Roll ability scores, create character around scores

If I HAVE to choose, the former.

But I prefer points buy.
And also to not play D&D.

Neither.

>you have to eat this shit sandwich or drink this gas
>do it faggot

No, you aren't forced to do it, you just have to favor one over another. It's "would you" rather than "you have to".

When faced with two terrible options, you either choose something else or don't pick anything at all.

>Create character, attempt to roll ability scores that fit said character

This is the right choice, unless the game tell you to roll something at random.

The stats define who your character is, they are part of the fluff

This
Preferably in GURPS, not an archaic game system.

PROTIP: BEING POINT BUY DONT INVALIDADE THE QUESTION

Roll first, character second to fit the attributes.

I enjoy coming up with characters using the limitations set by the attributes. Most of my more creative characters came about this way. If the rules don't have tables for race/class/etc., I'll make some myself for extra fun.

I like rolling first. It's fun to go in cold and make a character on the spot based on what the dice give me to work with.

The point is, rolling for stats is terrible.

>Find a gaming group that uses point buy.

>m-muh point buy

God you are some whiny fuckers. Just roll you pussies.

The latter.

I enjoy a bit of randomness from dice rolling, and how it on some level takes the decision out of my hands - compared to point buy, where I'm always tempted to make either a very rounded build or a very skewed one. Even if I cheat a little by freely putting whatever numbers I rolled wherever I chose, I still get something I would not have made myself.

Creating a character based on randomly rolled scores seems frustrating, especially when I don't have a good grip of how each class works yet.

Point buy is shit.

I'd rather everybody (including myself) roll scores and then try to make characters around them. It's the original suggested D&D character creation method for a reason: Getting your own first choice is boring.

This way you're forced to get out and explore classes/whatever that you don't know much about.

>m-muh rolled stats
God you are some whiny idiots. Just stop acting retarded you speds.

Do you prefer 4d6 drop lowest x6, or 3d6 x7 drop lowest?

Or hardcore grognard?

Rolled 6, 6, 6, 2, 4, 5, 2, 2, 6, 6, 5, 5 = 55 (12d6)

Create character.

Use this system:

Have base 6 in all stats and roll 12d6 adding every 2d6 down the line and assigning to stats as wished.
The average stat is 12 this way, 8 is minimum and 18 is maximum.

My players like it this way.

Rollan for example.
Making a Monk 2/Rogue to start at lvl 3.

An 18, 14, 15 10, 18, 16.

14 Str
18 Dex
16 Con
10 Int
18 Wis
15 Cha

>Monk with a +3 in Con, +4 in Dex/Wis, +2 in Str and Cha.

Mean of 3d10, plus 7, sell 2 for 1 once.

No retards but no showboats either

If I'm gonna roll for stats,
Then I'll let chance decide the character.
Prexisting concepts are for point buy systems.

The reason is because you werent expeted to survive very long. Rolling was because rping was literally meaningless in a gauntlet dungeon crawl

Rolled stats are garbage

You're retarded.

Rolling for stats is a valueless, pointless mechanic that only continues due to pointless bullshit nostalgia and should be completely forgotten.

Well, with a few exceptions. Gonzo comedy games like MAID RPG are the only examples I've seen where point buy actually works, because failing a roll is just as good as succeeding when it comes to the point of the game, ending up in strange and funny situations.

But in anything where success or failure actually matters, leaving your characters vital statics up to chance is just stupid.

Yes it does. Who the fuck would buy stats first, then say "well I guess I need a character concept so I'll build around what I already made"?
Unless you're taking seriously hardcore powergamers forced to roleplay.

So roll for stats is bullshit and points buy mostly doesn't work, do you have a specific third alternative or does that post miss something?

I do mostly #1

In one game I rolled ultra mediocre stats all around; my highest stat was a 12.

I roleplayed it as my character being a shopkeeper who accidentally fell into a hole to the underdark.

>points buy mostly doesn't work

What are you even talking about? Point buy works fine.

Sometimes I'll read through a new game and think 'Ohh, that class/ability/playstyle looks fun' and build around that, although I always make sure they're a fully fleshed out character regardless of where the concept started.

>Have character concept that you want to play
>Roll stats
>See if you can play your character with those stats
>If not, adjust

This guy gets it.

I have to admit that point buy is probably better for D and D, given the range of shit that you can end up with otherwise, but some systems suffer less for it.

