back at the inn, go find some real badasses to save the world with, and then catch up with my funny rogue friend after I'm done.
Well last night was character creation night and the system was a complete success. I offered the group either the 4D6 method or mine individually, they all took mine. Rolling stats for all five in the group took just five dice rolls and was done in minutes. Everyone was happy with the stat arrays they ended up with. I think a cumulative +5 bonus across all stats was the lowest rolled and +7 was the highest so right in the butter zone, no gimps, no uber characters to outclass the rest.
After rolling everyone was very satisfied and would choose to use it again.
Standard Array and Point Buy are both good options for character creation. They do make characters numerically equal, but that equality doesn't necessarily translate in game. Two people can play the exact same character and still have unequal results. I wouldn't fall into the trap of thinking that just because the numbers look the same that the results and experience will be the same. Stats are only a part of the character, which is only part of the experience.
As far as rolling itself, I've always liked the idea. Whether I'm a player or DM, I like to be surprised by my own creations, or by my character's story. I've even made randomizations for my entire characters, plots, and whatever else because I like having the opportunity to adapt to changes in something that ultimately I still have control over. I've messed around with a lot of different rolling method for stats (3d6 straight, 4d6 drop lowest, 4d4 exploding, 3d20 take mid, and plenty more). I've come to the conclusion that by far the best way to roll stats in 5e is 2d6+6. You're guaranteed results between 8 and 18 with an average of 13. It's also become my preferred method for 3.5 and 4e.
That's great man, I'm glad it worked out. If we ever do a little one shot as a palette cleanser in between large campaigns or just to take a break here and there, I'll be sure to try out the system you put together.
Even though I prefer point buy, I appreciate you sharing the system.
Youre absolutely right about stats not being the whole part of the story for a character's effectiveness. Player skill; creativity/ingenuity; and choices about feats, weapons, and mundane items carried all play a big part. What I like about point buy is everyone starts in the same footing stat wise. What a player does with that footing is on them.
The 2d6+6 is a pretty cool system. In 3.5 (which is what we played up until our current campaign), we've done roll 4 drop the lowest and assign points based on what you get and we've also done the guaranteed 18 to assign and roll the rest. If someone got super crappy rolls, they would reroll. The 2d6+6 seems to make the likelihood of that happening much lower.
Since you've already gone through the trouble of creating the arrays, you might as well use them. No sense in wasting that effort investment. 2d6+6 just happens to be a surprisingly simple solution to many stat rolling problems, especially compared to some of the common alternatives.
I prefer rolling, simply because it represents the randomness of life. Also, it's more exciting. Will I be an all-pro? A journeyman? Minor-leaguer? Bench-warmer on the company team? (To use sports metaphor...)
That said, D&D is supposed to be fun, and players tend to have fun when their characters succeed more often. So, I'd refer people to Matt Colville's method of rolling, where a character needs at least 2 abilities of 15 or higher to qualify as a roll. Don't get 2 15's, reroll. This way every character has the stats to be successful in their chosen class, while allowing the randomness of possibility to dictate their other abilities. Colville also requires players to take the rolls in the traditional order (str, dex, con, int, wis, cha) to prod players to consider classes they wouldn't normally play. If players are open to this, sure. If not, let em put stats wherever and build the character they want.
In the end, though, whatever method is chosen- for whatever reason- if you had fun, you chose wisely... or intelligently... or you ripped the choice away... or nobody noticed you making the choice... or 'this isn't the choice you're looking for'... or no matter what the choice is, you can take it. You shrug off the ill effects of that bad choice... ;p
I've developed a system for my home games that combines rolling with point buy. I love rolling stats as I have found many others have as well, but the bad rolls have left players with either playing a second-stringer on the team or just scrapping them and re-rolling a new character once too often. So, I developed this system.
Players roll 3d6 for their stats and they are locked in down the line. Then they total up the value of what they rolled. Take that number and subtract it from 75. This gives the player the number of points that they are allowed to spend on their stats.
Example: Player gets 11 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 15 Int, 9 Wis, & 10 Chr. Total value is 60, subtract 75-60 to get 15 points. Player then distributes 15 points into their abilities using standard point buy rules. (of course, everything less than eight is bought up on a 1 point for 1 point basis)
Upsides: Randomness, occasional higher-power characters, no characters with stats too low to play, customizable ability scores.
Downsides: Some players feel locked out of or pressured into certain classes based on the rolls being locked in. It does give the option of playing with a really low ability score if a player chooses (though that isn't really a downside if the player is choosing it, is it?)
Overall, I've had a pretty good success with this style of stat generation and all of my players have enjoyed it. Thought it would be good to share in case anyone else might be interested in it.
