Players rolling six 18's, a discussion

[Patrick Walsh]

If you're gonna have the PCs roll for stats - Let the dice stand where they fall, baby!

As several people have stated previously, dice rolling is not the method to use if you are worried about game balance. Dice allow either extreme and the DM has to accept that either end will possibly be in their game. It would be unfair to the player with six 3's to not have the same barganing position as the player with six 18's (ie, get stuff from the DM to make their character "more balanced"), yet this tends to happen, with the player on the bottom end of the curve being asked to suck it up.

Admittedly, the player will ask for a complete re-roll and the DM will tend to allow it so the play will "have fun playing the game". But if the goal is for the players to have fun, then six 18's has to be allowed to stand.

To avoid this issue, I'd recommend either the point buy system (the simplest method - if your players want super characters, just use more points) or a method of dice rolling where it is stated specifically beforehand what combined stat scores are not allowed (the method most likely to receive complaints from players - "What do you mean I have to throw out my character if I roll more that three 18's?").

[Timault Azal-Darkwarren]

If it's a game balance issue then I suggest you took a look at the extreme oposite that the PHB offers: If a player rolls stats that are "too low" with a minimal modifier bonus then that player may re-roll. I'd say that it is perfectly fine to ask a player to re-roll a new character if his bonuses are "too high."

Besides, a low stat is a great start in developing a character.

[jthilo]

Templeton Algrith wrote:

Folks, doesn't anyone else use Method Eight from the 3.5 DMG? 5d6, drop the lowest two. If the "rookie DM" theory is the case here, he might use just that and be considering that possibility, which greatly increases the chance of 18 in each set of five rolls by, what, a factor of six?

Compared to straight 3d6 it's even a little better than that (the factor is 7.67), but compared to the "standard" 4d6 the factor is only 2.19. I've never used this method myself, mainly for that reason. It does raise the average ability score by a little over a point, though, so it certainly has merit. It just doesn't seem "high-powered" enough to deserve that label.

Templeton Algrith wrote:

But, as an answer to the original question, I'd let the dice stand. After years of using the first-edition Unearthed Arcana rules for character generation (best-3-of-9d6 for a fighter's strength, for instance!)

Me too! (as noted above) I had forgotten all about it, though, until yesterday. Now that I've kicked it around, I *still* think it's a good way to go, though not as good as a point buy with a higher allocation (say, somewhere in the 40s).

Templeton Algrith wrote:

and STILL having only slightly above-average numbers

Word. I rolled up several sets of ability scores this way while kicking around a couple of ideas, and while they were certainly much better on the whole (if I had to guess, I'd say that on average it's better than 5d6 but not as good as 6d6) there were plenty of "hmmm" moments. In one set the 9d6 came up 14, while the 3d6 came up 17 (the best score of the seven). Slightly fewer than half of the sets had even a single 18. If I were a player following that method strictly and thinking "high-powered", I'd be rather underwhelmed.

Templeton Algrith wrote:

I'd love to see it

Likewise, though I won't hold my breath. Here's another mark in support of calling BS on those tales of "straight 18s long ago". When I was around ten years old, I remember hearing a couple of my D&D-playing friends discussing one of their characters with straight 18s. I didn't ask how they got those scores, but we certainly weren't concerned about fairness back then.

[Castilliano]

Here's my 2 cp (in 4 parts):
-Erik Mona, I believe, uses random rolling (4d6), 'reroll lame characters' in his current campaign. (from other threads.) So there are some nationally recognized DMs that do it. :)
-Random rolling is just that, and will often lead to game imbalances. If those imbalances made up for PC skill imbalances, that'd be great, but as one other mentioned earlier, often that's not the case and the rookie is handicapped. With the danger levels of the game fairly well laid out, that does make for a different game, but that's what a DM is for.
-Point Buy is lame. Cookie-cutter characters are boring and handicapping a PC by not using the "right" combo of stats is self-defeating & feels hollow IMO. One has to consider that sometimes somebody with innate sorcerous abilities is going to be the strongest in town or stronger than they are charming(especially if descended from a dragon).
-I use a pseudo-random method involving playing cards. Some cards are set to specific stats and others are set where the player wishes. The player chooses which set is which after they're laid out. There's also one re-shuffle if the player came in with a preconcieved concept for their PC. (sorta a nature & nurture combo) The system usually gives the PC 76 ability points (12.66... average, dropping 4-1s and 2-2s) which is a sliver higher than rolling (for those interested in figuring statistical norms). I invented the system after seeing a "+12 modifier" character fighting alongside a "+6 modifier" character with the latter always paling in comparison. (which is no fun, though the player in question rolled with it, so to speak) Most characters come out fairly standard, but with a small twist. Others come out intriguingly different, like fighters notably more dexterous than strong or one current 14 Wis Cleric (with a stat point at 4th!)who's tearing up his enemies with his combat prowess (and simply avoiding those spells w/ saves).

Anyway, that's my 2 cp. (for now) :)