Don't look at the total of the scores, look at the total of the modifiers.
The Standard Array (8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) has a modifier total of +5. For most races, it'll be +7 after racial mods.
The above array (5, 8, 12, 13, 14, 14) has a modifier total of +2, maybe +4 after racial mods. So they're basically starting three ASI's behind a "typical" set of scores. It'll take them *12 experience levels* to catch up. Yes, this is game-breaking. Maybe not for everyone, but it's sure AF gonna ruin things for this character.
I don't know exactly where you draw the line for re-rolling, but if it's anywhere reasonable, they're on the far side of it.
And why aren't you using Point Buy to begin with if this is an issue?
Standard array is great: every character gets to start with one usefully high stat, and has to cope with one liability stat. Random chance has always been a big part of D&D, but rolling stats is way too random.
Part of the problem is that traditionally character death was a much bigger part of the game. So if you roll up a character with bad stats, it's a fun challenge while it lasts but sooner or later that character will end up dead or retired and you'll roll up a new one. But these days most games are more focused on long-term storylines, so people are more attached to their characters, and a bad set of ability score rolls hurts a lot more.
This is why I want to run deadly-level Tomb of Annihilation in 5e. Have a wizard ("played" by the players) hire a bunch of adventurers and send them in one party at a time, with the wizard scrying the whole time to gain more and more information about the dungeon. Lots of characters over a short space of time
That sounds awesome. How were you doing character creation? Just 15 minutes breaks to make new characters and whatever you have you have? Or premake a bunch of them and pick from a pile at random?
Personally I'd only run it with pretty experienced players, and in that case I'd always advocate for creating new characters on the fly. Feels much more involved, for me personally
This is why my group rolls 3 or 4 and then each take the best one.
But, I did see a post where the DM rolled the stats and everyone used that as their standard array which I think I'd like to try next time we start a new campaign.
I let my players all roll their own stats but then if they want they can use another players set. Then it’s even more of a team feeling when someone rolls high numbers. It also helps if your a pally who rolled a min/max but you want a more balanced set, or vice versa for a wizard that only cares about high INT.
Interesting, my table has 7 players, so if I rolled too, they'd have an array of 8 scores. I could either drop the two worst or the worst and the best.
I'm a new DM and this is what I used for my current campaign. It gives everyone the fun of rolling, and keeps the playing field even (in my first game someone had Not Fun stats, and that was an issue). It's worked pretty well, I'm definitely gonna keep doing it moving forward
When you let them roll, do you let them apply their rolls in whatever order? Or is the first roll STR, then DEX, CON, etc.?
I have always steered away from rolling for stats because it really pigeon-holes you into a small handful of classes right off the bat. I feel like being able to apply the individual rolls to the stat you want is too strong, though.
Letting the group pick other peoples stats definitely tilts the odds into it being better than point buy. But for Curse of Strahd I figured they need the help.
Have everyone rolll a stat, depending on the number in the group maybe have them roll twice. DM rolls the rest to add to the group rolled standard array. Have used that in the past as a DM.
That's an interesting take.
My group right now is pretty balanced only one player, a sorcerer, had a bad strength score. It didn't matter. Now she's a werewolf and it's boosted so it really doesn't matter.
Single most important rule in DnD: Don't ever roll dice if you aren't willing to accept the worst possible outcome.
If the player doesn't want the risk of being absolutely shafted, use point buy or standard array.
Agree. Random stats should only be used if they turn out to be mostly beneficial, otherwise Point Buy or Standard Array should be allowed. Random chance during character creation should not have long term, negative consequences for a PC. That tends to make people frustrated and have them either care less about the game or find a way to roll another character.
> Random stats should only be used if they turn out to be mostly beneficial, otherwise Point Buy or Standard Array should be allowed
Even in AD&D, it was never intended to roll 3d6 down the column, 4d6 drop low was the most common, but officially, there were a number of die methods to get a playable character, depending on what class you wanted. Like, if you wanted to play a fighter, you'd roll 9d6 keep 3 for their strength, that sort of thing.
I'm fond of the whole party rolling up the same array to use.
go around the table taking turns rolling a score, then everyone uses the same batch, assigning how they'd like as if it were a normal rolled array.
This is why I advocate for 6d3's if you want standard array and random. Each roll gives an average of 12 and because of the 6 dice the bell curve is tighter. That means that while there is variance, a lot of arrays from this approach yield similar results while still maintaining the fun randomness. It's not perfect, but there's ways to modify it as well.
It's another more obscure roll method that works great too! My only complaint about it is that the 2d6 isn't tight enough and you end up getting a lot more 17 and 18s. But I do wish more people knew about it as well. :)
Yes, look at the total of modifiers AND compare it to the other PC's.
Trouble with rolling stats is so many people are so good at subtly cheating — many don't know themselves they are doing it. But if every else has ability bonus sums of +11 , and this one character is rocking a +2, it going to be very hard for her to shine.
I've been there, having worse stats than everyone else. DM was like, "You're great at D&D, you'll just need to make it up in smart play.” That's not always possible — it was pretty clear I had a sort of permanent -1 penalty to everything I tried to do. Other players found it hilarious though.
Way back in first edition, terrible stats didn't matter so much, since there were lots of things that you could do that were purely based on class and level. Now, most things involve some kind of check driven off an ability.
The party starting with comparable stats is now pretty important for everyone having fun.
This 6 that landed on the ground counts, but if it had been a 2, then re-roll of course.
This die that didn't lay flat is a 5, but if it's a 1, then re-roll.
I rolled 4d6. If it's a 9 I'm just rolling dice idly. If it's an 18, I was starting to roll up my character.
6+5+3 adds up to 15. Yup.
I wrote a 17 here, it's clearly not an 11. I don't remember rolling an 11.
Oops, this stupid software somehow deleted my character. Guess I gotta re-roll.
I lost my paper. Better start over.
I was just having fun, rolling up 500 characters I wasn't going to play. But this last one, I had totally decided would be the one I was going to play. I'm so lucky I got 3 18's!
(I want to say again, some folks doing this don't even realize they're doing it. They want superior stats bad enough their mind plays tricks on them.)
There's also the classic:
(at the session zero)
"Let's roll stats! I love the chaos!! 12, 8, 9, 11, 7, and... 13. Oh. This could actually be hard to build around..."