Rogue Trader and the rest of that little family are a good example - more stats in general, the ability to buy them higher with xp and a hard minimum (and the Origin Path stuff) means you'll almost always be able to actually do your character's job.

Rolled 5, 6, 5, 1, 4, 3, 3, 3, 5, 3 = 38 (10d6)

It depends on the type of game we're playing. Both the setting, and also the mood.

Is it a quick pick-up game? A one shot? A tournament game? Are we planning on a longer campaign for 6 months or more? Is it high-mortality? Is the system one that needs specific roles filled? What kind of party are we playing, and do I need to worry about integrating with the other players characters?

Anyways.

I suppose I would probably prefer to roll ability scores first if doing 3d6 down the line, and create character first if I can assign the stats however I want.

Or you can do something like this.

Or change it right up and do a combination where you get 48 points and assign a minimum 8 in each stat and then roll 10d6 to see how many "total" points you get to assign.

Right. So with rolling 10d6 to make up the remaining 108 potential points for 18 in each state, or max rolls for 3d6 for each stat, we end up with 38 points to spend.

You still have to make choices, you could still not be able to make a Paladin, but at least you have some flexibility with where you put the points.

On average mathematically, with this system you end up with 35 points to spend. Over six stats, that's 6 points in 5 stats and one in 5, or 14 in all and 13 in one. Want 18 (another 4) in one stat, let's say Str. 16 in Con after?

Str 18 Str 18
Dex 13 Dex 13
Con 13 Con 16
Wis 13 Wis 12
Int 13 Int 11
Cha 13 Cha 13

Etc. So you see how it creates a fairly balanced but playable character.

Rolled 1, 3, 5, 3, 5, 1, 3, 6, 5, 6 = 38 (10d6)

Rolled 8, 9, 1, 5, 9, 10 = 42 (6d10)

Want to make it less point-buy, more random? Roll your d10 6 times and go down the line. Average roll is 5.53

> anydice.com is what I used.

So

STR 16
DEX 17
CON 9
WIS 13
INT 17
CHA 18

Not too fucking shabby, given that crap CON I would probably play as a surprisingly good Bard but you could just as feasibly be a Wizard of some sort. Maybe a rogue, or a spellblade IDFK I don't really play D&D that much but I do love dice and rolling up characters.

I never see the point in adjusting/attempting to balance rolls.

If you want pointless bullshit randomness, go with that. If you want non-randomness, use point buy. Anything in between is just busywork.

2nd one, but if its just not possible to create the concept I had in mind I'll move onto option 1

It's called "I hate that point-buy makes me feel like less of a special snowflake, so I'll agree to some convoluted dice rolling convention that almost guarantees me having stats equal to or better than the most generous point-buy".

In other words it's pure undiluted turbo-autism.
So given it's Veeky Forums, this thread should go places.

>Who the fuck would buy stats first, then say "well I guess I need a character concept so I'll build around what I already made"?

Someone doing a conceptual character based at stats choice.

How to have roll with some sort of freedom.

Roll stat order at random.
Roll 3d6 for stat 1 and for stat 2. Decide if you want to swap or not.
Roll 3d6 for stat 3 and for stat 4. Decide if you want to swap or not.
Roll 3d6 for stat 5 and for stat 6. Decide if you want to swap or not.

Or you could make
Roll 2 stats at random, roll 3d6, decide where the number go.
Continue doing that until you rolled everything

speed 12
dex 5
int 12
str 12
will 10
health 12

I like to roll 3d6 in order or arrange when playing AD&D 2e, but it does not apply to modern games.
Higher stats were less needful in those eras. A perfectly good fighter could be had with the minimum of 9 strength for example while today starting with less than 16 or so is considered foolhardy.

Even back then Gary himself said rolling 3d6 was a terrible idea.

It's really only a problem with shit like D&D. Even then, mostly only because of minimum requirements. 12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.

The main reason for rolling stats is to force people to try and play creatively, either with a class they don't normally play, or in a class where they have to use lateral thinking to get around optimization.

Then again, you went with the "X creates a special snowflake"! argument, so I'm pretty sure you're just an autistic faggot that thinks stats are relevant past determining character creation.

If you're going to play them game relying on your stats instead of just using them, you should probably go back to vidya.