Standard Array and Point Buy are both good options for character creation. They do make characters numerically equal, but that equality doesn't necessarily translate in game. Two people can play the exact same character and still have unequal results. I wouldn't fall into the trap of thinking that just because the numbers look the same that the results and experience will be the same. Stats are only a part of the character, which is only part of the experience.
As far as rolling itself, I've always liked the idea. Whether I'm a player or DM, I like to be surprised by my own creations, or by my character's story. I've even made randomizations for my entire characters, plots, and whatever else because I like having the opportunity to adapt to changes in something that ultimately I still have control over. I've messed around with a lot of different rolling method for stats (3d6 straight, 4d6 drop lowest, 4d4 exploding, 3d20 take mid, and plenty more). I've come to the conclusion that by far the best way to roll stats in 5e is 2d6+6. You're guaranteed results between 8 and 18 with an average of 13. It's also become my preferred method for 3.5 and 4e.
Youre absolutely right about stats not being the whole part of the story for a character's effectiveness. Player skill; creativity/ingenuity; and choices about feats, weapons, and mundane items carried all play a big part. What I like about point buy is everyone starts in the same footing stat wise. What a player does with that footing is on them.
The 2d6+6 is a pretty cool system. In 3.5 (which is what we played up until our current campaign), we've done roll 4 drop the lowest and assign points based on what you get and we've also done the guaranteed 18 to assign and roll the rest. If someone got super crappy rolls, they would reroll. The 2d6+6 seems to make the likelihood of that happening much lower.
I've never heard of 2d6+6 but I just rolled a few arrays and I really like what came out of it, that might be what I use in the future
I've also never heard of this method, but I also like it. I might see what 3d6+6, drop the lowest looks like (that might put the power level too high though).
“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.
If you want to get even closer the Standard Array, 1d8+(7or8) are within 0.5 of the average of Standard Array (12 vs 11.5 and 12.5). 2d6+6 has a smidgen of curve should you want it and comes in at an average of 13. 3d6+6 drop lowest averages out to 15, but does still maintain a good min/max range. 2d4+8 would also be interesting. Maxes at 16 but impossible to get negative mods. Averages the same as 2d6+6 but with slightly less variance.
I prefer 2d6+6 because of the d6 familiarity and preference to the 8-18 range.
Point buy, and i include an option to buy a score of 16 for 12 of the point buy points so that you an get a +3 to a stat regardless of race. You can also get an 18 with race, but thats really expensive points wise- which means you can get more feats (you need fewer ABI to max your main stat) at the cost of your versatility.
I actually consider +3 to be the 'acceptable' modifier threshold for an important stat (thanks to bounded accuracy) and while the extra point is helpful, it isnt as important as the previous one- a lot of creatures have very low AC at lower levels (11-13) and very little HP so +3 is plenty.
This is why I dislike rolling stats. First of all, it's the rough equivalent of 30.75 point-buy, second of all, that's an average, meaning you'll more than likely get players with sub-standard stats and players with above average stats. Playing in a game where one player has the 35 point buy character and someone else has the 22 point-buy character isn't fun, AFAIC. It's fundamentally unfair and creates difficulties for the DM in running the game because they now have to cater to the power player to make things challenging, while nerfing things so that the underpowered character can actually feel useful.
However I understand that people, for some bizarre reason, like rolling for stats, so a compromise between rolling and point buy is rolling 1d65 and then using the corresponding array presented here. That is a list of all possible point-buy combinations. Go nuts.
Some other convoluted but effective methods to roll stats: 3d3dl+3d2+4 averages out to 12 but weighted towards the 11-13 range. Min 8 Max 15, so same range as Standard Array. Check it out here: http://anydice.com/program/b99c 1d4+1d3+3d2dl+4 also averages to 12 with an 8 Min and 15 Max, but weighted more towards the 10-14 ranges. http://anydice.com/program/b99d
This is why I dislike rolling stats. First of all, it's the rough equivalent of 30.75 point-buy, second of all, that's an average, meaning you'll more than likely get players with sub-standard stats and players with above average stats. Playing in a game where one player has the 35 point buy character and someone else has the 22 point-buy character isn't fun, AFAIC. It's fundamentally unfair and creates difficulties for the DM in running the game because they now have to cater to the power player to make things challenging, while nerfing things so that the underpowered character can actually feel useful.
However I understand that people, for some bizarre reason, like rolling for stats, so a compromise between rolling and point buy is rolling 1d65 and then using the corresponding array presented here. That is a list of all possible point-buy combinations. Go nuts.