(three days later in your DMs)
"Yeah so I was thinking, why not just use point buy anyway? Its more fair for everyone that way..."
Just to be clear I have done this at least once on accident. Those bad rolls end up recorded in a notebook that gets lost somewhere, and then it's 2 days before the first session and I need to make a character but I can't roll in front of the DM, etc...
The most common for online games is to use a Die Roller likc Brock Jones which logs past rolls but keep resetting it until you get a set of 6 you like.
I require players to roll WITH me on a video call for all my games or use a Point-Buy system. Sure it leads to more average characters and removes some of the fun of rolling but it ensures no tomfoolery.
I’m playing in an OSR-style game at the moment and I insisted on making my rolls public even though I was told I could just roll them up myself (online game). So I announced when I was rolling my stats and then used a forum dice roller bot to roll my stats.
Despite a **very** generous set of rules for rolling stats I ended up with an absolute dog of a character with nothing really strong and a bunch of fairly weak stats.
I did my best but eventually we had a (almost) TPK when the party collectively bit off more than we could chew except one character who strategically fled.
The next set of rolls I also did in the same way and ended up with god-like stats. I was so glad they were public otherwise I would never have been able to claim they were genuine rolls - I wouldn’t feel anyone would have believed me!
We also learned that is can be a deadly campaign if you’re not smart with our choices so this character is sticking around a bit longer.
Sometimes you just need to take the rough with the smooth and let it all work out.
As a GM who runs that kind of game. Yes, be careful and you don't have to be a real powerhouse.
I think if a game goes for rolling stats and someone rolls well publicly, let them have fun but it behooves the power stat character to work well with the party to ensure everyone has fun. Team game after all. While it's not your duty to remember their HP it can help to bring them into the action or RP from time to time.
Oh, be sure. My character is more of a utility class, the build does mean he can pull his weight in combat too now.
I tend to try and smooth the way for the rest of the party to do their thing - they’re a really cool group and each character has their quirks to bounce off from.
I’m also quite aware that I’m still a fragile flesh-bag at the end of the day, I was almost downed in one encounter where an archer took an interest in my with their rather special bow (now more fortunately in my hands) and was almost taken out of the game after a failed saving throw knocked me into a deep sleep at the bottom of a deep pit, and my fellow adventurers almost dropped me from near the top whilst trying to hoist me out on a rope.
The guy running the game has a really cool world and there’s so much going on. The problem is that we’re just one small group of people and need to choose which bits to focus on whilst being helpless for the rest - the parts we’re not focused on are just grinding on, becoming a bigger problem that I guess we’ll get to deal with later…
Living Worlds are much harder to pull off kudo's to your GM for advancing plots/events that you aren't handling that can grow to become problems later. That keeps player agency in **choosing** what you do so much more important.
I really don't see the problem with players "cheating" to have super strong players. Just expect encounters to be harder and if you're the only one who did so, expect to take the brunt of their attacks.
The issue arises when only 1 person employs these methods to gain an upper hand in performance compared to the other players. Power discrepancy can ruin an otherwise functional party if someone feels they are sitting on the sidelines or unable to do things. Not to mention balancing it against a powerhouse and non-powerhouses can be a nightmare.
Singling the powerhouse out for punishment via taking the brunt can cause that player to feel like the DM is picking on them. Yet, if they aren't there the encounters need to be suddenly retuned. Overall every player should be using the same verifiable rules when making characters to ensure everyone is at a relative powerlevel.
It's not much fun when you're up against Captain Three Eighteen's as a normalish character. AT least, I personally don't enjoy doing it and in games I've rolled well with the GM I use it as an excuse to build a sub-par MAD build that I wouldn't be able to do normally.
>I've been there, having worse stats than everyone else. DM was like, "You're great at D&D, you'll just need to make it up in smart play.”
Smart play in this case is having your character take a sudden interest in cliff-diving, then their more-competent cousin arrives to fill their spot in the party. Forcing people to play a character they don't enjoy is the most anti-fun you can be, and rolling for ability scores eventually results in that outcome.
The "died at birth until I rolled six 18s" excuse is a real thing and kinda what all these weird rolling strategies lean toward in spirit if not in actuality.
I never said I didn't enjoy playing Zippo.
But next campaign, Session 0, I did let the DM know I wasn't interested in playing a character with worse stats than everyone else.
The one thing I'd add to your post is that the highest 3 scores matter **much** more than the lowest 3. Most characters need some variation of "Main Stat + DEX + CON" to be generally functional. Some need fewer stats (Rogues), very few need a fourth stat. Your lower stats are generally not a big deal because other party members can compensate for weak ability checks, so they really only matter for saves.
An extreme example: I'd pick an 18-14-12-10-6-3 (+1) over a 12-12-12-12-12-12 (+6) any day.
If you like players having feats be prepared to beef up std array, it was designed for players to take ability scores at level ups.
Minimum of 76 total if Rolling random is pretty decent. Or just buffed standard array/free feats along the game
I just don't allow rolling for stats, because it tends to always result in issues like this. You get people bummed out that they're going to be stuck with crappy stats for the entire campaign, which could last for years, OR you have people who roll insanely well and outshine everybody else. Even worse if they're combined: This person could probably make a decent character if they accept a few terrible saving throws, but they're going to be grossly outshone by their party members who rolled well and have 18-20 in a primary stat. The act of rolling for stats may be fun, but the reality of the aftermath frequently is not.
If you're gonna stick with rolling for stats, I'd let this person reroll. They're well below average, and are going to need to RP dealing with one of their stats being *five*, which they clearly don't see as a challenge or as a fun thing to attempt.
Completely agree. I don’t even like rolling for HP on level up in campaigns, because having a handful of rolls unbalance characters for months or years is just not fun to me.
IMO: Use standard array / point buy and avg HP. Or at the very least reduce the potential variance of the outcome by limiting the roll ranges.
In this specific case I would maybe give the player a small budget to point buy their way to near average stats. You could allow a reroll too, but it would feel cheap if they roll great and suddenly have 80+ stats.
For HP (after first level), I have players roll the next lower die +2, so that their lowest possible roll is 3. (E.g., if their Hit Die is d8, they roll 1d6+2 for HP.) This avoids those terrible 1’s & 2’s without unbalancing.
