Remember when people used to get bad stats every once in a while?

Having dump stats exist sucks, having a single stat to base everything you ever do sucks. Being an elderly wizard with penalties to your strength doesn't matter! With 4 strength, the clothes on your back, a wizard book, and a single bag of holding is beyond what he can comfortably carry, but a single item, muleback cords, fixes it so that. A monk can use his dex for initiative and dodging, add his wisdom so he's strong in mind and body, and pump his strength to hit hard as fuck, right? Except the way everything is balanced anyone with a good spread should put it into something else.

Remember when stat modifiers were uncommon and a big deal?

Yeah, now we have to deal with assholes like

4d6, drop the lowest dice.

I have had to play a character with a cumulative stat mod of -1 they were so flawed it was not fun, highest stat was a 15, and there was no conceivable way this person would function as an adventurer ended up with a bearly sentient druid that had a charisma of three.the character was fun but playing it was not because it was bad at basically everything.

i think it's silly to argue about one thing being innately better than another. it's like arguing about salt being a better or worse ingredient than sugar. absolutely depends on what you're trying to do.

there are situations where rolling for stats is really stupid. there are also situations where there's a reason to do it and it's perfectly fine.

more than once i got dropped into a game with no time to come up with a character concept and drew a blank on what i wanted to play. instead of wasting X hours hemming and hawing about how to spend points i roll 3d6 down the line and go "oh, look at that, looks like i'm a charismatic, clumsy strongman, what class does that suggest?" and you go from there.

also it can be a learning experience. force yourself to play someone whose strengths and weaknesses you never would have picked on your own. enjoy the challenge. in the right group, with the right GM, this is totally valid. in a lot of other groups you might feel like it's shit and the rest of the party might feel like your turns are a waste of time. choose appropriately.

Lots of good points on both sides ITT.

I'd add that the only really bad idea is to be too rigidly in favor of one system or another. Try more things and try tweaking them until you, and your group, are happy with the results.

My bro was once stuck playing a Ranger that didn't have a stat over 13 because the DM, though running 3.5, was super rigid about using oldschool style 3d6 stat rolls with no re-rolls. Players began to resent my bro getting them into jams by trying to get something to kill him so he could re-roll.

I've also been in a game where my point-buy character was looked on as a burden and a waste of time because I didn't drop any stats below 10. They all had super min-maxed characters that didn't RP their stats at all so they saw nothing wrong with playing a brawler with single digit mental stats and still RPing him as a wise cracking problem-solver. When the mechanics needed mental stats, they'd just turn to the player with the opposite issue to fix it.

Players should have fun. System/edition preferences/wars aside, using your preferred rules to the point of infringing on the fun is the only truly bad idea.

3d3 exploding.

Your stats are 1d20

Really? I quite enjoyed having characters that had a few lower than average stats; it forces you to think up new ways to approach a problem if said problem relied heavily on those stats, rather than just being passably okay at everything.

Just used that format in the campaign I'm in right now. There's only one stat I don't have a +4 minimum in.

Sometimes I enjoy the randomness.
It really depends on the type of game I'm playing. Ultimately it's the group chemistry that's important.

Point buy is fine, but promotes useless rollplaying. Which is for twats.

I've used this method since 1st edition

>things that never happened.jpg

Seriously? I tend to get at least one -1 and 0, and I've never +4'ed.

yeah thats how it was when I played. We'd all roll in front of each other and create characters together. If someone got a set of stats with nothing over 12 or something, we'd always allow a reroll. But it was normal to have like an 8 or a 10 in there. Seemed like thats how our characters became more defined and memorable.

I remember I had a female thief with really low charisma for the Ravenloft module, and (iirc) its follow up module. My friend was DM and he was like 'she's either 100 lbs overweight, or has insane acne'. I was like well shit, I guess Im playing a fat girl thief. Well I also rolled successfully for Psionics, and I believe I could either stun people or put them to sleep, or perhaps damage them, I forget. (this was ~1990)
But this character would get harassed and disrespected all day by npc's, and even a (pre-that guy) guy in our group from time to time. I would use the Psionic powers in retaliation, often undetected from hiding or whatever. Just being fat and greasy, but in leather. I remember I kept picturing jabba the hut when she would have to interact with someone.

