Randomly rolling for Abilities in D&D gives you practically no information compared to other random character...

>there are multiple reasons your character could have a low attribute score and multiple ways to express it in character
>it's literally just telling you where you suck and where you're good and letting you draw your own conclusions from that

That's the point. You roll random stats and from them you create a character who would believably have those stats. Arrays are fine if you care equally for the mechanical side of character building, but for me, random generation will always be preferred. I feel it makes players develop and plays as characters they otherwise would never have thought of on their own.

I love RPG's for the roleplaying side, but I feel like that's part of why I prefer pointbuy. Rather than rolling random stats and having to figure out how to justify them, I prefer to come up with a character idea based on the theme, setting and the GM's game idea, and then figure out how to best represent them in the system. I find random generation just detracts from my amount of investment in the character, because they're not the result of my choices, but of random chance.

Here's a conundrum: given a set of randomly generated attribute values and a setting... can a good gamer envision a character that fits
a) the attributes and
b) the setting,
while still being interesting enough to compel the player to play.

We get it, you don't like D&D. Guess what? No one is forcing you to play D&D or even saying you have to like it!

Depends on the stats you rolled

There's choice within it though. As OP states there's many ways to express "9 intelligence" without even getting into class specific ways, and i find that by getting players to think about why their character concept would have the attributes it does they come up with interesting ideas they never would have explored in their own.

Absolutely, i don't even think it really takes a good gamer myself.

Is there ANY real reason for randomly generated stats other than "muh tradition"?
Point-based building is just much more efficient and actually allows you to make a character you want instead of trying to stretch the character idea into stats you've ended up with.
The only place where rolling works are horror games.

You're in a game about story-telling and you can't even be bothered to tell your own character's backstory?
You lazy piece of shit, just go get a randomly generated one online if you want randomly generated shit.

I guess I feel I don't need prompting to think about stuff like that. i prefer to go character first, stats second.

This argument only applies to 3d6 down the line, which hasn't been standard since 1999. But I'll bite.

If your character has a charisma of 14, he might be a charming motherfucker, or he might just be the quiet source of leadership everyone looks to when they're six levels deep and in the shit. That suggests at a character, which suggests background. Why is he a charming motherfucker? Why does his grip strength suck? Is he a noble? A rich kid who took elocution lessons? You don't need to roll for that, and you shouldn't need outside aids to come up with an explanation. It should come automatically to you.

But I don't care about all of that. Personally, in my 5E and Pathfinder games, I make my players roll for their stats just because I like making powergamers and MtG players cry like little bitches when their character isn't "optimized." They demand point buy out of a sense of "fairness," at which point I tell them that life doesn't have point buy because life isn't fair.

Am I a dick for that? Yes. Yes I am. And I'm the dick running the only game in town. Show up to chargen with d6s.

I'd argue it can work in comedy games, too.

Is that not the normal progression? Figure out a character concept to play, then stat the character to fit that concept?

In my experience, yes, but the apparent argument from people advocating for random stats is that the randomization acts as a character creation prompt, which feels weird to me.

It's all about pulling people out of their comfort zone. Even if your characters have a different personality and skills there inherently must be a rough archetype you start from when you think of a character. If not then I guess you're just a better writer than anyone I've ever played with. The random nature gets people to start thinking about playing different concepts than those they otherwise tend towards.

i do roll 4d6, add the best 3, six times
then put those points into whatever stat you want
I like it.

Mostly because it can cause some fun when you have like all shit stats except for that ONE stat that is at 18
and also because you can't minmax at all with this

what do u think

When I roll for characters, I just take the randomized results and spread them around as I see fit.

I guess the argument makes sense if people are following a sort of "roll each stat randomly" method where you don't decide on the value distribution yourself.

/v/ please leave

He probably uses backstory roll-tables, too.

>wanting a character to be more than numbers on a sheet of paper
>/v/

So you willingly put them in the position of having luck dictate all their stats and risk the so hated optimizer to end up with better stats than he could have possibily bought, instead of setting a low point buy so that they can not possibly break your carefully constructed rails?
Mah, you like to go out of your way to spite people eh.