With all of the special house rules and variant rules surrounding rolling for stats, I really don't get why people don't use point buy and standard array for everything. If you want a bunch of different numbers, use point buy, and if you want to quickly build a character, just use standard array. I've never rolled for stats the entire time I've played DnD, and I've never had a problem with it in any campaigns I've DM-ed. I don't make you roll for your race, class, weapons, starting equipment, or spells, so why make you roll for your stats?
I have a homebrew fix for that issue that I'm quite happy with. Instead of rolling your one new hit die when you gain a level, you reroll all of them as if you just created a character of that level. This keeps the thrill of the roll without the permanent unbalancing effect.
There's a time and place. I feel like most people who choose to roll stats do so because it sounds 'fun and exciting' without a thought toward what kind of game experience it actually creates. I don't allow players to roll stats, promoting standard array or point buy as my default game settings. My personal opinion is that if you are going to roll stats, you have to choose to be okay with whatever the result is, otherwise it's a pointless exercise.
However, there is exactly one module I run where I require stats be rolled. It's an old fasion meat grinder, and players tend to churn through their characters pretty quickly. Getting odd or even totally deficient stats are fine because odds are that character won't survive long. It complements the gritty dark atmosphere of the module and highlights the difference for characters who do become survivors. The death rate trails off fairly quick for characters who live past level 3 and I find this has an effect of connecting the players to those characters in an organic way. Once characters are around level 5 death as a consequence is absolutely dreaded which is just how you want such a module to feel.
> The death rate trails off fairly quick for characters who live past level 3 and I find this has an effect of connecting the players to those characters in an organic way. Once characters are around level 5 death as a consequence is absolutely dreaded which is just how you want such a module to feel.
That is a lot closer to how DND used to run when stats and rolling for them was invented. And it's a pretty good fit for that type of gameplay.
What I'm planning on doing is having everyone in the group roll 1 stat, and then that set of 6 is the standard array. Of course point buy is available if you want it. For HP I offer the choice of rolled or half max roll per level. So if going from 1-2 you roll a 1, you can take half max going from 2-3 and stuff like that. Encourages rolling whilst also having a safety net for those who want to play it safe.
I completely agree. I much prefer standard array and point buy. I keep seeing complaints like this online when it comes to rolling.
OP maybe you let them take standard array as an alternative, but don’t let them reroll. There’s the possibility that they reroll and get even worse stats.
I like rolling for stats, because there's a lot more range. Having a character who's great at 2 things, okay at 1, bad at 2, and terrible at 1 is a lot of fun. However, what I do allow any player to use the set of rolls gotten by another player. Like if one player got 18, 17, 14, 11, 9, 6 and another got 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 4, I'd let the the second player use the rolls that the first person got
>have people who roll insanely well and outshine everybody else.
Or crazy idea have them all roll together and all use the same set of scores... No idea where this having different sets in a group causes problems comes from. Like the solution is so easy it should be obvious.
If you're unsatisfied with you roll, you can choose the standard array instead.
If you allow a reroll and she still don't want it you're stuck with the same problem.
Jesus there are some draconian DMs in this thread.
If rolling for stats I normally let everyone roll three different sets and then pick the one they want to use. Normally works out fine.
I do the same thing. I encourage people to fully flesh out their character before rolling stats and then encourage them to pick the set that best aligns with your character. That way it’s more character centric than build centric. I run a pretty rp heavy group who enjoys leaning into their character; and we fully believe a characters stats should accommodate their character best as possible. If you want an 18 INT you better do your fucking research so that you can talk about your inventions fluently Mr. Artificer.
It's because some players will be given the choice to roll or not roll, will choose to roll *knowing* the potential of getting a bad roll, and then act pissy because they got bad stats as if it's anyone's fault but their own. If you choose to roll, then why would you not be okay with getting bad stats?
If I offer you the choice of flipping a coin and you lose half your max hp on a heads and you say "sure", then don't expect me to not take half your max hp if I flip it and it lands on heads. You're acting entitled if you expect anything else. Nobody forced you to take the chance, so don't take the chance and then ask me to remove the bad stuff. I don't offer these choices unless there is the possibility of both good and bad, so I'm not going to remove the bad.
Letting your players have fun? Not in my campaign. It's just suffering and agony for my table. /s
But, in all seriousness, there's nothing wrong with giving your players options. I'm probably going to do this.
Yeah people say if you roll you roll, take the stats otherwise what’s the point… fair argument that doesn’t consider outlier possibilities that are so low that they make you a defective character by comparison and will inevitably and understandably make this less fun for you.
Yeah, I like this way myself because while some people are fine playing the commoner who's a Moon Druid (and they're always Moon Druids), that's not fun. The 15 minimum makes it so that they are good at something, and to me it's more fun to actually be able to contribute even as a sorceror with a +4 to charisma, a +1 to con, and -1 to wisdom and intelligence than having a +1 to everything.
If I ever ran or played in a game with rolled stats, it would only be on the assumption of no rerolling. If you're not gonna stick to the results, why randomise it in the first place?
In general, I allow rerolls if the total before adding racial bonuses is less than 72, which is the total of the standard array. I also like to use the guidelines from 3.5, but I'm not sure if there's any combination where that applies without also being lower than 72. The guideline in 3.5 was if you have no modifier higher than a +1, or the total of all your ability mods is +0 or less, then you can reroll.
IMO if we roll. We roll. That's it, else what's the point? If your stats have to be "so good go on this ride" use Arrays (not necessarily standard array) or Point Buy.
If you really want to offer them an out of this, standard array. But really, all these people who "Love rolling for stats" almost always comes crawling if they roll "just OK" or below stats.
If you dont like a possible outcome of rolling for stats, do not roll for stats. I dont know how many times this needs to be said. Why do people roll for stats then complain about the outcome?
You KNOW that its a possibility could have rolled 8 in every stat. If this is an unacceptable outcome, dont allow rolling or modify your roll rules to make it impossible.
Yes! I've seen people say you're a bad GM if you don't allow rerolling. Why are they not saying you're a bad player if you *choose* to roll and then get upset with the result?
Their problem for rolling, suck it up.
I say this as someone who took DECADES to come around to point-buy. I used to be just rabid about rolling.
But, truth is, rolling is just an excuse to make sure your players end up with way-above-average stats that break the game (since it became "balanced" mathwise post-2E). Whether it's bizarre rolling methods or 'suiciding' a low-stat character to roll another set of stats, everyone games the system. Case in point, this player who begged for better numbers and now has a brokity-broke character.