But yeah, sometimes bad stats ended up working out in the long run.

Alright it's actually +3 min

Capped some of the rolls for proofs, others were 10 and 18.

The reason I dislike bloated pointbuy is because in older editions, the game was more balanced around having middling stats being the ACTUAL default.

Nowadays a warrior with 18 strength really isn't really getting a '+4' bonus, they're just 'at the expected power level.'

Now it's more like 18 is +0 and 10 is -4. When every warrior has 18 strength, that +4 might as well be part of the class and stats tossed into the trash.

Is the general decrease in the assumption of disposable characters a good thing?

Not good or bad, just a change tin expectation as RPG's evolved to have more focus on story than the orginal squad-based tactical wargaming simulators

>roll poorly
>try to overcome poor stats with creativity
>GM "Sure, roll [insert skill or stat]"
Fuck

In some systems stats aren't that important, but in fucking DnD is basically the base for everything ever

>DM 5e game
>4d6 drop lowest for stats
>two players roll excellent
>one rolls mediocre
>the other rolls two 17s and two 8s, so he's pseudo minmaxed
>mediocre stats guy complains
>all of his stats are between 12-14
>he says he's useless and can't do anything
>3 sessions in and he hasn't made an attack roll above 5 because his d20 rolls have been shit
>he insists he'can't do anything because his stats are so bad
>actively avoids danger because he's convinced his character is handicapped

He won't listen to the idea that he's just rolling like shit and that his stats are fine.

Should I kill his character and end this madness?

In the current game my total modifier is a +4, then the rest of players have a +10, +12 and +15, I'm literally useless, and if GM doesn't throw me a bone I'm going to retire the character

Consider rolling for stats, then letting people fiddle with the numbers

It sort of depends on the game that you want to run. Generally, people seem to want to throw out a character and start over if they don't like how things are going, but otherwise they don't want to just get rid of a character. There's not as much fun in a character dying, or as much expectation of that happening. It feels more like a loss of accumulated progress than something that's probably going to happen.

That said, then you tend to get into a mindset of 'the DM won't throw us up against something that could actually kill us!' And that's a bad thing. Now a GM has to stay in a limited window where there is a challenge, but not too much - deaths would make the players mad, but near misses are fun and exciting.

Bad.

I like the idea, but I'm a slow writer and photocopying is expensive.

As long as my character is good in what he's supposed to be good and isn't outclassed by others I'm good

Random stats are cool, but I'm not a big fan of somebody being able to roll much higher than somebody else.

So you played as an unnaturally competent warrior who longed to secretly be, what they call in some circles, a "dojikko?"

then lower them ass hat. no ones stopping you with a point buy.

>That said, then you tend to get into a mindset of 'the DM won't throw us up against something that could actually kill us!' And that's a bad thing.

It's a very easy issue to resolve with just some clear communication. It's only really an issue with certain players, and communicating with them directly that yes, they will very likely die if they choose a particularly suicidal line of action, is usually more than enough to get them to reconsider what they're about to do. After that, it becomes a question of whether or not you were bluffing, and no one can really blame you if you were not.

>>random method
>>everyone will get a +2 minimum
This is why random rolling is only done by retards

>everyone will get a +2 minimum
While that's technically true, everybody will also get a +2 maximum, and your phrasing makes it sound like you don't really understand the thing you're criticizing. What's your complaint?

No, that method actually works well for what it does. It gives you a random but playable result that might make you play a kind of character you would not otherwise play.

Random character generation should mean "You get a random character" out of a bunch of ones that are mostly decent. It shouldn't mean "You have a random chance for a playable character".

And if you happen to believe the latter, then user, I'm sorry, but a retard is you.

