Heroic Character Generation

[calithena]

Some people like starting characters to be 'hero' types. This rule is meant to accomodate them.

Roll 3d6 at the beginning of character generation. The number rolled indicates the attribute to be set at 'heroic' level: 1 = Strength, 2 = Intelligence, 5 = Dexterity, etc. Each 'heroic' attribute is rolled on 1d4+14.

If you roll doubles, the attribute indicated by two equal dice is automatically 18. If you roll triples, that sole attribute is set to 19, which looks cool on your character sheet but may or may not have any tangible game effect.

All other attributes are then generated on 3d6 in order.

Any player who complains, even a little bit, about a character generated by this method should be taken to the woodshed.

Examples: Joe gets 1, 3, 4 on his initial roll. This means that his Strength, Wisdom, and Constitution will all be exceptional. On the d4 he rolls 1, 1, 3, giving him a 15 Strength and Wisdom and a 17 Constitution. He then rolls 8 for Intelligence, 12 for Dexterity, and 4 for Charisma on 3d6 to round out his initial scores.

Karen gets 2, 2, 5 on her initial rolls. Her character's Intelligence is thus set to 18, and she rolls a 3 on the d4 to get a Dexterity of 17. She immediately writes "Magic-User" in the class entry and then starts generating her other attributes.

Bill rolls triple 4's, securing a 19 Constitution. He has no idea what this character will be like yet, but writes "Og the Unkillable" down as his name.

[machfront]

I've played around with similar things. Not as involved, though.
At the time I was thinking of protaganists from s&s stories who always seem to have at least one very strong attribute (usually strength, but perhaps dexterity in the Grey Mouser's case, etc.,etc.).

It was simply:
Roll 5d6, drop the lowest two. The resultant score may then be placed on any attribute.
The remaining attributes are rolled in order with the usual 3d6.

[Finarvyn]

I have mixed feelings about this.
1. As a system it seems well thought out, well presented, and is pretty clever.
2. It also promotes a level of stat inflation that I'm not sure works well for most OD&D campaigns that I'm aware of.

Keep in mind that the original OD&D rules for character generation are 3d6 without any rolling bonuses, and there are very few ways in the OD&D rules to actually improve a stat. (Cal, you know all of this of course, but I'm sort of preaching to others who might be reading.) As such, very few OD&D stats would ever approach 18, let alone having the opportunity to have half of the stats reach that level with the possible 19 thrown in there occasionally.

Part of me reads this and wants to scream whilst pulling out my hair (which is harder than it sounds as I have a buzz cut and have trouble getting a hold of my hair to pull on it).

However, part of me has the exact opposite point of view. My son is a teenager who is well versed in years of OD&D gaming. He has seen the "dark side" by playing Warhammer Miniatures and at heart is a bit of a power-gamer. When we sit around discussing rules ideas (a great way to fill up father-son time) and his ideas always involve "more and higher" in terms of stats and levels and powers. As such, I've tinkered with feats and such (yikes!) in my OD&D. This style of stat generation may also fit into my currently warped higher-powers game.

I'm gonna roll out some samples to see what I get. I'm also gonna toss you an EXALT for the idea.

[calithena]

Thanks Fin.

I picked the number spread the way I did thinking of your S&W White Box bonus schema, which is close to the one I use (you get a +1 at 15 in both). So basically the system is saying "here's a few extra +1's for those of you who like to play heroic characters."

The "some people like" at the beginning is meant to indicate that the system's not for everyone, for the reasons you state.

[snorri]

This makes sense only if you use a lot of abilities check with the full score, or the ac=dex system (or any house rule which make the full score useful. With low modifiers, it's not really useful - a little better if you use 2d6 rather 1d20.

That's a very strange thing with d&d, all editions together: the full score is rarely used, so it's not really useful. The dK system (a french simplification of d20) and, if i'm not wrong, True20, even discarded the score for the modifier alone - something which could be used with Od&d easily.

In Od&d, the reason why abilities are on 3d6 is a mystery, apart for the curve which makes modifiers rare. It seems to be a late modification to switch from a former 2d6 system and adapt to the d20, which has already all the signs of a late addition to the system.

The Rules cyclopedia skills grounded on the full score, but were hardly linked to level - stats and level don't go well together...

[dwayanu]

I would rather just start characters with some experience points to represent "born hero" status. A third-level PC definitely stands apart from the common man! Such a fighting man crosses the threshold to new attack and save values upon gaining the next (Hero) level.