From Grognardia

> I found myself thinking about this because, earlier today, I'd re-read the original appearance of the barbarian sub-class for AD&D, which Gary Gygax offered up for consideration in issue 63 of Dragon (July 1982). Unlike most sub-classes, the barbarian has no ability score prerequisites. Instead, Gygax offers an unusual method for determining ability scores:

Strength: best 3 of 9D6
Intelligence: 3D6
Wisdom: 4D4
Dexterity: best 3 of 7D6
Constitution: best 3 of 8D6
Charisma: 3D6

> Clearly, this is an area where Gary had a different opinion from my own. He explains his position in a post to ENWorld from December 2003:

> in 1972 we all rolled 3d6, but later when AD&D made the stats more meaningful, players would keep rolling until they got more viable numbers, so then we switched to various systems--roll seven or eight times with 3d6 and keep the six best totals or roll d4d and throw out the lowest die.

> After all, the object of the game is to have fun, and weak PCs aren't much fun for most players. Even fine role-players want characters with at least one or two redeming stats...

iirc that recommendation related to tournaments and not to ordinary gaming rounds and campaigns.

This is something that gets passed over a lot when people bring up Gygax.

He viewed tournaments, D&D as a commercial product, and individual groups and campaigns as very different things.

Tournaments are strictly structured so they flow quickly and easily from character creation to module completion because of limited time playing with strangers.

D&D as a product needed first of all to sell lol, but second to provide a framework for new GMs to be familiar with, and for players and GMs to be able to consistently play across different groups.

Whereas individual campaigns could do anything. Rule Zero, if you don't like something houserule it.

One of the things that made Gygax such a legend was the fact that he had no problem tailoring his games to his players on the fly.

I'm pretty sure he would have been fine doing whatever kind of stat generation his group wanted to do, so they could get past character creation and on to playing the actual game.

Heck, you can even work bad stats into a game. Playing a fighter with 8 strength? Well, one of his goals is now to recover Bracelets of the Ogre to increase his strength. Refluff it as a family heirloom that was lost in his Grandfathers time, or further back, who started a line of great warriors despite not being physically imposing himself, and the character is a fighter because he is expected to carry on the tradition. Or that he was passed over for inheritance because of his weakness and is trying to regain it.

Can't do that in a tournament though.

Point buy.

>create dozens of character concepts, save them until rolling stats that fit a particular one

What if the system does not support rolling stats?
Like Star Wars...

Then you're playing a system with better design and you can ignore the idiots shouting about rolled stats.

Hooray!

It's not "better design." It's just different design, coming at an RPG from a different angle. Modern RPGs want you to make the character that you want to make, representing a big heroic dude who's awesome at everything before the game even starts. Oldschool D&D is based around playing a regular person who has the potential for greatness, and then strives to achieve that greatness, rather than having it given to them.

Essentially, you're playing a more or less regular person instead of the greatest in the tri-state area, and until we get to Gattaca people are stuck with the genetics they were given.

Except that's horseshit.

Pointbuy does not mean high power. It just means having choice rather than introducing pointless randomness.

You can have pointbuy in a low power game just fine.

> pointless randomness
You mean the very foundation of genetics itself? Pointbuy is either a gamist aberration in which a person can actually choose their own physical and mental characteristics, or it's representative of you the player choosing to inhabit the body of a single person drawn from a relatively large pool of candidates. Neither of those are representative of the vast majority of the population. Ergo, even if you're a shitty low-powered hero, you're still a hero as a function of the chargen system.

Not saying that pointbuy is bad, of course. Just saying that rolling for stats is a perfectly viable roleplaying option, because most of us poor humans didn't get to choose our stats either, and we seem to do alright. Usually people complaining about stat-rolling are folks that are simply sperging out because they didn't get the exact stat allocation they wanted, rather than just playing a character that has faults and/or weaknesses.

I prefer 14 in every stat and roll 6d4, down the line. More hardcore since you have to take what you roll in a stat.

I haven't rolled on Veeky Forums in over a year, probably doing it wrong.

I don't even... What? What the fuck are you talking about?

>12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.
I said something like this a month ago and I get shit on by everyone for being an idiot, I'm glad someone agrees with me.

Though my statement was a +3 vs +4 modifier isn't that use of a deal.

It entirely depends on the system. In some cases, it isn't a big deal, in other cases it can massively affect your effectiveness. It all depends on how finely tuned the math is.