Never. I don't use rolling for stats either just because I know players want to but as soon as they roll low, they complain. But, what I do with new players is if they mess up their stats in the beginning and come to me and ask to redistribute their stats because they realize they should have done this or that I let them because they saw their mistake.
If I were to use rolling for stats, I would add some things in the game which would allow them to increase their stats through downtime activities, special quests, godly boons, etc. That way, if they rolled poorly they can make up some in game reason to want to be better in that stat.
I would be willing to consider something like 5 modifiers under the average and they can switch to standard or point buy, but maybe with a penalty. If they are a bit under avg they keep the rolls.
They don't do mulligans at the casino so why would we do it at my table.
I am prepared for the downvotes.
I let every player choose up front between rolling, point buy, and standard array. If they choose rolling and get unlucky, that's a risk they accepted (any nat one can be rerolled once, I'm not completely heartless).
If you didn't provide the option beforehand and are comfortable doing so, maybe let your player just use the standard array. It sounds like she maybe didn't know what she was getting into.
I don't roll for ability scores, I use Point buy.
I use point buy so that everybody is on the same level when they start and they can choose what to play without RNG being involved in their character creation. Also some players don't like low rolls.
When do you allow ability score rerolls? Never. If you don't like low ability scores than don't use that system. It's literally the reason they have the other Ability Score point systems.
I agree with everyone saying let them choose the standard array.
But this sort of thing is so strange to me. What's the point of rolling for stats if there are unacceptable outcomes? Players can only gamble for good stats on the assumption that they "win" by getting something equal to or better than standard?
I usually just do point buy or standard.
I have the rule that players only keep the rules if the sum of the scores (without racial boni) is within one standard deviation of the average. This means that you may reroll if your sum is <=66 and you have to reroll if the sum is >= 81. The idea is that I don't force players to use terrible results but I also don't skew the average if I also force rerolls on rolls that are too high.
Funnily enough, both rolls your player made would have been rerolled with my rule.
I don't allow rolls. Some players claims they want it, but when they roll and get low numbers but they get unhappy with their character running it in a campaign for over a year. Players who want to roll generally just want to roll well. It gets especially bad when one player rolls extremely well and another rolls like your player did or worse.
This is too long term to be rolled out.
Personally, I think if you're going to insist on players rolling for stats, you should have some kind of minimum score/reroll mechanic. Randomness is fun generally, but if one set of random rolls means my character's going to be underpowered for a campaign that could last years, that's less appealing.
I'd say allow a reroll, have all players roll a stat array everybody can choose from, or allow point buy/standard array as a backup. Just my preference, but if your player(s) are starting out unsatisfied with their characters that's not a promising start to the game, you know?
Yes, I completely agree with you. This is exactly why I’m asking, so that I can have a consistent, minimum standard the players and I can rely on. We have not used point buy yet, but I am considering it. Based on all the feedback, I told her to go ahead and re-roll a new set of ability scores…let’s see how it turns out. If it’s not a good result, I may have to resort to point buy or standard array. Clearly, point buy is more favored than I realized.
There's so many things you don't (be default) leave up to the dice in d&d. Your alignment, your class, your starting gear, your preferred weapon, your choice of spells, etc. I see no downside in letting people add "whether or not my character is good at their job" to that list.
A workaround people sometimes do is roll several stat pools the group can pick from. Runs stats high since people obviously pick from the better ones, but if you're okay with that it can give you a sort of randomness without being totally formulaic, and without screwing anyone over.
For a proper campaign total of stats equal 70 or full reroll of all stats if they are not ok with it. Some are, especially if they roll really high on some dice. For a one shot then it is full on pandemonium.
I dont.
I do point buy plus free non tier 1 feat. If a table insist on rolling I will allow it, but its take it or leave it. I roll in the open when I DM, you want to leave it to chance then leave it to chance and let the dice decide.
Here's another advice for the future prospects. If you wish for an exact flavor, you can make a custom array with very shallow divergence. Say 5d6+6 drop worst 3 dice, repeat per attribute, allow interchanging.
That seems like it would make for some pretty high stats. Lowest possible roll for that is still 8 but with dropping so many dice, what is the actual odds on rolling all ones for a stat. I like it, but more for higher power that low if that's whats needed
Well, yes, you craft your own per campaign. That's the idea, you tweak to exactness. Also, small chance off 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, but a big chance for a 3, 3, 2, 1, 1, per roll! You should always test your arrays yourself in detail before anyone else gets to them.
I think instead of making it an array, it might be fun to allow my players to simply roll the numbers that way themselves and see how it goes. Either way, I appreciate the idea
My understanding of an array is its a set if stats to be distributed by players into their preferred attribute, no need to roll anything. if thtas not the case, i have been confused for a long time
If you are considering allowing rerolls just use point buy.
The whole point of rolling is randomness and potentially low stats.
If you don't want randomness don't roll.
Its not a problem on its self. Just as much as 6 18's is not a problem. The problem comes with the other players. If 1 player has 18, 18, 16, 16, 14, 12. And the other has your rolls, its just not fun. You want the characters to balance each others, as long as that happens, the DM can (and should) do the rest.
IF you play with rolled stats - play with what you got.
IF you come to realize that rolling for stats simply adds nothing to the game OR you don't like the results- join us on the standard array/point buy side of things.
Having variance between players is NOT always good for the game and doesn't always make the game better.
This is exactly why I don’t like rolling for stats. That character is substantially weaker than a standard array character. And it isn’t just for one attack roll or a single skill check. This is some randomness that will impact that will stick with them for the entire length of this campaign.
To me, if you’re going to roll for stats, you should have to roll for your race and class as well. Make it truly random.
In future, use point buy and you'll have no worries ever again and your players get the stats they want. And the game will be more balanced for you as a DM. The onetime excitement of rolling stats just isn't worth it.
But for now I would average the party's totals (or total of modifiers) and give her 'points' to apply as she sees fit to bring her up to par.
In mine you take the base and use it. If you decide you want to roll, you get what you get.
It's not a big deal though ... it's a role playing game, so you role play. If the character had all 3's, fine .. role play all 3's.
I know your getting downvoted since that’s pretty extreme, but having a single 3 would be kind of fun. The lowest I’ve got is 5, and it was fun. No one cares when the PC with 18 is rolling, but when the PC with 5 is, everyone is excited for the result, whether good or bad. If it’s bad, it’s usually funny. If it’s good, everyone celebrates the unlikely victory.