Idk, a Human Paladin with 22 points can have 16, 11, 12, 10, 11, 14 as their final stats while a Human Paladin with 30 points would be 16, 11, 14, 11 12 16.
I don't think the extra 1 hit point per level and 5% increase to Con/Wis/Cha-based checks/saving throws is really going to be game changing or "unfair", considering bounded accuracy.
“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 love to roll stats for my characters. I like the randomness and risk and trying to build around what I get rather than min-maxing. This has given me amazing stats (had a +4 in two stats +3 in one stat, +2 in two stats, and a -1 in one stat) and also given me horrible stats (+1 in one stat, everything else in the minuses). I can see the problems with both of these characters mechanically. One is completely overpowered. The other is completely broken and nearly useless.
I think rolling adds more fun to the game, but would dictate that no roll can be over 16 or under 8. Any roll falling into those ranges must be rerolled. That lets them try for a slightly better character than standard array without the min-maxing of point buy as well as including the risk of having less than stellar stats without the risk of being completely unplayable due to poor rolls. And there's always picking a class that doesn't rely as heavily on stats and being more of a support/rp focused character or taking a race that bumps your desired stats up to help even things out a bit.
This is why I dislike rolling stats. First of all, it's the rough equivalent of 30.75 point-buy, second of all, that's an average, meaning you'll more than likely get players with sub-standard stats and players with above average stats. Playing in a game where one player has the 35 point buy character and someone else has the 22 point-buy character isn't fun, AFAIC. It's fundamentally unfair and creates difficulties for the DM in running the game because they now have to cater to the power player to make things challenging, while nerfing things so that the underpowered character can actually feel useful.
However I understand that people, for some bizarre reason, like rolling for stats, so a compromise between rolling and point buy is rolling 1d65 and then using the corresponding array presented here. That is a list of all possible point-buy combinations. Go nuts.
If you encourage and reward creativity by fudging rules where appropriate, there's no reason the underpowered character can't feel useful without nerfing encounters. Sleep is an amazing spell and doesn't use any stat. Tripping someone rather than attacking them is useful. Cutting the rope to a chandelier so it falls on someone for massive damage can be very effective. Knocking someone into a pit damages them and forces them out of combat until they can climb out. Let them do things that aren't explicitly stated in the handbook and come up with some appropriate roll for it. That will focus moreso on creativity, rather than pure stats, to determine if the person is successful.
You could also just give someone who rolled shit stats a free feat from the phb to make them incredibly useful in some specific way or scenario. After that, just leave it to your player to find their own fun in the game. It's not all about combat any more than it's all about rp or all about exploration/investigation. Trying to buff/nerf things rather than forcing your players to think creatively and rewarding that creativity is going to make stats way more important than they need to be. Even with a -1 to a stat, on a dc 10 check, you have a 50/50 chance to succeed at it, unproficient. proficiency adds to that number, rewarding their clever/creative use of the skill increases that even further.
Just make sure you have a session zero so everyone can stake out their own role in the party and you don't have two fighters with the exact same fighting style, background, and proficiencies both trying to do the same things, but one with much better stats than the other. I was in a game where I was one of 2 wizards. He had much better stats, but was focused entirely on damage. I was building focused around support and would do crazy creative things in battle. I don't think either of us felt like we were useless or underpowered compared to the other. We just did things differently. He would sneak up while invisible and burning hands a pack of orcs in the face, I would cast sleep on them and the party would slit their throats one by one. Same result: dead orcs, very different styles.
I think under any circumstance the PCs should be able to choose where they put their stats. Nothing is worse than wanting to play x class and end up with an 8 in that stat and then having to play something else. Especially if everyone ends up with an 16 in str and 12- in the other class important stats.
I prefer point-buy. It gives everyone an equal baseline to adjust from and prevents people from getting completely screwed by random chance. We prefer a higher powered game where the characters are epic adventurers, so we do 32 point buy with a hard cap at 15 for every stat.
I'm a proponent of not committing the Stormind Fallacy, so min/maxing is fine and as the DM I encourage my players to do so for a few reasons: it lets me throw some big stuff at them, it gives them the opportunity to do cool things, and it ensures that no one is is terrible at their role in the party because they had a crap roll.
From a role-play perspective, I'm not going to want a fighter running around with me and having my back if they can't hit worth a damn or a spellcaster who can never land a spell because it gets resisted every time. If I were a person in that world and I was going up against dangerous creatures of imaginable strength, I would leave the really funny rogue who can't pick a lock or hit an ankheg with his dagger back at the inn, go find some real badasses to save the world with, and then catch up with my funny rogue friend after I'm done.
