3d6 or Just Pick

[talysman]

I remember reading someone on a forum, somewhere, suggesting that you don't need all those options for generating stats, just two: 3d6 in order, or pick whatever scores you want and get on with the game. (I don't remember who said that, but if anyone remembers, that'd be cool to know...)

Does anyone have any experience with just letting players pick whatever stats they wanted? Without restriction, or did you have something to balance it?

On my blog, I was toying with the idea of an "unusual background table". You can either do 3d6 in order, or pick one or more stats and then roll 3d6 and add your highest picked score for an unusual background. I wrote up a sample table with 34 entries on my blog; high results are bad, most are mixed, but a very few low results are actually good. There are a bunch of other unusual background tables out there that could be used the same way, like in the Central Casting books (although you'd probably want to re-arrange the entries in a similar order.)

[famouswolf]

Point buy. Several systems use it as the an alternative to rolling, like Earthdawn.

Most recently I ran Openquest, with seven stats. All start with a base of 8 and you get 30 to spend on a one to one basis with a starting maximum of 18. That's about as close to 'pick your own' as I've seen.

[tombowings]

This is awesome, Talysman. Consider it stolen.

[Vile Traveller]

Pont buy, yes, but never tried "just pick". As a player I'd probably hate it, it'd be a constant battle between "I want it all!" and "Nah, the DM will think I'm an idiot". Just sitting here at work thinking about it makes me want to stop and do some work instead.

[rms]

I've never run D&D that way, but we did run RuneQuest as pick your stats a few times. That was mainly to facilitate building characters that fit a predefined vision that worked into all the various social roles in Glorantha. It worked very well, though it did indeed present a problem that the players were generally building less competent characters than I expected, so I'd let them bump them up here and there.

Recently, I used an old-fashioned point by for a similar game, because of what Vile mentions. It actually made it easier for the players. The other was too open-ended for them.

[runequester]

In high school, in our white wolf/world of darkness games, we would just let people play whatever they wanted.
One guy would show up with an ancient vampire, the next guy with a psychic janitor. It all somehow worked out okay.

Huge fan of "weird background" stuff. The more of that the merrier. If I was to use something like that in D&D, we'd probably also roll race and class randomly. You make do with what you rolled

[Necropraxis]

Talysman, maybe this is what you were thinking of?

untimately.blogspot.com/2011/09/character-creation.html

The quote is from Jeff Rients.

[talysman]

Yep, that's it. And here I was thinking it was Michael Mornard.

[Finarvyn]

I can't imagine running a "just pick your stats" game because I have a blend of players, some of whom are "play a role" folks and others "max your character" types. I don't think the game would end up very fair at all since some would abuse it.

I've tried giving them some pre-determined numbers, arrange to taste. I think I used 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17. That gave one below average, two average, three above average. Then I applied racial bonuses as per AD&D. Worked out pretty well.

[sulldawga]

Here's a radical idea: have the players describe their character in a written paragraph or two and then assign scores based on that. If they don't mention the character's INT or STR, for example, then they get a 10 (or 12 if you're in a generous mood).

[blackbarn]

I myself like to roll first, then the scores suggest a character to me. That's part of the fun when I make a character. But for players who have a character in mind first, I see no reason why they can't just pick. The scores mean so little, rules-wise, anyhow. It's not like they are assured survival if they have good scores! In the game we most recently started I rolled 3d6 in order, while another player rolled 4d6 drop lowest then arrange, with the group's approval on that method. I don't feel cheated, as we both got to do it in the way we prefer. The end result is comparable!

[inkmeister]

When I was a teen, I used to have my players roll, then we would tweak the results based on the concept they had. My players didn't try to abuse this, so I would often even allow them to bump things higher than they had in mind.

Lately I have bought into the old school roll em and keep em as they are idea. But since I've really started to question the mechanical aspect of ability scores, I've started to think it would be fine to either drop them altogether or let players pick them (if they want) and simply have no mechanical benefit (or penalty) to various die scores (the numbers just paint a picture, nothing more).

I think it's fine to let players pick, so long as it is balanced against the type of game everyone wants to play. There is charm to the aspect of being surprised by what you get though.