>>durrr
its very possible to roll entirely negative stat arrays. the average roll of 3d6+1 is 11.5. That's not impressive, and very easy to fucking tank some rolls and end up with 0 or less. it's also very possible to produce some even more powerful players compared to others.

Random rolls are bullshit, there are no gaurantees or +2 minimums. thats the whole fucking point of random you stupid cuck.

Arrays and point buy give you actual minimums. Rolling is russian roulette

He'll just end up vilified in the end and focus hard on trying to go for super high bonuses and bitch when he rolls anything less.

Rolling was a mistake.

Str: 14
Dex: 4
Con: 7
Int: 6
Wis: 5
Cha: 5

>>durr eyem a big shitfaced retarded covered in guano.
a +2 minimum does not exist in a 3d6+1 array fagtron. it doesn't matter if you want shit characters, you don't get to lie and say that every roll, statblock total or individual statistic, gives you at least a +2

I just did this to try it out, my stats are 6 6 5 6 6 9. Amazing method.

I don't understand. Are you just lashing out at random? because you seem to be criticizing dice rolling and then criticizing that system for not being like dice rolling.

Have my players do an array: 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8

Good at something, bad at something was my idea. Players have been pretty okay with it so far, though o have a party full of fighters so it is a bit samey

That's me. When I was eight.

So I have become the little girl?

This

2d6+6

32 PTbuy total, pretty based, would actually let you play a mad class. you may consider letting them have 3 16s as an option though.

holy shit

Guess I'm playing a fucking Rock Golem or something.

Alright, this is now a party of three, I personally look forward to seeing how things play out.

We still play 3d6 down-the-line.

It's just more fun for our group, and that's all that there is to it.

I do think other players who have come to our group were basically playing D&D with training wheels.

It's a much more fun game when it's not "roll to see how much I won by."

Point buy is for chickenshit faggots who don't want to face the glorious wonders of the dice gods.

The last time I faced the glorious wonders of the dice gods, about three sessions later everyone, including the GM, went 'wait why are your stats so shitty, here use these stats instead'

Then you had a bad group or you just suck ass at roleplaying.

Tried out a dice pool stat generation once to immense hilarity.

You get 24d6
You must place at least three in each stat.
Allocate where you want the other 6d6's.
Ironman roll.

Had a kinku fighter named Warbeak with a 24 str, 30 dex, 7 con, 9 int, 4 wis, and 16 cha.

I could move and hit like a kroot, but had a severe case of glass jaw (dem hollow bird bones mayn) and lacked any kind of common sense or discretion. Made a DC30 Escape artist check to squeeze through an arrow slit at lvl 1 (with assistance from the Rouge kicking me through it) but later promptly fucked the party when some guards interoggated us when we tried to enter a city in search of the smarmy bard BBEG.

>"What business do you have within our walls?"
"We here to kill fappadandy!"

Also the shiny tiarra that Warbeak found did not help with concealment but I refused to take it off as "Warbeak pretty bird."

tl;dr random stats can make for hilarious characters.

>30 dex
I don't know what edition you play, but it's fucking terrible.

>just suck ass at roleplaying
I am having trouble figuring out what the hell this part is supposed to mean.

As far as I can tell, either I was the one person in the group that hadn't rolled good, or there had been an unspoken 'reroll until you get a set you like', because the rolls I'd had fit into the system's "this is good enough you don't get a free reroll" bracket. Perhaps if this hadn't been literal years ago, I could remember the details better, but I'm fairly certain that someone was wondering why my modifiers were meh during a combat, then everyone turned out to be surprised that I had kept the stat rolls I'd gotten.

Did you not read how stats were generated? It was intended to get extreme variance. This was not a stone cold super serious campaign.

damn i love my class choice and ability to perform any action whatsoever being crippled on chargen while another player rolls incredibly and dominates every encounter. you god damn fucking moron. you stupid bitch. i fucking hate you.