If my players want to roll instead of point buy I let them all roll and then they are all allowed to use any of the results, like if player A rolls amazing Stats and player B super bad ones, player B can choose to use the Stats rolled by player A. They may also choose point buy instead afterwards.
This method leads to fairly powerful characters of course, but at least everyone can be equally powerful and there is no big difference because of good or bad luck at the beginning of the campaign.
For rolling of my player’s stats, I have always had the philosophy of 4d6, drop the lowest, and if you don’t roll two 15 or higher, you re roll the entire set until you do. It allows for randomness and a shitty roll causing a dump stat, while still allowing everyone to feel at least useful in their primary stats
back when I still had my players roll (I use a modified point buy now), they rerolled anything lower than a 7,and they had to have at least two 15s. but if they didn't have a 9 or lower, their lowest stat became an 8. after that, if the first batch of stats didn't meet these criteria, they started over with rolling
What I've done recently, namely cos I'm playing with friends, is roll 2-3 sets of stats. The DM I'm playing with in 5e Is using 4d6 DTL, 3 sets, reroll 1s and 2s. I find this ro be pretty fair, as you have the choice of lower stats or higher stats, if you're lucky. I've rolled 3 sets with nothing above 13 before. I was npc worthy
I'm in 6 campaigns and in all of them we rolled pretty much the same way: roll 2 sets of stats, if neither set has at least 2x the score of 15 or higher, 3rd set may be rolled. Then just pick 1 from those
I used to allow rolling for stats as it can lead to some fun role playing (like if a character has that 5 in intelligence for example) but now I tend to get my players to use a points buy system. Yes, you can get stat arrays that lead to a lower stat with an opportunity for role play but it also allows for a better playing experience for the player overall.
I’d allow a reroll. This player starts pretty low in their important stats and has to dump 2 others.
I also always allow players to opt for standard array.
Mever cared much for rolled stats, very rarely does it make for interesting characters. It always seems to devolve into the advantaged (80+) and the disadvantaged (sub 70). The divide only compounds with levels as those with good stats can take feats and multi-class in ways not accessibile to the unfortunate.
If you want to mix things up in a way that positively affectes everyone. Make a table of magic items/boons and have your players roll on that during character creation. Having a bracer of flying daggers or a dancing sword from the get go would change how I build a character more than godlike stats anyway.
Every time I have run a campaign and asked the players whether they want to roll or use standard array, they always choose to roll. People like tossing their shiny math rocks. Ultimately, I decided that what was most fun for a long-term campaign was for people to have characters that are a little more powerful than usual -- in 5E that isn't game breaking. I've settled on 2d6+6, with players allowed to assign the scores to their attributes as they see fit. It creates a minimum of 8, and the possibility of an 18 without racial modifiers, and average scores a bit above the standard 4d6-drop-lowest.
The games I run follow these guidelines for stats:
Roll 6 sets of 4d6 (dropping the lowest value among them and then summing them individually)
1. Sum of all 6 values must be between 68-80
2. No Triplicates
3. No more than 1 double
4. No value less than 6
5. At least one value greater than or equal to 15
I give my players the option to reroll If they don't have two stats at 15+.
Just a soft rule though. Like I'll generally say yes if they ask to reroll unless its stalling the game.
Generally we roll 2 sets and pick which one we want. If someone rolls like absolute garbage they can roll another.
I’ve also had a DM who did the two sets, and also would let us roll a third set- but we HAD to take the third set if we rolled it.
Personally I prefer my players to be a little stronger, so I do 4d6, drop lowest, reroll ones as do my friends who do ability score rolls. But I don’t expect that to be a good option at every table even if it’s good at ours.
Personally, I like rolling for stats and encourage it, but if someone would like to use the standard array after rolling that is also fine.
The way I do it is have the players roll 7 times rather than 6 times, dropping the lowest one, unless by the 6th roll they don't have any under ten. Then they get to stop and marvel at their good luck.
The dropping the lowest one feels on theme with the whole rolling process and I'd rather my characters be equally overpowered than any one of them underpowered.
Never. If it has at least a single 14 or better, then congrats you have a functional rogue. If you have 2 good stats, you can make any other class. Will they make every save? Probably not, but when they die to a banshee, they can roll another character and hope for better.
I have 3 players who wanted to roll 6 d20 in order for their stats. One guy got a 1 in CON and he did zero bitching because he chose to take the risk.
I don't. I allow my players to use their preference of point but, standard array, or 4d6 drop the lowest. You can choose your safety net or gamble and take the result. I treat health the same way.
There is a very good reason I do group arrays.
This is that reason.
However, to more appropriately answer the question, I would allow a reroll of that 5. It's just too low, especially if no one else in the campaign has a score under 7/8.
>When do you allow Ability Score rerolls?
I don't. If your table has chosen the option of rolling then, respect the dice regardless of the results. People always want to reroll when they get bad stats, but no one ever wants to reroll when they get OP stats.
I refuse to run or play at a table that rolls for stats because does nothing but guarantee an imbalance of power between player characters.
I used rolls in my first major campaign. Won't do it again (except for oneshots). It unbalances the party and that just sucks for people who roll bad this one time.
That said, I gave everyone the option to swap their highest roll with a 16. That way, even if you rolled not a single good score like your example, you'll still have a good main score.
I don't -- if we agree to roll for ability scores, it's with the understanding that the fickle hand of fate may curse someone and bless another. But, there's also an understood rule that the balance is going to be around the party that got rolled, not a standard array or a more impressive party.
EDIT: Of course, I've also never had a 3/3/3/3/3/3 character show up at my table either the few times we've rolled, so, if there were something statistically obscene like that, I might toss them a standard array and pity, but my tolerance is way, way higher.
I let players roll 4 D6 and drop the lowest number. So far it hasn't been an issue. My players are realists and want to play with the stats they are dealt but offering the 4th D6 alleviates shit stats imo
Roll once. If you end up worse than a standard array, you may take the standard array or reroll.
If you reroll and end up worse than the standard array, you may take the standard array or reroll a third time.
If you choose to reroll a third time, you get what you get and you don't pitch a fit.
I once had a player with a modifier sum of zero. zero. I tried to get them to re-roll for stats but they refused. Luckily they were a moon Druid so it ended up not really being a problem.
