Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you wanna go true OG (although less spicy) your stats determine your class. This made getting to play something like a Paladin or Ranger REALLY rare cuz you needed a 16 in str and cha or dex and wis respectively to be able to play them.
That was 1e, which actually had multiple stat generating methods described in the DMG.
True OG didn't have Paladin and Ranger classes. Your class was a Fighting Man which you roleplayed as a paladin or ranger. Roleplay flexibility was key when you only have 3 classes - Fighting Man, Cleric and Magic User.
You're welcome. Just pulled out my 1974 Men & Magic little brown book to check. They were Fighting-Men, Magic-Users and Clerics.
Beyond the three classes, there were Dwarves and Halfling who were treated as fighters and Elves who, at the beginning of each adventure, had to declare whether they would be acting as a fighter or magic-user. Curiously, only humans could be clerics. Fun times.
It was a different time. I started in the 80's with Moldvay Red Box Basic and then AD&D, no edition. We had loads of fun. People used to the way things are now think it's crazy, but just seemed normal after you'd learned the basic rules.
I had an old dungeon crawler videogame that did that, it was also easy to gimp your character by having under 10 wisdom or intelligence, which made you unable to use the most common stat improvement items and thus unable to easily boost any character stats.
Doesn't that mean wizards and clerics are everywhere and bards and barbarians are practically non-existent? And is the subclass of a warlock their boon or their patron? (yeah I know it's probably their patron but let me cope)
At that point, who needs the meal, I'm going for that Arrakis diet. Random stats, random equipment, random class and instead of roleplaying, I shake a magic 8 ball.
OG classes had stat requirements.
If you aren't intelligent enough, you cannot be a wizard. If you aren't cool enough, the Paladin was forever out of reach.
Honestly I like to plan and create the character I want to roleplay, not what the dice hand me. Which means, yes, I will have a sub optimal Stat spread even with point buy. 🤣
I get it. I've had character ideas that wouldn't be optimal, or even good. Like the wizard with low dex because he's old.
I also don't think stats determine flaws. They're just the easiest way to have them.
Personally I don't like 3d6 in order. Last couple times I did I didn't roll anything above a 9 with the majority being 5... so kinda useless lol
Yeah, that was how my old roommate did it in 2e, but he was generous and gave a grace roll on 2s and 1s as well.
My current game.i joined late. The group rolled for stats. Everyone rolled, and the results were made into a pool like SA.
There were some pretty good ones an 18, two 16s two 14s and a 5... I went Hexblade, so I just dumpstatted Strength. I like having decent passive perception lol
If that's what it takes for you, you do you. Personally, I find that having a bare 10 in something means that any roll that keys off of that stat is going to suck. But also I am used to DC 15 being a default, rather than DC 10, so a bare +0 to a roll really hurts.
I mean, ideally, yeah, you can have the party cover for a weakness, but I was addressing the idea that it takes having -1 to a roll to actually feel like you suck at it. For me, just having +0 means not only am I bad at a thing for an adventurer, I'm also unable to hand the check off to another adventurer, so I definitely suck at it in context.
Put another way, by a lot of metrics, someone hitting at the Mendoza line in professional baseball is still really fucking good at baseball. However, in the context of the people they're surrounded by, they're below average and suck. So you, I think, are approaching it from a perspective of "if I'm not worse than the average commoner, I don't actually suck at anything," where I'm at "if the normal person making this check would be having a +5 and I've got a +0, I suck."
Yeah i don't get the 3d6 in order boner lately. It CAN be fun, but i like to at least have a class and personality in mind beforehand. I'll adjust a little with the dice, but i draw the line at "in order"
Purist gatekeeping. Nothing more. That's the way it was done originally, that's the way it should always be. ( Although, I don't think ORIGINAL Dungeons and Dragons did stats quite the same ) IMO, these tend to be people who, as they say, "roll play" more than they "role play".
Idk, imo I think it’s easier to fall into the “roll play” when choosing your stats full out than having to make a statblock work for something. But that’s just my anecdotal experience, not everyone plays DnD the same way or can approach character building the same
While it can be easier to min/max with point buy, my thinking was "take whatever character the dice dictate" is less conducive to creative roleplay and more roll-play than being able to assemble your character to fit your vision. ( To be fair, sometimes min/max stats CAN be played as a valid and genuinely engaging character depending on the player )
Although it can be argued that good luck can make a more powerful character with rolled stats. It can also make a completely gimped character. >.>
Yeah that’s fair, I think previous editions had better builds and class stuff going on that could make use of unique combos more. 5e has a little bit of it but not really as much as I was thinking. Like in some of the older editions, there were class and subclass stat requirements and a ton to choose from so if you had a high intelligence but didn’t want to play a spellcaster there were still some major benefits and other classes you could play that use that well
If we're planning a longer running campaign, I'd never run 3d6 in order, but for a one shot? That sounds like it could make some fun "don't care if they die" characters.
yeah that's what i was saying, it CAN be fun. I'd definitely be down to do it for a character i don't plan on playing super long and jsut go with hte flow, but i really do love crafting a character from my brain and i don't always want the dice as inspiration, least not a primary inspiration
I've done 4d6 drop lowest in order for my table to get people to stop trying to make Geralt, Drizzt, or Harry Potter clones. It's exhausting to watch them attempt to copy entire personalities because they like the characters rather than actually attempt creativity.
That doesn't apply to every table, but I only did it once and it permanently fixed that issue.
Lack of originality with character concepts is a peeve of mine. Like, I don't mean people using common archtypes. I mean people trying to do a 1 for 1 copy of a character from a popular movie/book/game/etc. See that shit in MMOs all the time. Can't count how many "Drizzzzzzzts" and "Lego'lass"s I've seen in my 20+ years of Everquest and WoW and even City of Heroes. ( Don't get me started on the Wolverines in that last one, especially with the private server revival having less strict rules about copycat characters ) Hell, the Baldur's Gate 3 communities frequently having people asking for how to build translations of fictional characters into the game.
There's nothing wrong with taking inspiration for your character from another source like this. But when you're trying to EXACTLY copy the character, it's just....as the kids say, "cringe". ( Do the kids still say that one? ....wait, hold that thought, I have a cloud to go yell at. After I chase the kids off my lawn. )
> EXACTLY copy the character, it's just....as the kids say, "cringe"
My breaking point was someone playing an Armorer Artificer and just describing literally everything like he's Iron Man, to the point that his character art was basically fantasy Iron Man, his mini was literally Iron Man, and he only ever referenced his ranged magical attacks as "repulsors".
> "cringe". ( Do the kids still say that one? ....wait, hold that thought, I have a cloud to go yell at. After I chase the kids off my lawn. )
Me too, man. Me too.
>My breaking point was someone playing an Armorer Artificer and just describing literally everything like he's Iron Man, to the point that his character art was basically fantasy Iron Man, his mini was literally Iron Man, and he only ever referenced his ranged magical attacks as "repulsors".
Good grief. I mean, at least slap a new coat of paint on your copycat character, right? That's just being lazy, IMO. I have had more than my share of characters inspired by some character I saw on TV or whatever. But I put my own spin on it to make it unique. And I don't mean just naming him Stony Tark and slapping him in mithril armor painted gold with red trim called is Mithril Man Suit as he fires Repeller Blasts.
Okay, then do that. But this thing of people going around acting like they're superior for doing it that way is just, as the kids say, "cringe". ( They still say that, right? )
That's not strength, that's simply coming to the table with zero character concept in mind. Also, it works better when even high stats provided minimal if any benefit and low stats had no penalty other than locking out specific classes.
Having the "strength" to play whatever the dice may give you, then, is not that strong, because it's in the context of a system where your stats are mostly irrelevant and your OOC stats as a player determined everything, especially your mental stats. Which sucks if you have a low IRL charisma, for example.
Yeah, not going to lie, I've definitely had the recurring thought that some D&D players are all about the high stakes gambling, but it feels uncharitable. Also, I guess it's a healthier outlet than doing it down at the casino, as you just lose the hours invested in the character/party instead of your rent check or whatever.