[talysman]

UPDATE:

I had removed the original blog post I linked to, with the random background events table, with a promise to edit it and re-release it as a PDF download someday.

That some day is NOW.

Let 'Em Pick PDF

Blog update describing the PDF

So, now you can have players roll 3d6 in order, or if they want to pick their scores, roll 1 to 3 times on the table for random stuff that happened to their character before they started their adventuring career.

[Lorgalis]

I like to pick my own stats - I have a concept and want the stats to fit. Most GMs say hell no however two or three said sure and were impressed with my characters.

An elf ftr/mu I made looked like this

S12 I16 W 10 C 9 D 14 CH 14


As a DM I make players roll, however if our discussion about the toon and it's background details a change in stat up or down, I accommodate.

[Scott Anderson]

That is God's honest truth: there's 3d6 in order, and there's everything else.

[scottenkainen]

I've played in campaigns where we were allowed to roll up our characters on our own and bring them to the table on game day. Everyone was on their honor to roll, but depending on how trustworthy your players are, this could wind up being a "pick your own" situation...

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

[talysman]

Feb 23, 2015 15:54:04 GMT -6 Lorgalis said:

I like to pick my own stats - I have a concept and want the stats to fit. Most GMs say hell no however two or three said sure and were impressed with my characters.

An elf ftr/mu I made looked like this

S12 I16 W 10 C 9 D 14 CH 14

To illustrate how the table in the PDF works: If you picked those stats foryour character at my table, I would roll 3d6 twice and add 16 (your high score) to each result.

I roll: 13 and 10. Modifying those results, I get "You have been the victim of a hoax" and "You're in debt". Those work together nicely. So, your elf, on his first day in a human city, got tricked into buying "government visitor identification papers" from some guy who *looked* like a guard. You had to hock your fancy ancestral elven gear for the 120 gold pieces the conman asked for, and then borrowed the same amount from some kind soul to get your stuff back. Now you have to figure out how to get 120 gps to pay off that debt.

Feb 23, 2015 15:54:04 GMT -6 Lorgalis said:

As a DM I make players roll, however if our discussion about the toon and it's background details a change in stat up or down, I accommodate.

I've decided I don't even care about the background details. If they want particular scores, I'd just let 'em have 'em (and then roll for random stuff on the table.) And if the scores seem munchkin-y, I'd point and laugh, as I put it on another forum, but let 'em have those scores and just move on.

[Deleted]

Jeez louise, stats matter so little in OD&D that if somebody whines about having to roll 3d6 in order six times, I don't want to play with them anyway.

[talysman]

Feb 23, 2015 17:04:14 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Jeez louise, stats matter so little in OD&D that if somebody whines about having to roll 3d6 in order six times, I don't want to play with them anyway.

Yeah, but I'm trying to be more forgiving.

But what I really dislike is all the serious discussion about the "in-between" methods. As if we're really going to solve the problem with point buy, standard array, or 9d6 drop the lowest 6. If you aren't going to use 3d6 in order, just pick what scores you want and move on. Everything else is just a way of disguising "picking the scores I want".

[Scott Anderson]

For a long time, my draft of Treasure Hunters didn't use ability scores. We don't use them at my home game- only bonuses and penalties. We say, "this guy has inferior strength" or "that guy has exceptional constitution."

In the end I decided to go with the 3-18 range. But you only get +1 for scores above 12 and -1 for scores below 9. Which is okay because almost everything is resolved on 1d6 or 2d6, and more often 1d6.

The point is, if you minimize the mechanical discrepancy between, say, getting a 14 or an 18, people will whine less and just play.

[Lorgalis]

That was Michael Monards point I believe. I think the old range was -1 to +1 which turned into -3 to +3 then all sorts of stuff in Ad&d onwards.

[Scott Anderson]

A +-1 on a 1d6 roll is about the same as a +-3 on a d20 roll. (16.67% vs 15%), but the discrepancy between +5% for a 14, say, and +15% for an 18, disappears.

to be honest, all the throws in an RPG are abstractions, so one is just about as good as the other. The key component to any of The rules is verisimilitude, not realism.

But back to the topic at hand: if you're not playing iron man (3d6 in order and like it), it matters very little how you arrive at your numbers. And one way is no better than the other.