I don't mind it in gameplay terms, but in fluff terms it's pretty wacky. 10 being average and 18 being ABSOLUTE PEAK OF HUMAN ACHIEVEMENT doesn't make much sense when most characters will have one really high stat and everything else is around 14, maybe with a 10 or two.

>Sits down to play D&D
>Tells group what class and race he wants to play
>"Ok, now let's figure out attributes!"
You're doing it backwards.

I am glad that you hate me and groups like mine. It'll keep you away.

There are plenty of story-focused, narrative RPGs.

D&D has never, ever been one of them. You are playing a hack & slash, dungeon crawler, and starting it out by cheating.

It's lame. It just spoils the whole thing.

Play a game, instead of just cheating at it. You might find out it's fun.

i have, you stupid fucking faggot. i have played, with an idiot like you, and it was awful because the only way to turn the worthless statblock id been handed into anything approaching a character was to game the system. unless youre making a character youre fine with losing in the first session you play them or outright intending to, being chained to a useless lump that cant do anything is not fun at all. how is picking stats cheating in any sense, its a system that prevents cheating by putting players on a genuinely even starting playing field. you are incredibly stupid.

I sure do! I run B/X

Even if his rolls were average he wouldn't be doing anything.
What of it?

TG complaints board, have you considered playing a roleplayin game that isn't D&D, or roll playing?

>I'd like my character to have some kind of flaw represented in his stats

Why? I keep seeing this from time to time. Why would you want to have a low stat to represent a flaw in a game like D&D?
Did you know that in 5e you have a dedicated space in you character sheet named Flaw and you actually get rewarded for roleplaying it?

Hey, that's an average Primarch statline

>muh 2nd edition
Stats didn't matter as much then. 9-12 was no modifier at all, and your tohit was mostly based on level anyway. Your strength score didn't really make a difference unless it was like an 18/00.

>players should get bad stats
I think each player should get one or two stats below 10.so we don't have to imagine the entire party as ubermensch.

>people should roll for stats always
Yeah, then you find one guy with 18/17/16 and another guy with 14/12/8, and you wind up with people doing stupid shit to try and balance them out again. Most players don't actually want the disparity that comes with random stat generation.

>I need low stats to have flaws
That's because you didn't make a sufficiently deep or fun character. If you had written a PC who was enjoyable to play, he'd wind up with flaws that aren't reliant on ability scores being low. You'll know what these look like if you read enough of the source material that fantasy RPGs are based on.

>You know, I've never tried playing a social character. I want to be a bard!
>rolls 11 charisma

>I think paladins are pretty cool, I'd like to try that out!
>9 strength

>Wizards are badass. I want-
>10 int

based on true stories.

D&D is very stats-focused but pure combat is only one way out of many to do it. Roleplay is still possible, and it sucks when you don't get to make the character that you wanted without sucking at it due to random chance.

Nobody cares.

We're using this method in an Iron heroes game at our shop.

I enjoy my 4 int armiger.

Yes but, doesn't it make creating a story before rolling stats awkward when it contradicts what you've written for them?

Ex: Orc Barbarian who has a back story that marks him someone who survived fighting as an arena combatant has rolled extremely low STR + CON.

Ex 2: Bard who was considered a fairly good entertainer seeks adventure. Except they have low Charisma.

Ex 3. Old wizard who has studied magic most of his live ends up with High STR and Low int

I mean it is not the end of the world and I suppose all it would take is "a wizard cursed me" or some kind of injury to explain away some of those discrepancies.

>Orc Barbarian who has a back story that marks him someone who survived fighting as an arena combatant has rolled extremely low STR + CON.
All that arena torture has devastated his body.
>Bard who was considered a fairly good entertainer seeks adventure. Except they have low Charisma.
Training over natural talent.
>Old wizard who has studied magic most of his live ends up with High STR and Low int
Shits fucked yo.

>I wanted my character to be clumsy but got cockblocked by my dm

A. you're a fajita
B. You could play a character who drops things intentionally, because of his lack of confidence. I know guys who are tight shit until they realize how difficult is what they're doing, then they spazz out.