>also because you can't minmax at all with this
when you can arrange stats in the order you like, you totally can minmax.
I'm OK with more forgiving roll methods (such as 2d6+6 or 4d6k3) but if you're doing it in order to prevent munchkinry the /order/ needs to be out of the player's control.

Wow, it's almost like different people have a varied preferences concerning things they like and don't like in their games. Shocking.

You and your common sense, leave the precinct NAO!

A good gamer? Sure. But I think that says more about quality players than the game system

>everything about my character has to be mechanically represented on my character sheet or it doesn't exist.

Rollplayer detected.

Yeah...it's your opinions that I'm disagreeing with.

You just keep telling yourself that and calm your tits.

>Drawing a distinction between mechanics and narrative

The point of RPG's is that they're both. Elements of your character should be mechanically represented on your sheet because that's the primary means you have of interacting with the world and story in tangible, reliable ways.

Yes, you can always talk with the GM and improvise stuff, but that takes more time and is much less reliable than just pointing to the part of your sheet that says 'I can do x' or 'I get a bonus to trying out y'.

True, but comedy games usually don't have stats at all

>real reason

Eh? You use this phrase, I don't think it means what you think it means.

Show me on the array where the 3 touched you.

>the /order/ needs to be out of the player's control
This completely ruins player freedom to actually design their character however. I like stabbing things with swords and shit. I never care for magic users. So if I want to play some sort of tough guy (fighter, barbarian, paladin) but happen to roll low for constitution, strength, and dexterity, but high for intelligence, wisdom, and charisma than it heavily limits their options.

Granted it helps that the people I play with aren't jackasses.

This is how you do random character generation: 1d4chan.org/wiki/Reign/Random_Characters

Just rolling 6 numbers gives you nothing to work.

>make powergamers roll for stats
>they just pick SAD classes instead of MAD classes, making the gap between them and the other players even wider than it would be with pointbuy
Good job retard

Preference is one thing but preference without justification especially over something vital like WHAT YOU WILL PRIMARILY BE ROLLING should have SOME logistical backing to it!

As much as Veeky Forums will hate me for saying this: "it's an opinion" is not a 100% air-tight alibi and defense some people think it is. Some opinions are shitty and if you don't like being told your opinion is shitty then go back to your fucking hugbox.

Nice straw-man.

3d6-down-the-line doesn't contribute to character or background development.

It's just the arbitrary system around which the game's balance is predicated. Not using it means you're cheating at a game where there aren't even winners and losers, and is a special kind of sad.

>b-b-but it's not what WotC editions are balanced around!

Yeah, but we're talking about Dungeons & Dragons.

>This completely ruins player freedom to actually design their character however.
Yes, it does. It should. Sit down at a table with your friends. Roll some characters. Create a party together. Adventure out into dungeons and explore a world with the group you all rolled up.

Except even the early editions of D&D provided multiple methods of character generation you wannabe-grognard.

No, they provided alternative methods. Not multiple: alternative. For sissy-babies who thought the game was too hard.

>It forces you to play outside your comfort zone!
No it doesn't. If that is actually what you wanted, you'd play any of the numerous systems that have you roll your characters backstory, skills, etc instead of the trifling randomization that makes you a little bit more or less competent

If anything, random stats forces you to play it safe and optimize to be competent. Whereas pointbuy might let you do something unusual or experiment with a mix of character options, rolled stats forces you to stick to stock archetypes, and if you roll badly you're very restricted in the options you can take if you want to remain in any way relevant.

You have constructed a straw-man that you proceeded to argue against. Congrats.

But it's not about "comfort zones." It's not about character background. It's about the fact that the game was balanced with 3d6 PC stats in-mind. That's the game.

Play it, don't play it, whatever. But stop straw-manning a buncha nonsense to justify why you'll only play it if your group agrees to cheat.

>Randomized stats
>Balance

Pick one. The two cannot coexist.

Except random generation is easier, retard. Repeated random generation produces better characters than methods with hard stat caps.

Random generation a crutch for people who can't make due with a balanced character, clearly.

>Not using it means you're cheating at a game where there aren't even winners and losers

Cheating?

How're you "cheating" with something that has an array of assured numbers for everyone vs randomly determined ones?