Well last night was character creation night and the system was a complete success. I offered the group either the 4D6 method or mine individually, they all took mine. Rolling stats for all five in the group took just five dice rolls and was done in minutes. Everyone was happy with the stat arrays they ended up with. I think a cumulative +5 bonus across all stats was the lowest rolled and +7 was the highest so right in the butter zone, no gimps, no uber characters to outclass the rest.
After rolling everyone was very satisfied and would choose to use it again.
Standard Array and Point Buy are both good options for character creation. They do make characters numerically equal, but that equality doesn't necessarily translate in game. Two people can play the exact same character and still have unequal results. I wouldn't fall into the trap of thinking that just because the numbers look the same that the results and experience will be the same. Stats are only a part of the character, which is only part of the experience.
As far as rolling itself, I've always liked the idea. Whether I'm a player or DM, I like to be surprised by my own creations, or by my character's story. I've even made randomizations for my entire characters, plots, and whatever else because I like having the opportunity to adapt to changes in something that ultimately I still have control over. I've messed around with a lot of different rolling method for stats (3d6 straight, 4d6 drop lowest, 4d4 exploding, 3d20 take mid, and plenty more). I've come to the conclusion that by far the best way to roll stats in 5e is 2d6+6. You're guaranteed results between 8 and 18 with an average of 13. It's also become my preferred method for 3.5 and 4e.
That's great man, I'm glad it worked out. If we ever do a little one shot as a palette cleanser in between large campaigns or just to take a break here and there, I'll be sure to try out the system you put together.
Even though I prefer point buy, I appreciate you sharing the system.
Youre absolutely right about stats not being the whole part of the story for a character's effectiveness. Player skill; creativity/ingenuity; and choices about feats, weapons, and mundane items carried all play a big part. What I like about point buy is everyone starts in the same footing stat wise. What a player does with that footing is on them.
The 2d6+6 is a pretty cool system. In 3.5 (which is what we played up until our current campaign), we've done roll 4 drop the lowest and assign points based on what you get and we've also done the guaranteed 18 to assign and roll the rest. If someone got super crappy rolls, they would reroll. The 2d6+6 seems to make the likelihood of that happening much lower.
I've never heard of 2d6+6 but I just rolled a few arrays and I really like what came out of it, that might be what I use in the future
it could be worse, you could be on fire.
Since you've already gone through the trouble of creating the arrays, you might as well use them. No sense in wasting that effort investment. 2d6+6 just happens to be a surprisingly simple solution to many stat rolling problems, especially compared to some of the common alternatives.
I prefer rolling, simply because it represents the randomness of life. Also, it's more exciting. Will I be an all-pro? A journeyman? Minor-leaguer? Bench-warmer on the company team? (To use sports metaphor...)
That said, D&D is supposed to be fun, and players tend to have fun when their characters succeed more often. So, I'd refer people to Matt Colville's method of rolling, where a character needs at least 2 abilities of 15 or higher to qualify as a roll. Don't get 2 15's, reroll. This way every character has the stats to be successful in their chosen class, while allowing the randomness of possibility to dictate their other abilities. Colville also requires players to take the rolls in the traditional order (str, dex, con, int, wis, cha) to prod players to consider classes they wouldn't normally play. If players are open to this, sure. If not, let em put stats wherever and build the character they want.
In the end, though, whatever method is chosen- for whatever reason- if you had fun, you chose wisely... or intelligently... or you ripped the choice away... or nobody noticed you making the choice... or 'this isn't the choice you're looking for'... or no matter what the choice is, you can take it. You shrug off the ill effects of that bad choice... ;p
I've developed a system for my home games that combines rolling with point buy. I love rolling stats as I have found many others have as well, but the bad rolls have left players with either playing a second-stringer on the team or just scrapping them and re-rolling a new character once too often. So, I developed this system.
Players roll 3d6 for their stats and they are locked in down the line. Then they total up the value of what they rolled. Take that number and subtract it from 75. This gives the player the number of points that they are allowed to spend on their stats.
Example: Player gets 11 Str, 8 Dex, 7 Con, 15 Int, 9 Wis, & 10 Chr. Total value is 60, subtract 75-60 to get 15 points. Player then distributes 15 points into their abilities using standard point buy rules. (of course, everything less than eight is bought up on a 1 point for 1 point basis)
Upsides: Randomness, occasional higher-power characters, no characters with stats too low to play, customizable ability scores.
Downsides: Some players feel locked out of or pressured into certain classes based on the rolls being locked in. It does give the option of playing with a really low ability score if a player chooses (though that isn't really a downside if the player is choosing it, is it?)