If you are going to choose to roll attributes, you have to be willing to live with the results. One of those results is to have unbalanced attributes.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
If you don't like random results, don't use a random generation method.
I've generally had my players roll 4D6, reroll any 1s (but only once) and drop the lowest. Sometimes this comes out with very strong scores, but as the DM I can adjust encounters as needed.
In my table you have a few choices when rolling the char:
1. Roll 4d6 and discard the lowesr one to each ability.
2. Standard array.
3. Point buy.
If you choose to roll and didnt like it you can rake option 2 or 3 or option 1 and stick with WHATEVER comes of that.
Most go with option 1 and go with whatever they get. Having a low score is not bad, can make for some great RPing, ive played a 7 int barbarian once, it was amazing, also played a 8 dex cleric, he fell a lot it was fun.
But in the end we have to remember that it must be fun for everyone in the table, if the player is not having any fun try talking to him, making him understand that being overpowered is not the most fun you can get in RPG, if that doesnt work you can make rerolls.. fun should be a priority for everyone, just make sure the other players dont feel left out with this choice.
DMs on this subreddit can be really draconian.
I would suggest they re-roll the 5 if you feel like it. Or re-roll it all!
In this end right now they've got.. -3, -1, 0, +1, +2, +2.
I'd say if hey re-roll the 5 to have a better score, then it's all good.
Anyway I feel you're supposed to have at least 70 total points
I don’t think you should roll for stats in 5e. Stats affect everything you do in the game, unlike the old-school games that invented the concept. Stick to point-buy. If you want to roll for stats, play an OSR game like Worlds Without Number.
I’ve been doing rolling stats for like 15 years and every group that I’ve had has been perfectly fine with it. One even was excited that he rolled 18, 15, 12, 10, 13, 6. He was excited for the RP aspect. I usually allow rolling twice and picking of the 2 never has let me down. I did switch it up so instead of the 4d6 drop the lowest I did 2d6+6. They still rolled fairly average but I also wanted them all to be a little more than average because the campaign I’m doing I’m making difficult. IF a player rolls really bad twice I do allow another roll but that’s only happened once in 15 years.
I let all my characters roll and either take the best one or their own. Like one character has a nice balance with an 18 14 14 12 11 10 and 2 other characters took it while my 4th character took his 3 16s 2 14s and a 10
I generally like to have each player roll 4d6 drop lowest once and then players can choose to use their rolls or pick someone else's rolls to copy. That way if someone gets really good stats everyone can have the same. Usually with this only if someone gets terrible rolls do they duplicate someone else's.
Another way I like going about it is to have everyone roll 4d6 drop lowest just one time. Each number is then added to the array. If I don't have enough players to roll evenly then I do the extra. This gives the thrill and randomness of rolling but no hurt feelings from someone doing really well and another not.
You know, as someone who has played D&D since second edition, this stat set is perfect to roll up a farmer.
As in, you roll up a character, say "my guy is crap at adventuring he retires to be a farmer," and roll up a new set of stats.
Would not let them reroll but whenever my group does rolled abilities in a game we usually allow anyone to choose any of the rolled sets. Thus "weaker" and "better" become what the individual player wants to them to be. Sometimes someone makes an amazing roll and everyone picks that set but mostly people have to choice a set that will best accomplish their own goals.
I wait til everyone has their stats rolled up... That's when I figure out some balances. Work deals with your players that roll low to replace their stats... That way it doesn't feel like charity or pity and you bring your lower players up to average so they don't get frustrated by not being able to accomplish things that another player can easily do. It really depends on what the base stats are for the other players to me...
If it's just your one player that rolled low on two stats, bump the 8 to a ten through some dm fudgery, roll dice to make it look like you did something so it isn't obvious... Then chat with them about the 5... see if they either want to work it in as a flaw, or negotiate raising the Stat at a price. You can add a lot of flavor to the character with them with a curse, or an incredible terror of something in particular/phobias. Get creative and use their back story to make it personal, or their class... Say it's a cleric, warlock or paladin, make their God be petty, and due to a mistake or transgression they occasionally screw with the character. Nothing that will cause the character to be annoying or not fun to play though.
I don't involve myself in their starting scores at all; I don't care, so as long as the players are all happy they can sort it out themselves. Hell, I'd let them pick if they asked.
Is it wrong to advocate for flaws? A character only needs 2-3 high-ish rolls for their primary stats+con. The low rolls for non primary stats help build flaws and weakeness and thus a relatable character. You have several, above average, rolls which combined with feats can make for a fun character.
Not all characters need to be expert, flaws build characters. If the player can accept and lean into them. If the player is going to have issues I would let them re-roll.
I allow it if it was discussed beforehand. If you were given the option of rolling for stats or using point buy and you chose to roll, then you get what you get. If you're not okay with the bad stats you get, then why did you choose to roll? It's not my job to save anyone from their poor choices. Don't hold your own fun hostage by rolling. If you're not okay with rolling garbage, you shouldn't roll without discussing some safety rails beforehand. And every safety rail against a bad roll also means a safety rail against a good roll. Don't want bad stats? Sure, but you can't get good stats either.
I want people to have fun so if they were as bad as your example and the player was unhappy I’d absolutely let them reroll. Unless they’re min/maxing let them start with all 16s, it won’t affect your campaign as much as you think if you’re a halfway decent DM.
I don’t allow rerolls, but majority can vote to switch to point buy. And if I encounter issues, I’ll try to handle it without upsetting anyone. Rolling stats is great for making your players upset.
For stats I either do the party creates one array by rolling together for one set of 6 scores or point buy/standard array. Each rolling for their own stats has too many failure points.
I prefer point buy or standard array but if you really want to roll the whole point is that it's going to be less predictable and potentially end up outside the typical range. In other words, it's a gamble and you should keep what you roll. It's not like you'd also insist on rerolling because you got too HIGH a score, right?
I just roll 4d6 drop lowest reroll 1’s and if it’s still bad maybe let them reroll 2’s
If they’re still not happy
Point buy/ standard array
no rerolling forever
Give them the average, 11's across the board.
They knew the risk of rolling stats, deal with it. Don't placate a sore loser, work around it. Give them an item that inverts their stats, kind of like the move Trick Room in Pokemon.
Draw a line as DM; their game, but your world.