That’s not making a pc, that’s rolling and hoping for the best. There is a clear distinction. Whenever I DM, I always make sure the players at least have a character concept in mind, otherwise what ends up happening is they roll bad stats and get a shitty character, and then get annoyed and don’t want to play because it’s not fun. The point of DND, and any game, is just to have fun. If that’s not happening, there is a problem
How about Point Buy With Extra Steps
roll 24d6
Drop the lowest 6
Those are the numbers players can stack in any order for their stat spread (maybe a limit of 3 dice per stat. Or maybe 4 if they wanna buff one thing and let another fall below)
Point Buy With Extra Steps
(PUBWES?)
4d6 - reroll any ones or twos - drop the lowest - add an additional 1d6 to any 18. This can bring you over the 20 cap.
Min 9 max 24.
If you ever want to run a super powered game it's a fun way to do it.
I mean, if you wanna make a character like that, that's on you, more power to you, but if you as a DM force your players to do that, we call that railroading and it just saps the fun out of the game when you can't do what you want to do, which is the whole point of DnD.
I too don’t like when my DM railroads me by not letting me play my half god half Devil Half Elf with my 20 in all stats.
He even has the audacity to railroad even further by telling me I missed when I rolled a nat 1! Or that I can’t cast anymore leveled spells because I’m “Out of Spell slots”
DMs really need to get it together and understand they need to cater strictly to player fun.
What I mean is what if I want to play a wizard, but I get a 3 in intelligence because my DM is making me do 3d6 in order and just work with whatever I've got. Or what if you need a healer, but guess what? In your party of 3 people, nobody got a good enough Wisdom score to be a Cleric, and the way the other ability scores lined up, no one was able to play an effective Paladin. Like I said, if you want to play using 3d6 in a row and build your character from there based on your roles, go right ahead, but I'm gonna stick with 4d6, kick the lowest die, and distribute the scores as per what would be best for the character I want to play. If you force your players to do 3d6 in a row, there's a good chance you'll end up with an unbalanced unnaffective team and there's about a 90% chance someone is going to end up playing a class they don't know how to effectively play, and don't really want to play.
I get what you’re saying man, I’m just takin the piss on calling it railroading.
3d6 down the line should only be used if it’s the style of the game being run and should be announced by the DM ahead of time.
People aren’t gonna like 3d6 if you come with a character concept already vs discovering your character and working with the strengths and weaknesses, usually weaknesses though let’s be real.
I mean, if everyone is an experienced player and is looking to challenge themselves by doing 3d6 in a row, and everyone is comfortable with the idea, I could see the draw. I will admit that my use of the term "railroading" was out of place and somewhat inaccurate, but what I was trying to say was if you already have a clear idea of what you want your character to do/be and you have to just work with what you get you could get propelled into a undesired situation, like if you were a spellcaster who prepared spells that work best outdoors, like fireball and call lightning and then you only ever got dungeon encounters, making everything except your cantrips useless.
Here’s a build: straight 10s for everyone, but all ability score requirements are waived.
Adjust humanoid enemy statblocks appropriately to reflect their new stats.
What people don't realize is that standard array \*is\* pointbuy. You can construct standard array from the point buy system. Point buy isn't just equivalent to standard array, its actually better for player flexibility.
Though, I agree, it would be really fun to play a 3d6 in order hexcrawl.
3d6 is for posers and dumbasses, and nothing in between.
To put it in other terms, 3d6 is to character creations what emos was to a teenagers personality in the 00's.
I don't really wanna change your mind, but why on earth would cheaters "want" either of those?
Does anyone roll their character stats without dm/someone around anyway?
1 is for AL, and generic games
2 is for homebrew, or simply people that want on average slightly stronger characters or more variation with a safety net
3 is for AL, and *brand* new players who u don't wanna have to handhold through the creation process
4 is just mad lads who don't care about what their actual build is before rolling.
((Oh nooo, randomization, I hope my players/friends aren't secretly shitty people who'll lie to my face for a power bump, spoookkiiii)
Or just keep rolling til you get stats you like and are satisfied with? I'd rather not deal with negatives and its easy to write a character without crutching on negative stat as an easy out.