There's no stat for personality. Charisma only coutns so far.

ask your dm nicely to switch your strength and iq
muscle wizard
play. a fucking. fighter. you ametuer

I think rolling for stats requires a different mindset.
Either don't go into it with a specific character in mind, or bring a shitton of micro-concepts that can be modified on the fly to the wildly different stats.

I only do stat rolls when I'm running a meat-grinder, so having a long (or even well-thought out) backstory is practically a detriment.

It really depends on the game for me. Unless I'm running a one shot or a game that is super lethal and has a revolving door of PCs, I want baseline competency for my players.

Having a low stat could be fun to roleplay, but I prefer people to play what they want, not what they get (with some exceptions). And with dice rolls there is a chance you are just straight up worse than someone else. Why would the party travel with a fighter with only one stat in the double digits when they already have a fighter with only one stat
In the single digits. I think that's unfair to all the players.

But there are times where I want to run or play in a game where I have almost no control over what I am or what my stats are, just throw some dice and look at some charts to see what the hell I am. I think WFRP is perfect for this.

I actually like this.

>exploding 3d3: 14, 11, 11, 14, 14, 12
Wow, look. A normal character.

If anybody wants to try rolling this and doesn't already know about anydice, go here and click on the "roller" button:

>anydice.com/program/843f

>exploding 3d3: 11, 27, 5, 11, 4, 4

Dude, just swap our your gimpy flesh with cybernetics.

>play anima
>roll 4 10s a 4 and the rest 7+
Dm banned me from changing the lowest to a 9 as rules say.

This is why point buy is siperior

People got bad stats all the time.

The moment you get good stats, you stop deliberately trying to get your characters killed.

>Yes, this happened

Code for "Things that never happened."

How about imploding 2d3?

> anydice.com/program/8440

Last time a rolled, my 5e bard had no stat lower than 14 except strength, at 13. He has higher stats than most of the party.

Kek.
See what you did there gov.

You sound like a smarmy faggot. Please consider sudoku

Remember when stats didn't determine whether you were going to be successful or not because 8-15 gave no bonuses or penalties?

Fuck off.

has anyone ever played with a dm that made you roll then use the stats in the order you rolled them (first roll is strength etc)?

rolling for stats is fucking dumb and if a DM makes you do it instead of just letting you use point buy or standard array you're probably in for a bad time.

I don't want a character with all stats above 12 and I don't want a character with all stats below 10, both of which are entirely possible

I dont want a cookie cutter character with absolute defined optimal selections of stats, feats, spells, and whatever other garbage is lying around. Give me some degree of unpredictability that I have to adapt my character's build to any day.

Oh, you mean the time when people would blatantly cheat and start off with at least 3 18s and no stat under 12? Yeah, what a shitty time, am I right?

Man, am I glad that I don't play with shitty people like

I've taken up forcing all of my players to roll 3d6 down the line, allowing them a one-time swap of two ability scores.

The trick is that I allow them to reroll the entire array as many times as they like. I get varied characters, and everyone gets the stats that they're happy with. It's 100% win-win with none of the downsides.

I know people don't like rolled stats and the inherent unfairness in them, but how else do you keep people from being too average in all areas but the importance?

I mean its a nice idea to want balance by using point buy, but how actually fun is it to have characters with stats of 10, 10, 10, 15 in an important stat and that's it? At least with rolled stats you can force someone to get a shit number they have to use, forcing them to actually roleplay someone that is weak in some way. The dumb hotheaded warrior, the fragile but intelligent Wizard, the limping but faithful cleric, and so on. Isn't this more interesting and engaging then min-maxed ubermen with no real flaws?

I like the idea of combining a bit of both worlds; roll for random stats but allow you to arrange them as desired- that way its still random, but you have a little more control and can better fit your character around the needs of the party.

At that point, why not just let them use point-buy? It ensures everyone is on the same power level so nobody feels useless, and you don't waste time endlessly rerolling stats.