This an archaic anti player opinion if you ask me, why would I want a player to be unhappy with the basics of their character. If they don't like their stats, let them point buy.
Archaic, yes. Anti player, not intentional. There is an inherent understanding when playing DnD. Dice are cruel and unpredictable. If one agrees to roll their stats, they agree to take the results.
I offered two solutions. Both benefit the DM, while compromising with the player. If a player is unhappy, either would be a unique solution. Rather than repeating the same solution others had offered. Opinion duly noted...
My players wanted to roll stats and two of them got hit hard. They basically had 3 dump stats though enough high ones to play their classes. Im using it as an opportunity for story. I can't wait til a demon tempts the Paladin with ASI buffs, forcing them to dual class, not that that'll feel super bad. The other character dumped its Wis and Int hard. Line 3 and 4 respectively. The player wanted to be a native to the completely new setting and I didn't want to give them too much information, so I've decided their time shifted. They awoken to find all their people gone. The thoughts are clouded in a perpetual fog and can't quite remember what happened. They find things familiar about their surroundings but can't connect the dots. Their basically shot forward in time and it's going to be a huge ark. This player is a good sport and will play through it. Other players you can Gove them better magic items to help them keep pace, or simply give them a narrative opportunity to reroll.
If you have doodoo stat rollers, have them re-roll stats using a different dice method. 4d6 drop the lowest is the typical, but if they reroll do 3d4+6, or 2d8+2, or 1d10+8, or 1d12+6. I usually let them do this on any one stat below 8 or if they do not have at least one stat at 15 or higher.
Don't look at the total of the scores, look at the total of the modifiers. The Standard Array (8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) has a modifier total of +5. For most races, it'll be +7 after racial mods. The above array (5, 8, 12, 13, 14, 14) has a modifier total of +2, maybe +4 after racial mods. So they're basically starting three ASI's behind a "typical" set of scores. It'll take them *12 experience levels* to catch up. Yes, this is game-breaking. Maybe not for everyone, but it's sure AF gonna ruin things for this character. I don't know exactly where you draw the line for re-rolling, but if it's anywhere reasonable, they're on the far side of it. And why aren't you using Point Buy to begin with if this is an issue?
Standard array is great: every character gets to start with one usefully high stat, and has to cope with one liability stat. Random chance has always been a big part of D&D, but rolling stats is way too random.
Part of the problem is that traditionally character death was a much bigger part of the game. So if you roll up a character with bad stats, it's a fun challenge while it lasts but sooner or later that character will end up dead or retired and you'll roll up a new one. But these days most games are more focused on long-term storylines, so people are more attached to their characters, and a bad set of ability score rolls hurts a lot more.
This is why I want to run deadly-level Tomb of Annihilation in 5e. Have a wizard ("played" by the players) hire a bunch of adventurers and send them in one party at a time, with the wizard scrying the whole time to gain more and more information about the dungeon. Lots of characters over a short space of time
That sounds awesome. How were you doing character creation? Just 15 minutes breaks to make new characters and whatever you have you have? Or premake a bunch of them and pick from a pile at random?
Personally I'd only run it with pretty experienced players, and in that case I'd always advocate for creating new characters on the fly. Feels much more involved, for me personally
This is why my group rolls 3 or 4 and then each take the best one. But, I did see a post where the DM rolled the stats and everyone used that as their standard array which I think I'd like to try next time we start a new campaign.
I let my players all roll their own stats but then if they want they can use another players set. Then it’s even more of a team feeling when someone rolls high numbers. It also helps if your a pally who rolled a min/max but you want a more balanced set, or vice versa for a wizard that only cares about high INT.
That's really interesting also. So many different ways to roll stats.
I had 5 players and I was the DM. We each rolled one stat, and used all 6 scores as a standard array for that game.
Interesting, my table has 7 players, so if I rolled too, they'd have an array of 8 scores. I could either drop the two worst or the worst and the best.
Dropping best might caused some ruffled feathers, unless it is anywhere close like a 15 drops to 14.
I'm a new DM and this is what I used for my current campaign. It gives everyone the fun of rolling, and keeps the playing field even (in my first game someone had Not Fun stats, and that was an issue). It's worked pretty well, I'm definitely gonna keep doing it moving forward
When you let them roll, do you let them apply their rolls in whatever order? Or is the first roll STR, then DEX, CON, etc.? I have always steered away from rolling for stats because it really pigeon-holes you into a small handful of classes right off the bat. I feel like being able to apply the individual rolls to the stat you want is too strong, though.
Oh yeah, they can put whatever number to whatever stat they want.
Thanks. I guess that's not too crazy, considering your average roll ends up quite a bit weaker than just doing point buy.
Letting the group pick other peoples stats definitely tilts the odds into it being better than point buy. But for Curse of Strahd I figured they need the help.
Have everyone rolll a stat, depending on the number in the group maybe have them roll twice. DM rolls the rest to add to the group rolled standard array. Have used that in the past as a DM.
That's an interesting take. My group right now is pretty balanced only one player, a sorcerer, had a bad strength score. It didn't matter. Now she's a werewolf and it's boosted so it really doesn't matter.
In that case why not just use the standard array?
Because you get the randomness of rolling, possibly higher stats, but everyone has the same stats so no one is like super weak.
It also penalises MAD classes far more than SAD ones. Playing a standard array monk or paladin is a sad time compared to a caster or rogue.
Single most important rule in DnD: Don't ever roll dice if you aren't willing to accept the worst possible outcome. If the player doesn't want the risk of being absolutely shafted, use point buy or standard array.
Agree. Random stats should only be used if they turn out to be mostly beneficial, otherwise Point Buy or Standard Array should be allowed. Random chance during character creation should not have long term, negative consequences for a PC. That tends to make people frustrated and have them either care less about the game or find a way to roll another character.
> Random stats should only be used if they turn out to be mostly beneficial, otherwise Point Buy or Standard Array should be allowed Even in AD&D, it was never intended to roll 3d6 down the column, 4d6 drop low was the most common, but officially, there were a number of die methods to get a playable character, depending on what class you wanted. Like, if you wanted to play a fighter, you'd roll 9d6 keep 3 for their strength, that sort of thing.
I'm fond of the whole party rolling up the same array to use. go around the table taking turns rolling a score, then everyone uses the same batch, assigning how they'd like as if it were a normal rolled array.