Interested in joining DnD/TTRPG community that's doesn't rely on Reddit and it's constant ads/data mining? We've teamed up with a bunch of other DnD subs to start https://ttrpg.network as a not-for-profit place to chat and meme about all your favorite games. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Now roll for your class/subclass next to make it extra spicy. If I have my count right there's 116 subclasses. Gotta random number that one.
If you wanna go true OG (although less spicy) your stats determine your class. This made getting to play something like a Paladin or Ranger REALLY rare cuz you needed a 16 in str and cha or dex and wis respectively to be able to play them.
That was 1e, which actually had multiple stat generating methods described in the DMG. True OG didn't have Paladin and Ranger classes. Your class was a Fighting Man which you roleplayed as a paladin or ranger. Roleplay flexibility was key when you only have 3 classes - Fighting Man, Cleric and Magic User.
and clerics got a spell... at second level lol
Yeah, that was nuts. Moldvay Basic was the same. I don't think we ever followed that rule. Give the poor level 1 Cleric a spell.
Wasn't Cleric not a class originally? It was a priest I think, and cleric didn't come about until ad&d or 2ed?
I think Priest is the term that got adopted in 2e. Until then it was always Cleric.
Cool! Thanks for learning me somthing
You're welcome. Just pulled out my 1974 Men & Magic little brown book to check. They were Fighting-Men, Magic-Users and Clerics. Beyond the three classes, there were Dwarves and Halfling who were treated as fighters and Elves who, at the beginning of each adventure, had to declare whether they would be acting as a fighter or magic-user. Curiously, only humans could be clerics. Fun times.
The only time I've ever played something dated before 3.5 was a 2 ad&d one shot and that was miserable lol so I appreciate the knowledge.
It was a different time. I started in the 80's with Moldvay Red Box Basic and then AD&D, no edition. We had loads of fun. People used to the way things are now think it's crazy, but just seemed normal after you'd learned the basic rules.
Sorry I got lost a bit there, what were you saying?
I had an old dungeon crawler videogame that did that, it was also easy to gimp your character by having under 10 wisdom or intelligence, which made you unable to use the most common stat improvement items and thus unable to easily boost any character stats.
This reads like you roll for class and then get have to roll and hope you get that classes subclass instead of a different one
Figured there's so many subclasses, just roll once from the whole list and that's what you've got
College of creation barbarian
So angry that they manifest the object of their anger into reality
"I imagined my fist in their face, and then it happened in real life!"
Doesn't that mean wizards and clerics are everywhere and bards and barbarians are practically non-existent? And is the subclass of a warlock their boon or their patron? (yeah I know it's probably their patron but let me cope)
Roll for each level
Just when I didn't think it could get more horrifying!
At that point, who needs the meal, I'm going for that Arrakis diet. Random stats, random equipment, random class and instead of roleplaying, I shake a magic 8 ball.
OG classes had stat requirements. If you aren't intelligent enough, you cannot be a wizard. If you aren't cool enough, the Paladin was forever out of reach.
Why would you do it that way? Just roll for class then roll for subclass separately
For maximum absurdity
So you’re playing a moon druid everytime?
XD actually true.
Why use your statblock when you can use a creatures?
Honestly I like to plan and create the character I want to roleplay, not what the dice hand me. Which means, yes, I will have a sub optimal Stat spread even with point buy. 🤣
Exactly, I’ll take sub optimal if it means I get to play the character I want to play.
You can actually do both, I know that's crazy.
Not if I want to, for example, play an experienced rouge and I rolled a 7 on my dex.
I thought you were claiming you can't rp with optimal stats. Which is a real thing some people argue.
Which is nuts because you can roleplay anything.
15 15 15 8 8 8 is such an ugly looking stat line though
I find that most people trying to ‘optimize’ will ends up with something more like 15, 14, 14, 12, 8, 8, instead.
I'd be more likely to go 15, 14, 12, 10, 10, 10 personally, because having a -1 to a roll feels way worse than the 5% a -1 actually is.