Overall, I've had a pretty good success with this style of stat generation and all of my players have enjoyed it. Thought it would be good to share in case anyone else might be interested in it.
I've also never heard of this method, but I also like it. I might see what 3d6+6, drop the lowest looks like (that might put the power level too high though).
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.
If you want to get even closer the Standard Array, 1d8+(7or8) are within 0.5 of the average of Standard Array (12 vs 11.5 and 12.5). 2d6+6 has a smidgen of curve should you want it and comes in at an average of 13. 3d6+6 drop lowest averages out to 15, but does still maintain a good min/max range. 2d4+8 would also be interesting. Maxes at 16 but impossible to get negative mods. Averages the same as 2d6+6 but with slightly less variance.
I prefer 2d6+6 because of the d6 familiarity and preference to the 8-18 range.
Point buy, and i include an option to buy a score of 16 for 12 of the point buy points so that you an get a +3 to a stat regardless of race. You can also get an 18 with race, but thats really expensive points wise- which means you can get more feats (you need fewer ABI to max your main stat) at the cost of your versatility.
I actually consider +3 to be the 'acceptable' modifier threshold for an important stat (thanks to bounded accuracy) and while the extra point is helpful, it isnt as important as the previous one- a lot of creatures have very low AC at lower levels (11-13) and very little HP so +3 is plenty.
This is why I dislike rolling stats. First of all, it's the rough equivalent of 30.75 point-buy, second of all, that's an average, meaning you'll more than likely get players with sub-standard stats and players with above average stats. Playing in a game where one player has the 35 point buy character and someone else has the 22 point-buy character isn't fun, AFAIC. It's fundamentally unfair and creates difficulties for the DM in running the game because they now have to cater to the power player to make things challenging, while nerfing things so that the underpowered character can actually feel useful.
However I understand that people, for some bizarre reason, like rolling for stats, so a compromise between rolling and point buy is rolling 1d65 and then using the corresponding array presented here. That is a list of all possible point-buy combinations. Go nuts.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
Some other convoluted but effective methods to roll stats:
3d3dl+3d2+4 averages out to 12 but weighted towards the 11-13 range. Min 8 Max 15, so same range as Standard Array. Check it out here: http://anydice.com/program/b99c
1d4+1d3+3d2dl+4 also averages to 12 with an 8 Min and 15 Max, but weighted more towards the 10-14 ranges. http://anydice.com/program/b99d
I don't think the extra 1 hit point per level and 5% increase to Con/Wis/Cha-based checks/saving throws is really going to be game changing or "unfair", considering bounded accuracy.
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.
I love to roll stats for my characters. I like the randomness and risk and trying to build around what I get rather than min-maxing. This has given me amazing stats (had a +4 in two stats +3 in one stat, +2 in two stats, and a -1 in one stat) and also given me horrible stats (+1 in one stat, everything else in the minuses). I can see the problems with both of these characters mechanically. One is completely overpowered. The other is completely broken and nearly useless.
I think rolling adds more fun to the game, but would dictate that no roll can be over 16 or under 8. Any roll falling into those ranges must be rerolled. That lets them try for a slightly better character than standard array without the min-maxing of point buy as well as including the risk of having less than stellar stats without the risk of being completely unplayable due to poor rolls. And there's always picking a class that doesn't rely as heavily on stats and being more of a support/rp focused character or taking a race that bumps your desired stats up to help even things out a bit.
You could also just give someone who rolled shit stats a free feat from the phb to make them incredibly useful in some specific way or scenario. After that, just leave it to your player to find their own fun in the game. It's not all about combat any more than it's all about rp or all about exploration/investigation. Trying to buff/nerf things rather than forcing your players to think creatively and rewarding that creativity is going to make stats way more important than they need to be. Even with a -1 to a stat, on a dc 10 check, you have a 50/50 chance to succeed at it, unproficient. proficiency adds to that number, rewarding their clever/creative use of the skill increases that even further.
Just make sure you have a session zero so everyone can stake out their own role in the party and you don't have two fighters with the exact same fighting style, background, and proficiencies both trying to do the same things, but one with much better stats than the other. I was in a game where I was one of 2 wizards. He had much better stats, but was focused entirely on damage. I was building focused around support and would do crazy creative things in battle. I don't think either of us felt like we were useless or underpowered compared to the other. We just did things differently. He would sneak up while invisible and burning hands a pack of orcs in the face, I would cast sleep on them and the party would slit their throats one by one. Same result: dead orcs, very different styles.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
If following the handbook to the letter fudges those rules, then you're kind of already doing it.