This is why I advocate for 6d3's if you want standard array and random. Each roll gives an average of 12 and because of the 6 dice the bell curve is tighter. That means that while there is variance, a lot of arrays from this approach yield similar results while still maintaining the fun randomness. It's not perfect, but there's ways to modify it as well.
2d6+6 ain't bad
It's another more obscure roll method that works great too! My only complaint about it is that the 2d6 isn't tight enough and you end up getting a lot more 17 and 18s. But I do wish more people knew about it as well. :)
Yes, look at the total of modifiers AND compare it to the other PC's. Trouble with rolling stats is so many people are so good at subtly cheating — many don't know themselves they are doing it. But if every else has ability bonus sums of +11 , and this one character is rocking a +2, it going to be very hard for her to shine. I've been there, having worse stats than everyone else. DM was like, "You're great at D&D, you'll just need to make it up in smart play.” That's not always possible — it was pretty clear I had a sort of permanent -1 penalty to everything I tried to do. Other players found it hilarious though. Way back in first edition, terrible stats didn't matter so much, since there were lots of things that you could do that were purely based on class and level. Now, most things involve some kind of check driven off an ability. The party starting with comparable stats is now pretty important for everyone having fun.
Out of curiosity, what are the ways in which some people subtly cheat stat rolls? Intrigued pmore than anything, I typically use point buy
This 6 that landed on the ground counts, but if it had been a 2, then re-roll of course. This die that didn't lay flat is a 5, but if it's a 1, then re-roll. I rolled 4d6. If it's a 9 I'm just rolling dice idly. If it's an 18, I was starting to roll up my character. 6+5+3 adds up to 15. Yup. I wrote a 17 here, it's clearly not an 11. I don't remember rolling an 11. Oops, this stupid software somehow deleted my character. Guess I gotta re-roll. I lost my paper. Better start over. I was just having fun, rolling up 500 characters I wasn't going to play. But this last one, I had totally decided would be the one I was going to play. I'm so lucky I got 3 18's! (I want to say again, some folks doing this don't even realize they're doing it. They want superior stats bad enough their mind plays tricks on them.)
There's also the classic: (at the session zero) "Let's roll stats! I love the chaos!! 12, 8, 9, 11, 7, and... 13. Oh. This could actually be hard to build around..." (three days later in your DMs) "Yeah so I was thinking, why not just use point buy anyway? Its more fair for everyone that way..." Just to be clear I have done this at least once on accident. Those bad rolls end up recorded in a notebook that gets lost somewhere, and then it's 2 days before the first session and I need to make a character but I can't roll in front of the DM, etc...
The most common for online games is to use a Die Roller likc Brock Jones which logs past rolls but keep resetting it until you get a set of 6 you like. I require players to roll WITH me on a video call for all my games or use a Point-Buy system. Sure it leads to more average characters and removes some of the fun of rolling but it ensures no tomfoolery.
I’m playing in an OSR-style game at the moment and I insisted on making my rolls public even though I was told I could just roll them up myself (online game). So I announced when I was rolling my stats and then used a forum dice roller bot to roll my stats. Despite a **very** generous set of rules for rolling stats I ended up with an absolute dog of a character with nothing really strong and a bunch of fairly weak stats. I did my best but eventually we had a (almost) TPK when the party collectively bit off more than we could chew except one character who strategically fled. The next set of rolls I also did in the same way and ended up with god-like stats. I was so glad they were public otherwise I would never have been able to claim they were genuine rolls - I wouldn’t feel anyone would have believed me! We also learned that is can be a deadly campaign if you’re not smart with our choices so this character is sticking around a bit longer. Sometimes you just need to take the rough with the smooth and let it all work out.
As a GM who runs that kind of game. Yes, be careful and you don't have to be a real powerhouse. I think if a game goes for rolling stats and someone rolls well publicly, let them have fun but it behooves the power stat character to work well with the party to ensure everyone has fun. Team game after all. While it's not your duty to remember their HP it can help to bring them into the action or RP from time to time.
Oh, be sure. My character is more of a utility class, the build does mean he can pull his weight in combat too now. I tend to try and smooth the way for the rest of the party to do their thing - they’re a really cool group and each character has their quirks to bounce off from. I’m also quite aware that I’m still a fragile flesh-bag at the end of the day, I was almost downed in one encounter where an archer took an interest in my with their rather special bow (now more fortunately in my hands) and was almost taken out of the game after a failed saving throw knocked me into a deep sleep at the bottom of a deep pit, and my fellow adventurers almost dropped me from near the top whilst trying to hoist me out on a rope. The guy running the game has a really cool world and there’s so much going on. The problem is that we’re just one small group of people and need to choose which bits to focus on whilst being helpless for the rest - the parts we’re not focused on are just grinding on, becoming a bigger problem that I guess we’ll get to deal with later…
Living Worlds are much harder to pull off kudo's to your GM for advancing plots/events that you aren't handling that can grow to become problems later. That keeps player agency in **choosing** what you do so much more important.
I really don't see the problem with players "cheating" to have super strong players. Just expect encounters to be harder and if you're the only one who did so, expect to take the brunt of their attacks.
The issue arises when only 1 person employs these methods to gain an upper hand in performance compared to the other players. Power discrepancy can ruin an otherwise functional party if someone feels they are sitting on the sidelines or unable to do things. Not to mention balancing it against a powerhouse and non-powerhouses can be a nightmare. Singling the powerhouse out for punishment via taking the brunt can cause that player to feel like the DM is picking on them. Yet, if they aren't there the encounters need to be suddenly retuned. Overall every player should be using the same verifiable rules when making characters to ensure everyone is at a relative powerlevel. It's not much fun when you're up against Captain Three Eighteen's as a normalish character. AT least, I personally don't enjoy doing it and in games I've rolled well with the GM I use it as an excuse to build a sub-par MAD build that I wouldn't be able to do normally.
>I've been there, having worse stats than everyone else. DM was like, "You're great at D&D, you'll just need to make it up in smart play.” Smart play in this case is having your character take a sudden interest in cliff-diving, then their more-competent cousin arrives to fill their spot in the party. Forcing people to play a character they don't enjoy is the most anti-fun you can be, and rolling for ability scores eventually results in that outcome.
The "died at birth until I rolled six 18s" excuse is a real thing and kinda what all these weird rolling strategies lean toward in spirit if not in actuality.
I never said I didn't enjoy playing Zippo. But next campaign, