Rolling for attributes: Who does it?

[Deleted]

While working on my 'The Fantasy Game' clone and going through OD&D sentence by sentence I was completely dumbfounded by the initial statement in the section on determination of abilities (http://www.thefantasygame.org/2011/05/reading-od-from-cover-to-cover-rolling.html): There the rules state that the referee rolls for the attributes of the characters.

I don't remember seeing this in any other edition of D&D (but maybe I just over-read or ignored it) and thus am really curious: How many of you use that rule? Do the players roll for attributes or is it the job of the referee.

I always let the players roll as attribute generation for me is one of the important parts of the "bonding process" (if you would like to call it that way) with the future character. Since the attribute scores are something you will have to live with for a long time it seems important to me (on a purely emotional level) to let the players steer the hand of fate in this.

What do you think?

[tombowings]

Well, it depends whether you think bonding is a good thing. I tend to have very high mortality games and the players who want/need to have characters in the literary sense of the usually end up dropping out.

That being said, I have players roll up their attributes. That way I don't have to take time away of the game when half the party dies and has to remake characters (as fast as possible as to not miss anything).

Then again, I'm the type of person who has a TPK and wonders how to make the game more deadly; my players enjoy it and I enjoy, but others may not.

[coffee]

Since I tend to roll crap for my characters, I prefer it if the DM rolls.

That way I have a fighting chance. (Or someone to blame...)

[waysoftheearth]

Having the ref roll works perfectly for a play by post game -- eliminating delays and potential dishonesty.

I also recall reading somewhere that D&D was sometimes played over the phone back in the day.. that might have a similar feel to modern PBP games when it came to die rolling... maybe?

For face to face games I find the players like to roll, and its also quicker for all concerned.

[Deleted]

The OD&D game that I'm in the ref rolled the stats for all our characters. He rolled several sets of characters up and let us choose one to play.

[talysman]

I remember doing it this way when I first started playing, but eventually moved to players rolling their own characters.

[Morandir]

Every game I've ever played in or run has had the players doing it themselves. I think my players would throw a fit if I wanted to roll their stats for them.

However, I've considered producing a stack of pre-gens (say, 10 of each class I use) for my current game, equipment and all. That when when a character dies, I could just hand the player the stack and have them pick one.

[oldkat]

I think its the cat's meow!
For OD&D ;D
Stats really aren't all THAT important until you get into Greyhawk.

[Stormcrow]

I've been thinking of something a little different.

The referee prepares a stack of index cards on which he has rolled the abilities of one character per card. (He might use a computer to program the card-making process.) Whenever a player needs a new character, the referee hands him the next one on the stack. The referee may give the illusion of choice back to the player by fanning out the cards face-down and letting the player choose one at random.

For those referees who require players to "play what they get," the player decides on the class and alignment of the character, adjusts any ability scores as permitted, rolls hit points and money, and buys equipment. The player can even use the card as a character record if he wants.

If the referee wishes, the player may choose whether or not to play that character. If the player doesn't like the character, he hands the original character back to the referee, who sets it aside, and the referee hands the player the next character. Continue this until the player has a character he likes or until there are no cards left in the stack, in which case the player must play the last card. The player may not go back through the discards and choose a character from there; once discarded, that character is forbidden to that player. (The referee may want to mark the card to indicate that that player may not use it in the future.)

This avoids the situation where a player rolls a 10 strength and then whines that he's hopelessly weak before he's rolled any of his other abilities. Players may still whine, but at least you don't have to endure it while they're still rolling characters.

[howandwhy99]

If you think about it, anyone should be able to roll the dice. But when the die type, groupings, and numeric results are important for the players to know, then they should roll them. This goes for character generation especially IMO.

Maybe there are some people who are good at cheat-rolling - rolling dice where one can determine the result by how they do it. But it's typically held as a fair shake, if the dice aren't loaded or cocked. If someone routinely gets awesome or even horrible results, I suggest rolling with a cup. It works wonders.

IMO dice results players roll are expressions to them of random distributions and the final numerical results. Learning what the numbers mean and what the progressions are is a central core of the puzzle game.