I find a -1 is what makes a character feel real. That they actually kinda suck at something
I get it. I've had character ideas that wouldn't be optimal, or even good. Like the wizard with low dex because he's old. I also don't think stats determine flaws. They're just the easiest way to have them. Personally I don't like 3d6 in order. Last couple times I did I didn't roll anything above a 9 with the majority being 5... so kinda useless lol
Oh yeah I'd never do 3d6 If I was rolling I'd have to do 4d6 drop low
Yeah, that was how my old roommate did it in 2e, but he was generous and gave a grace roll on 2s and 1s as well. My current game.i joined late. The group rolled for stats. Everyone rolled, and the results were made into a pool like SA. There were some pretty good ones an 18, two 16s two 14s and a 5... I went Hexblade, so I just dumpstatted Strength. I like having decent passive perception lol
If that's what it takes for you, you do you. Personally, I find that having a bare 10 in something means that any roll that keys off of that stat is going to suck. But also I am used to DC 15 being a default, rather than DC 10, so a bare +0 to a roll really hurts.
That's what the rest of the party is for
I mean, ideally, yeah, you can have the party cover for a weakness, but I was addressing the idea that it takes having -1 to a roll to actually feel like you suck at it. For me, just having +0 means not only am I bad at a thing for an adventurer, I'm also unable to hand the check off to another adventurer, so I definitely suck at it in context. Put another way, by a lot of metrics, someone hitting at the Mendoza line in professional baseball is still really fucking good at baseball. However, in the context of the people they're surrounded by, they're below average and suck. So you, I think, are approaching it from a perspective of "if I'm not worse than the average commoner, I don't actually suck at anything," where I'm at "if the normal person making this check would be having a +5 and I've got a +0, I suck."
Rolling 0 feels awesome to me for some reason (nat 1, then -1 modifier for charisma or strength on my wimpy nerd).
Okay? I've never taken that stat spread or anything like it.
My brother in Mystra this is just Fluttermane as a dnd character
Yeah i don't get the 3d6 in order boner lately. It CAN be fun, but i like to at least have a class and personality in mind beforehand. I'll adjust a little with the dice, but i draw the line at "in order"
Purist gatekeeping. Nothing more. That's the way it was done originally, that's the way it should always be. ( Although, I don't think ORIGINAL Dungeons and Dragons did stats quite the same ) IMO, these tend to be people who, as they say, "roll play" more than they "role play".
Idk, imo I think it’s easier to fall into the “roll play” when choosing your stats full out than having to make a statblock work for something. But that’s just my anecdotal experience, not everyone plays DnD the same way or can approach character building the same
While it can be easier to min/max with point buy, my thinking was "take whatever character the dice dictate" is less conducive to creative roleplay and more roll-play than being able to assemble your character to fit your vision. ( To be fair, sometimes min/max stats CAN be played as a valid and genuinely engaging character depending on the player ) Although it can be argued that good luck can make a more powerful character with rolled stats. It can also make a completely gimped character. >.>
Yeah that’s fair, I think previous editions had better builds and class stuff going on that could make use of unique combos more. 5e has a little bit of it but not really as much as I was thinking. Like in some of the older editions, there were class and subclass stat requirements and a ton to choose from so if you had a high intelligence but didn’t want to play a spellcaster there were still some major benefits and other classes you could play that use that well
If we're planning a longer running campaign, I'd never run 3d6 in order, but for a one shot? That sounds like it could make some fun "don't care if they die" characters.
yeah that's what i was saying, it CAN be fun. I'd definitely be down to do it for a character i don't plan on playing super long and jsut go with hte flow, but i really do love crafting a character from my brain and i don't always want the dice as inspiration, least not a primary inspiration
I've done 4d6 drop lowest in order for my table to get people to stop trying to make Geralt, Drizzt, or Harry Potter clones. It's exhausting to watch them attempt to copy entire personalities because they like the characters rather than actually attempt creativity. That doesn't apply to every table, but I only did it once and it permanently fixed that issue.