Ability score inflation is sort of like an arms race, simply establishing a status quo with bigger numbers ("But these amps go to eleven!"). When every fighter gets a +1, you need a +2 or more to stand out as exceptional.

Moreover, the spread can get skewed in frustrating ways. Using AD&D factors with straight 3d6 rolled in order, most fighters have the same fighting ability. An exceptionally good or bad set of rolls is interesting, but does not in my experience much change the chances of surviving the first couple of levels. If a "golden boy" dies, then by the time that player rolls another, the less gifted but surviving and successful others are likely to get much more benefit from their higher levels.

With the scheme introduced in Moldvay Basic, dicing for ability scores becomes much more significant; only about 50% of scores fall into the "ordinary" range. Best 3 of 4 dice, with free arrangement (the most common method) in AD&D seems to me slightly less warping -- but still to present the problem. The rub is that it's almost necessary if one hopes to see some sub-classes in play.

The 2d6 curve is one that I (as a big Traveller fan) like, but it's also more "swingy". The absolute best and worst results come up (obviously) six times as often as with 3d6, and it's easy to see other artifacts in the spread.

I've had a decades-long romance with the notion of rolling 2d6+3 for ability scores and using those directly with 3d6 for resolution. My conclusion is that one needs a lot of significant scores and/or a lot of combined and averaged values to make up for the randomness. Too much of the latter, and you're basically taking the long way back to scores not counting for much.

[snorri]

I would rather agree taht the most easiest issue to play heroic modules is to play heroes (so level 4 - it's the fighter title!) and for superheroïcs, start at level 8. There is just no reason to always start at level 1.

[coffee]

Apr 4, 2009 5:20:14 GMT -6 calithena said:

Any player who complains, even a little bit, about a character generated by this method should be taken to the woodshed.

I like this rule, even with a straight 3d6....

[codeman123]

My old DM used to do alot of these kind of things but his game where boarding on insane not just heroic lol. He used to let us roll a d20 for stats and add like 1d6 points or something hahahaha. They where fun games though and he didn't always run games like this.

[waysoftheearth]

About a year ago I purchased a later print of the AD&D player's handbook for my collection. When it arrived, I found two official AD&D character sheets inside. Both were completely filled in -- and presumably from the heyday of AD&D.

It was a rare opportunity for a brief glance into how people a world away had played their flavour of D&D. I was stunned by what I saw.

Both character sheets were meticulously detailed -- with seemingly hundreds of tiny little boxes on each sheet filled with numbers, modifiers and the names of spells and magic items. Both PCs were 6th level. One was an Elven fighter/magic-user, the other a Human fighter/thief. Both were beings of Godlike stature -- with several ability scores of 17 and 18. The Elf had 19 dexterity. Neither had any ability score below 15. However, what REALLY blew me away was that despite the apparent devotion to record keeping, neither character had a name!

For me, this firmly clinched my belief that the "numbers inflation game" is a completely different game to "my" D&D. Sure, some people do like the inflation game, and if they enjoy it that's great.

But getting back to the topic of the OP...

High ability scores don't make heroic PCs unless the game system itself differentiates them from lower ability scores -- via improved die modifiers, or some other game advantage (such as that described in Snorri's reply).

Without a "rules" advantage, 19 strength is no different from 15, so why bother?

If you do introduce rules advantages for higher ability scores, then you have to expect players to want those advantages. Pretty soon the players begin to see any PC without those advantages as sub-standard... and from there, well, it can be a slippery slope.

[calithena]

The premise of the thread is, if you want characters with heroic attribute scores, here's a system for generating them.

People can talk about whatever they want of course, I just want to make clear that I am not advocating this system except under the conditional that it's something people want.

I am thinking that the range should be 15-17 if you don't roll doubles though, so 14+1d3.

I have a strong argument for attribute scores against the d20/Forge idea that they're irrelevant because only the numbers derived from them matter. I will post that in another thread sometime.

[waysoftheearth]

My apologies Calithena if I came across all negative in my previous post -- that wasn't my intention at all. I just wanted to share something I thought may be interesting and (vaguely) related to the topic heading "Heroic Character Generation".

In the end, whatever is considered good fun for the participants is a good thing -- regardless of who approves or disapproves!

Apr 5, 2009 6:50:59 GMT -6 calithena said:

I have a strong argument for attribute scores against the d20/Forge idea that they're irrelevant because only the numbers derived from them matter. I will post that in another thread sometime.

I'm interested in this too -- and looking forward to seeing your ideas