[blackbarn]

We've never had the DM roll for PC ability scores, but it is interesting that the book says it that way. Does that mean at some point Dave or Gary did it that way?

It might be fun to try it with only the DM knowing what the stats are, and the players just selecting a class, and letting the DM work out how effective they were. A lot of work for the DM (I wouldn't really want to do it), but no player would worry about what they could/could not do based on high or low scores.

[arcadayn]

May 19, 2011 3:07:36 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

I also recall reading somewhere that D&D was sometimes played over the phone back in the day.. that might have a similar feel to modern PBP games when it came to die rolling... maybe?

I played a lot of rpgs over the phone in the early to mid '80s. I hadn't remembered this until now, but yeah, the DM always made all the rolls. Of course, I was in middle and high school, so we certainly didn't trust each other to make our own rolls!

[thorswulf]

I'm flexible about this one. Mostly because if you have honest players, dice rolls average out in the long run.

[foxroe]

Interesting. The players have always made the rolls wherever I've played; however, what's the big deal? If the rolls are in the open, statistically speaking, there is no difference that depends on the roller. The only thing that the players are missing is the "thrill" of rolling 3d6...

[tombowings]

My opinion has always been that if a player needs high stats to have fun, cheating might make the game more enjoyable for everyone else at the table.

I've even run games were I let player PICK their own states. No guidelines: nothing. Guess what? No one has a stat about 15 and it was pretty balanced set of characters.

[Finarvyn]

May 19, 2011 11:58:37 GMT -6 talysman said:

I remember doing it this way when I first started playing, but eventually moved to players rolling their own characters.

This is my experience as well. I remember early on creating pages and pages of pre-rolled characters for my players to grab, but after a while we decided that since character creation was so fast why not let the players roll as needed.

I've hardly ever gone back to the referee-created character, except for a few pregens I prepare for the first time we play a game. For example, when we played our first 3E game (and again with 4E) I started with pregen characters since the process is more complex.

[Falconer]

I have each player roll up a roster of 12 PCs right off the bat. They pick one to flesh out (character sheet) and play, and hold the other 11 in reserve as their “stable”. In fact, they can flesh out any or all of them at any time in the campaign, and switch freely between them.

[howandwhy99]

Technically it isn't supposed to matter who rolls the dice, but there is some element of fate going on there, so I prefer the actor to roll. This often means the player in questions.

But I do like to offer a list of pre-rolled ability scores in case anyone would prefer to pick something more difficult to qualify for. I generally roll until all of the sub-classes are covered. With the ability to buy points up and down to maximize the PR (prime requisite) score this isn't too hard.

I mean the 2-for-1 or 3-for-1 buying out of other scores to increase the prime req.

[Stormcrow]

May 18, 2011 23:43:00 GMT -6 @brannalbin said:

While working on my 'The Fantasy Game' clone and going through OD&D sentence by sentence I was completely dumbfounded by the initial statement in the section on determination of abilities (http://www.thefantasygame.org/2011/05/reading-od-from-cover-to-cover-rolling.html): There the rules state that the referee rolls for the attributes of the characters.

I don't remember seeing this in any other edition of D&D (but maybe I just over-read or ignored it) and thus am really curious: How many of you use that rule?

That's not really a rule; it's just a description of how player characters can get their scores. I've just noticed in Gary's article in the Europa zine about "How to Set Up Your Dungeons & Dragons Campaign—and Be Stuck Refereeing It Seven Days per Week until the Wee Hours of the Morning," he says: "Each [player] in turn rolls three dice to record the various scores for the makeup of the character they are to play and how large an initial bankroll the character begin [sic] with." The zine was published in April 1975.

[sepulchre]

We don't use stats just classes and some applied racial qualities (see MM or GryhwkGlss) for color. If we were to roll stats I am inclined to agree with Howandwhy99 who wrote:

Technically it isn't supposed to matter who rolls the dice, but there is some element of fate going on there, so I prefer the actor to roll. This often means the player in questions.