Cheating would be intentionally flubbing your rolls for 18's across the board. What arrays do is give everyone an standardized playing field without fiddley numbers.

Also it's "balance" was never predicated around it because old D&D's concept of "balance" was "I dunno we're just doing this by the skin of our teeth give the clerics 9th level spells like wizards and let them wear armor sure why not Dave wants to fuck with Craig's vampire character by pretending to be Peter Cushing."

>The two cannot coexist
Why, because you're completely unfamiliar with the wild world of statistics and math-for-twelve-year-olds? Damage is rolled on dice. Can that not possibly be balanced, either?

>strawman
Read the thread you illiterate retard. must have a pretty hard time typing with his straw hands!

Roll 1d6 for each stat. This tells you what your childhood favored. Low CON? Maybe you were sickly. Low INT? INT (in any version of D&D where 3d6 in order isn't a terrible idea) refers more to what your character knows than to actual intelligence, so maybe you were raised by someone who didn't really care about your education. High STR? Maybe you worked in the fields. And so on.

Now roll 2d6 for each stat and add that. These numbers reflect what you've worked on as an adult. Perhaps you discovered a joy of reading. Maybe you learned to dance and greatly improved from the clumsy child you were.

This should give you a lot to work with while leaving you a lot of room.

2nd post best post.

Still, it's funny trying to explain to grognards how literally hitting the random article button on wikipedia a few times would give them more to go off of for a character than random dice results will and watching them shriek and recoil with the sort of fervor normally reserved for the religious defending their holy books.

>Random generation a crutch for people who can't make due with a balanced character, clearly.
Nope. It's just the rules of the game against which the rest of the game is balanced. You keep trying to invent reasons that you then claim are why people who prefer playing by the rules must secretly prefer doing so. It's not about anything except the rules being designed around that premise. The end.

Well you clearly know how to post a response. So why not do so? Your lack of one seemed like, rather than responding to someone, you, you know: weren't.

Because the rules are: roll 3d6 for stats. Instead, you are doing something else to produce a more-favorable result than you otherwise might. How are you unclear about why that constitutes cheating?

Yes because damage is a short-term deal.

You deal 2d6 damage and you get a bad roll it means the monster doesn't die this turn.

You roll 3d6 dice and whelp looks like you're rolling -3 on 2 out of 6 of your abilities (that's 1/3 of your potential rolls) for the rest of that character's career now.

For someone condescending about "twelve year old math" you seem to not understand the difference between long and short term consequences and results.

A game will feature a lot of damage rolls, so the individual variation amongst them isn't a balance concern over time.

Stat rolls, however, happen once, and good or bad rolls on the part of one character or another can influence the balance of the whole rest of the game, with no ability to correct the situation.

ok

The long term is multiple characters over multiple games. I'm sorry that you're short-sighted or overly-invested in particular playing pieces in games, but it's really a problem with you.

And gamers will feature lots of games. You got bad stats? Your character dies. Roll a new one. Crybaby.

>the rules are

And I'm saying: those rules suck and a better version of those rules exist.

The fact you apparently think ANY MANNER of defiance of old rules constitutes "cheating" is... well I dunno what the fuck level of grognardery that is.

Gonna tell us how we're call cheating cause we moved on from ThaC0 while you're at it?

> Crybaby.

Ohhh look at the big man here.

Saying how unmanly you are for not playing tabletop games in this specific manner.

How mature and manly you must feel right now.

>And I'm saying: those rules suck and a better version of those rules exist.
I think that if the rules of the game are "do this," and you say "that doesn't favor the result I want so I will do something else," then you are cheating.

Who is forcing you to play D&D? No one. You like the rules of other games? Cool story, bruh. Go play it.

A character isn't a playing piece. A character is a character. Each one is an individual with their own personality, history and story to be told. I do not view any of my characters as disposable. That doesn't mean I never die, but I want each to have a decent chance to explore their own arc and interact with the world. Sacrificing an opportunity to do that because of bad rolls seems ludicrous and pointless.

If you need point buy to have fun because it's unfun to be unoptimized, you're playing tabletops wrong in my opinion. I don't make my players roll for every goddamn thing they do, so stats aren't even that applicable. My players can play retarded peasants and have fun with it.