I prefer the iron man method. Here in a PBP game I have an LBB hobbit with CON and WIS each of 4, and one hit point. Because that's what the dice told me she was. And thats fun for me. YMMV and all that.

[Deleted]

Actually in OD&D you get a +1 HD for CON 15+, and a bonus to (I think) missile fire if your DEX is 15+ -- but other than that THERE ARE NO BONUSES, other than to XP.

[Scott Anderson]

The XP bonus from having a good prime requisite is probably more valuable than getting an additional +1 to any other stat in the long run.

[waysoftheearth]

Feb 24, 2015 3:04:14 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Actually in OD&D you get a +1 HD for CON 15+, and a bonus to (I think) missile fire if your DEX is 15+ -- but other than that THERE ARE NO BONUSES, other than to XP.

There's also languages for int, the system shock for con, and the loyalty adjustment and number of henchmen you can have for cha

Feb 24, 2015 3:08:16 GMT -6 Scott Anderson said:

The XP bonus from having a good prime requisite is probably more valuable than getting an additional +1 to any other stat in the long run.

It's likely that many characters won't live to see "the long run", so it's as much about the odds of making to 2nd level as it is about anything beyond that.

It could be argued that the 15 con fighting-man has better odds of making it to 2nd level than does the 6 con fighting-man. On the other hand, it could be counter-argued that survival is more about player strategy than it is about ability scores. (Having the best possible AC, and hiring a bunch of mercs will probably help more than a few extra hp!)

[sepulchre]

Sulldawga wrote:

Here's a radical idea: have the players describe their character in a written paragraph or two and then assign scores based on that. If they don't mention the character's INT or STR, for example, then they get a 10 (or 12 if you're in a generous mood).

Pretty much, I just ask the players to describe the character they want to play and either I assign the stats or if they have a fair grasp of how the quantification of attributes reflects their character then it is up to them. As the referee I look over the assignment of the numbers and we usually find general agreement.

Talysman, some very clever ideas for events in your blog post, thanks for sharing them.

[geoffrey]

Feb 23, 2015 15:58:34 GMT -6 Scott Anderson said:

That is God's honest truth: there's 3d6 in order, and there's everything else.

Yep. I'm not interested in generating characters other than by 3d6 in order, set in stone. I don't even like lowering one score to increase another. Nope. I roll 3d6 for strength, and that's what I got. Then I roll 3d6 for intelligence, and that's what I got. Etc.

One of my favorite characters is my magic-user with a 3 intelligence.

[Deleted]

I've used a random point buy system in 3e. I had a random chart of ability scores that all were within a range of point costs (using 3e's point cost method). You'd roll a d1000 and get one set of numbers from the chart. Still random but nobody will be significantly better or worse than anyone else.

I'm of the opinion that once you add ability score modifiers for all ability scores, you should apply a XP penalty for high stats and a bonus for low stats. (total of all scores, not just prime) Since, in general, having high stats means the encounters are easier so you aren't challenged as much so you don't learn as much.

Feb 23, 2015 17:57:59 GMT -6 talysman said:

If you aren't going to use 3d6 in order, just pick what scores you want and move on. Everything else is just a way of disguising "picking the scores I want".

3d6 in order is really just "3d6 in order and then suicide your characters until you get six numbers you like" so it's not so far from picking your stats anyway.

[talysman]

Feb 24, 2015 15:08:05 GMT -6 @hedgehobbit said:

Feb 23, 2015 17:57:59 GMT -6 talysman said:

If you aren't going to use 3d6 in order, just pick what scores you want and move on. Everything else is just a way of disguising "picking the scores I want".

3d6 in order is really just "3d6 in order and then suicide your characters until you get six numbers you like" so it's not so far from picking your stats anyway.

Only if a player actually takes that next step. You don't *have* to kill your character. You could accept the scores you get.

It all boils down to that. Will you accept random scores, or do you want some control over it? Those are the only two options.

[Deleted]

I've never, ever seen anybody suicide a character in 42 years. If somebody rolls a character and manages to average less than a 9, I'll let them reroll, because that's pretty awful.

But other than that, if somebody threatened to suicide a character I'd tell them to grow up.