As the poster you were replying to said, in old school it wasn't a big deal, but in 3.PF or 4e the difference between a 12 and an 18 can make a massive difference to what a character is capable of doing.

I'll try to use simpler words this time.
A) Normal people don't get to choose their own stats. Their stats are randomly derived from their parents.
B) Point-buy lets you choose your stats. Normal people don't get to do this.
C) Therefore, if you're using point-buy, you aren't a normal person.

Following C), there can be two major reasons for this. Either you say 1) "fuck the police" and assign whatever stats you want where you want because it's an RPG and fuck realism. Or you say 2) "oh, well, I'm sure someone in this area has the stats and background I want, I'll just play them."

Both 1) and 2) make your character heroic compared to regular mortals, for different reasons.

Neither 1) nor 2) have the capacity to simulate playing a flawed character, unless you CHOOSE to make a flawed character. Thus, they are significantly different from real life, because real life is all about becoming aware of your own flaws and weaknesses, and either overcoming them, or simply coming to terms with them.

Stat rolling allows for RP where you attempt to overcome your own flaws in a way that point-buy simply cannot duplicate, because any flaws in point-buy are part of your character concept rather than actual flaws.

Stat rolling and point-buy lead to different but equally valid playstyles.

Let me boil down this pointless non-debate for you spergs.

A guy wants to spend an evening pretending to be a knight on a quest. You can either: a) let him play a fucking knight and suggest which stats/skills he should pick out or b) tell him that a random string of numbers over which he has no control by definition is preventing him from doing so.

There really isn't anything else to it.

This is an absurd meta argument that has no bearing on an actual game.

A dragonborn paladin in DnD is by far less normal than an office worker who ends up investigating a monster attack in GURPS. Its crazy to pretend otherwise.

Unless you want to use a pointless definition of normal that just makes you sound like you are trying to denigrate point buy supporters.

I get what you're saying. I just have no idea why it's relevant to RPG's or why you're somehow equating character generation mechanics with genetics. It makes no fucking sense.

>imaginary flaws that I choose for my imaginary character are different than imaginary flaws that are randomly assigned to my imaginary character

You realize how dumb you sound, right?

user rolled terribly for his genetics, thus now suffers from autism, making it impossible for him to differentiate games from reality

> 12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.

Bull fucking shit. Especially at lower levels. In 5e your stats are going to be most of your attack modifier.

The difference between a 12(+1) vs 18(+4) is a 15% hit rate and is the lion's share of a character's attack modifier. That is difference between missing half the time and two thirds the time.

There's no actual link to the way you role-play your character and your character's mechanics. It's meta by definition. Even for pallies, who have actual role-play restrictions, you get a very different character if you're using the 2e Complete Paladin's Handbook or you're trying not to be a complete retard.

Paladins have unusually high minimum stats, so they're going to be unusual and rare regardless of whether you're using point buy.

>There's no actual link to the way you role-play your character and your character's mechanics.

What? This makes no sense.

Your characters mechanics are a representation of the character you're roleplaying. Having a good, functional set of mechanics is helpful in a roleplaying sense because it lets you clearly define your character capabilities and have a good idea of the ways in which they can meaningfully interact with the world and setting.

Your characters is more than their mechanics, but if the mechanics aren't a useful part of the character then they might as well not exist.

>things you choose to do
>things you don't choose to do, but happen anyway
These are not the same. If you have a problem with things that are imaginary, maybe Veeky Forums isn't the place for you?

From an in-universe perspective, characters are born, not made. Rolling for stats simulates that better. If you don't care about simulationism, then it's completely irrelevant to you. But that doesn't mean it's completely irrelevant to everyone.

Is no one going to mention how there's literally nothing stopping you from assigning your points at random in a point-buy system? Roll-for-stats is the objectively inferior chargen method solely due to the fact that it can easily be replicated in a broader system such as point-buy.

>I am not pretending to be autistic because I choose to, I do it because the die told me

I didn't even begin to claim that mechanics weren't a useful part of the character. But just because your strength is 18 doesn't mean you're obligated to play a strongman, nor if you have 6 constitution are you required to play a kid with an inhaler. Your character's personality is the majority of their RP, and that's not really linked to your stats in most systems. You can absolutely play womanizer with a shitty CHA score, you just probably won't get many ladies. Perhaps you're suave as hell, but you smell terrible all the time, or perhaps you're Eric Idle's wink-wink nudge-nudge guy.