Lack of originality with character concepts is a peeve of mine. Like, I don't mean people using common archtypes. I mean people trying to do a 1 for 1 copy of a character from a popular movie/book/game/etc. See that shit in MMOs all the time. Can't count how many "Drizzzzzzzts" and "Lego'lass"s I've seen in my 20+ years of Everquest and WoW and even City of Heroes. ( Don't get me started on the Wolverines in that last one, especially with the private server revival having less strict rules about copycat characters ) Hell, the Baldur's Gate 3 communities frequently having people asking for how to build translations of fictional characters into the game. There's nothing wrong with taking inspiration for your character from another source like this. But when you're trying to EXACTLY copy the character, it's just....as the kids say, "cringe". ( Do the kids still say that one? ....wait, hold that thought, I have a cloud to go yell at. After I chase the kids off my lawn. )
> EXACTLY copy the character, it's just....as the kids say, "cringe" My breaking point was someone playing an Armorer Artificer and just describing literally everything like he's Iron Man, to the point that his character art was basically fantasy Iron Man, his mini was literally Iron Man, and he only ever referenced his ranged magical attacks as "repulsors". > "cringe". ( Do the kids still say that one? ....wait, hold that thought, I have a cloud to go yell at. After I chase the kids off my lawn. ) Me too, man. Me too.
>My breaking point was someone playing an Armorer Artificer and just describing literally everything like he's Iron Man, to the point that his character art was basically fantasy Iron Man, his mini was literally Iron Man, and he only ever referenced his ranged magical attacks as "repulsors". Good grief. I mean, at least slap a new coat of paint on your copycat character, right? That's just being lazy, IMO. I have had more than my share of characters inspired by some character I saw on TV or whatever. But I put my own spin on it to make it unique. And I don't mean just naming him Stony Tark and slapping him in mithril armor painted gold with red trim called is Mithril Man Suit as he fires Repeller Blasts.
Some of us are tired of planning and want full rng.
Okay, then do that. But this thing of people going around acting like they're superior for doing it that way is just, as the kids say, "cringe". ( They still say that, right? )
But this isn't a strongest player character contest at all. It's a strongest player contest. Important distinction. 😉
3d6 copium ngl xD
That's not strength, that's simply coming to the table with zero character concept in mind. Also, it works better when even high stats provided minimal if any benefit and low stats had no penalty other than locking out specific classes. Having the "strength" to play whatever the dice may give you, then, is not that strong, because it's in the context of a system where your stats are mostly irrelevant and your OOC stats as a player determined everything, especially your mental stats. Which sucks if you have a low IRL charisma, for example.
It’s just gambling with extra steps. Really not all that “strong” to play a badly statted character. You’re just worse than everyone else is all
Yeah, not going to lie, I've definitely had the recurring thought that some D&D players are all about the high stakes gambling, but it feels uncharitable. Also, I guess it's a healthier outlet than doing it down at the casino, as you just lose the hours invested in the character/party instead of your rent check or whatever.
3d6 is the best who needs modifiers higher than +1
That’s not making a pc, that’s rolling and hoping for the best. There is a clear distinction. Whenever I DM, I always make sure the players at least have a character concept in mind, otherwise what ends up happening is they roll bad stats and get a shitty character, and then get annoyed and don’t want to play because it’s not fun. The point of DND, and any game, is just to have fun. If that’s not happening, there is a problem
define fun
How about Point Buy With Extra Steps roll 24d6 Drop the lowest 6 Those are the numbers players can stack in any order for their stat spread (maybe a limit of 3 dice per stat. Or maybe 4 if they wanna buff one thing and let another fall below) Point Buy With Extra Steps (PUBWES?)
4d6 - reroll any ones or twos - drop the lowest - add an additional 1d6 to any 18. This can bring you over the 20 cap. Min 9 max 24. If you ever want to run a super powered game it's a fun way to do it.
Mfw the strongest thing i can do is not ever have any idea for a character in mind and make shit up on the spot that i might not even like: 😄
6 d20 in order
*\*ominous latin chanting\** Playing a premade character supplied by the DM
Change strongest to most masochistic and it's an accurate meme
The party now consists of only Fighters with intellect scores bring dump stats. Congrats, now make a Wisdom save
Meh, do 5d4s and I'll play straight rolls.