>The fact you apparently think ANY MANNER of defiance of old rules constitutes "cheating" is... well I dunno what the fuck level of grognardery that is.

>Gonna tell us how we're call cheating cause we moved on from ThaC0 while you're at it?

>Shit, I got blown the fuck out. That'll get in the way have my role playing as someone who actually rolled a d20 before 2007. Better pretend to be too retarded to actually read the fucking thread, that'll show 'em!

So play 5e or other games that aren't D&D. Who's stopping you?

I ignored those claims because you attributed nonsense to me that I never claimed, then challenged me to defend the nonsense that you invented which, having never claimed it, I feel no compulsion to do. 3d6 stats is the basis for the rest of the game's mechanics. That isn't the same thing as your bullshit about:
>The fact you apparently think ANY MANNER of defiance of old rules constitutes "cheating" is... well I dunno what the fuck level of grognardery that is.
But yes: you're probably retarded if you think there is a problem with THAC0

>I hide my attempt to say anything behind green-text implications because I have nothing to say
>Also my vagina smells weird
Good one, but I can do it too.

Er, how are you defining "D&D?"

oD&D through pre-WotC-2e (no: Die Vecna Die! is not D&D)

And why is the definition that and that alone?

>game is literally the fifth edition of dnd
>not dnd
fuck off mate

It's not. You asked how I define it. You're welcome to arrive at your own conclusions.

Yes, but why did you choose this definition? On what basis are you deciding that WotC D&D is not D&D?

That I liked TSR and I dislike WotC and the awful shit they've done to the property since purchasing it.

You completely misunderstood what I meant by comfort zone.

I meant comfort zone as in roleplaying comfort zone. When you have stats that don't fit with a typical character that you'd create you're forced to create something new and explore a concept you're not used to exploring.

I really want to know what this is

I'm going to guess it's the Central Casting Heroes of Legend book, referenced in one of Spoony's videos

youtube.com/watch?v=pBmEFgd_4ho&feature=youtu.be&t=448

I think it was just 4 or 5 pages though
I'm going to comb my folders again.

None of the central casting supplements are structured the way user describes, they're great books but not the same.

Chuck it in the thread if you find it
I'm genuinely excited to read through something like this

>The long term is multiple characters over multiple games.

I was somewhat sympathetic until you posted this. This is a false equivalence. You're stuck with one character for a lot longer than you are with the results of a single damage roll, so the consequences of a weak character are prolonged, and affect more things.

Not that user, but maybe this?

This is what I was thinking of, thanks user!

Even if you don't want to do 3d6 down the line, it's also a fun thing to run through and just use standard array with your stats in the same highest to lowest order.

It helps build a PC concept because it forces you to focus on a character that fits a narrower set of parameters. If their train of thought comes to something that doesn't fit, they have to find a new train of thought, one that could very well be a path they never would have thought of exploring without the outside intervention.

People generally have a worse time making decisions, both in making GOOD decisions and making them in the first place, the more choice that is dumped in front of them.

Plus, forcing someone to roll stats also removes one of the bigger no-nos someone can have, which is "coming to character creation with a full character already in mind". I personally believe it isn't that bad on its own, but I can see why there are plenty of people who dislike such a thing. It runs the risk of characters that don't mesh well, developing the bad habit of always playing the same thing over and over, and also tends to breed being overly invested in one's character.

>The long term is multiple characters over multiple games. I'm sorry that you're short-sighted or overly-invested in particular playing pieces in games, but it's really a problem with you.
Some people play particularly long games, years upon years of one campaign. Some people care about narrative elements regarding their characters.

>You got bad stats? Your character dies. Roll a new one. Crybaby.
You roll a character who's too good at fighting and not much else. You want to do something that isn't fighting but everyone else is better at those things, and you're too good at fighting to die doing the one thing you're allowed to actually do. Now what smartass?

>trying to stretch the character idea into stats you've ended up with.
This is missing the point of random generation completely - it's to force you to create/play a character from scratch, rather than start with an pre-existing concept that you want to play and assign stats to fit. It gives the game a greater emergent property.

>D&D