>But just because your strength is 18 doesn't mean you're obligated to play a strongman

>If your character is strong you are not obligated to play a strong character.

I'm not parsing that one.

Strongman = carnival guy who lifts things heavy stuff for a living.

>D&D
>Simulationist

Also

>Implying all the hardcore simulationist games like Hero System and GURPS use random chargen.

Underrated post. Too bad fa/tg/guys are autistic min/maxing munchkins and wouldnt know good philosophy if it pissed in their face.

But I guess that's what happens when you're born with low INT and try to role play a smart person.

>12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.
You're both fucking idiots and should actually learn the game that you're playing.

Without even getting into the nitty-gritty mechanical aspects, a character with 18 STR would have a light load of 100 lb. while a character with 12 STR would have a light load of 43 lb.

d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm

In case you haven't noticed or just suck at math, that's a difference of 57 lbs. which is a big fucking difference.

Gee, user, maybe if that's the case you shouldn't just go in flailing like a retard.

Maybe you could consider using a ranged weapon instead, which uses Dex? Or weapon with the Finesse quality, which also uses Dex?

Maybe work with another party member to gain Advantage?

Cover doesn't work only for ranged weapons, get yourself a spear and stab from behind a buddy, or a barrier. Alternatively, don't just stand there, hit it and quit it and make the enemy decide between chasing you and giving an AoO to your buddy or letting you get away.

Maybe use some thought before getting into fights to prep the area, or position yourself. Maybe look to see if you might get ambushed somewhere.

You can also interact with one object or feature of The Environment for free each round, so use that too. Knock stuff over, throw something at your enemy to distract him. Or get your GM to allow you to try and distract them verbally since there aren't really skills for that.

Honestly, engaging all this sort of stuff is one of the reasons people argue FOR rolling stats. So that you're forced to work around your weaknesses instead of just rolling your way through shit. That's what ruins D&D players for other games where they don't understand how beneficial things like positioning, or cover, or terrain, or preparation etc. can be.

And once again, Finesse.

7/10, gave me a pause for a bit.

Except none of what you said makes any difference to his core point? Which was that it is a significant difference?

If anything, pointing out ways to close the difference just means you acknowledge that the difference is significant.

> Without even getting into the nitty-gritty mechanical aspects, a character with 18 STR would have a light load of 100 lb. while a character with 12 STR would have a light load of 43 lb.

Either don't carry a bunch of heavy shit around, or get I dunno maybe a cart or something? Or get the guy with 18 STR to help you carry shit.

Oh, I didn't realize I was a baby at character creation. Gosh, I sure am a precocious toddler!

Genetics =/= Environment.

A low STR to me, represents a person who was malnourished during their childhoood, or didn't bother to do physical exercise, not someone with Muscular Dystrophy or some shit.

I honestly can't see genetics accounting for more than 1 or 2 points.

Same with intellect, wisdom, charisma etc. 90% of who you are is what you've done with your Human base template, excluding outliers from genetic disorders.

People IRL didn't choose to start off stronger than others but we, as players, choose who our characters are going to end up being.

We choose their race, their class, their alignment, their spells, even their height, weight, age, and sex. These characters are not autonomous and they live or die based on our direction as players.

Genetics have nothing to with rolled stats and that argument has no bearing because this is supposed to be a game where everyone is supposed to contribute equally to the party dynamic.

On a related note, I always thought it was weird as hell that there's more mechanical difference between strength 18 and 18/100 than there is 18 and 6, especially since there's only a 1% chance it even becomes relevant for a given character.

Yet another bizarre D&D quirk.

>12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.
>Hurr just don't carry heavy shit xD

Pic related

It's called teamwork, and is a viable solution to the problem of "I am not strong enough to carry this on my own."

Playing with 12 STR just means I play differently, not that I can't play.

I mean, what do you do when you point buy a wizard and have low Strength?

Even when I roll stats, I use it to create the character still. WHY does he have low Con but high Str? It doesn't make sense for him to have been bookish and not physical as a reason for low Con in that case. Maybe he had a sickness as a child he never recovered from, or grew up in a sanitized environment, or inherited something from his parents, or has really bad allergies, etc.

Why does he have such high Cha? Is my character just really good looking, with good physical stats? Or does he have high intelligence and is manipulative and able to persuade people? Or a high Wis score, and he's just a genuine and caring person and people respond to that.