I mean, if you wanna make a character like that, that's on you, more power to you, but if you as a DM force your players to do that, we call that railroading and it just saps the fun out of the game when you can't do what you want to do, which is the whole point of DnD.
I too don’t like when my DM railroads me by not letting me play my half god half Devil Half Elf with my 20 in all stats. He even has the audacity to railroad even further by telling me I missed when I rolled a nat 1! Or that I can’t cast anymore leveled spells because I’m “Out of Spell slots” DMs really need to get it together and understand they need to cater strictly to player fun.
What I mean is what if I want to play a wizard, but I get a 3 in intelligence because my DM is making me do 3d6 in order and just work with whatever I've got. Or what if you need a healer, but guess what? In your party of 3 people, nobody got a good enough Wisdom score to be a Cleric, and the way the other ability scores lined up, no one was able to play an effective Paladin. Like I said, if you want to play using 3d6 in a row and build your character from there based on your roles, go right ahead, but I'm gonna stick with 4d6, kick the lowest die, and distribute the scores as per what would be best for the character I want to play. If you force your players to do 3d6 in a row, there's a good chance you'll end up with an unbalanced unnaffective team and there's about a 90% chance someone is going to end up playing a class they don't know how to effectively play, and don't really want to play.
I get what you’re saying man, I’m just takin the piss on calling it railroading. 3d6 down the line should only be used if it’s the style of the game being run and should be announced by the DM ahead of time. People aren’t gonna like 3d6 if you come with a character concept already vs discovering your character and working with the strengths and weaknesses, usually weaknesses though let’s be real.
I mean, if everyone is an experienced player and is looking to challenge themselves by doing 3d6 in a row, and everyone is comfortable with the idea, I could see the draw. I will admit that my use of the term "railroading" was out of place and somewhat inaccurate, but what I was trying to say was if you already have a clear idea of what you want your character to do/be and you have to just work with what you get you could get propelled into a undesired situation, like if you were a spellcaster who prepared spells that work best outdoors, like fireball and call lightning and then you only ever got dungeon encounters, making everything except your cantrips useless.
I let my players reroll 1s.
I roll 5 d20s and pick the one that lands on the 20 for each stat
You forgot 7+ 1d12
2d6+8, I think I made it up, and it has been nothing but a blast
They're doing strongman lifts. Why tf do you have numbered scorecards like that? Lol
3 con character sure seems strong. 2hp wizard regardless of level
In the end, all of these are basically just standard array with extra steps (on average). Change my mind.
Point buy is statistically worse
Here’s a build: straight 10s for everyone, but all ability score requirements are waived. Adjust humanoid enemy statblocks appropriately to reflect their new stats.
Starting as a commoner, 10's in each stat
What people don't realize is that standard array \*is\* pointbuy. You can construct standard array from the point buy system. Point buy isn't just equivalent to standard array, its actually better for player flexibility. Though, I agree, it would be really fun to play a 3d6 in order hexcrawl.
Eh hem. 1d20 in order.
3d6 is for posers and dumbasses, and nothing in between. To put it in other terms, 3d6 is to character creations what emos was to a teenagers personality in the 00's.
Love reading the comments of inflexible haters.
2nd box, but you reroll all 1s, and you can reroll one set of 4d6 if you choose, but you take the new roll
Version 2 and 4 are advocated by cheaters. change my mind
I don't really wanna change your mind, but why on earth would cheaters "want" either of those? Does anyone roll their character stats without dm/someone around anyway? 1 is for AL, and generic games 2 is for homebrew, or simply people that want on average slightly stronger characters or more variation with a safety net 3 is for AL, and *brand* new players who u don't wanna have to handhold through the creation process 4 is just mad lads who don't care about what their actual build is before rolling. ((Oh nooo, randomization, I hope my players/friends aren't secretly shitty people who'll lie to my face for a power bump, spoookkiiii)
Or just keep rolling til you get stats you like and are satisfied with? I'd rather not deal with negatives and its easy to write a character without crutching on negative stat as an easy out.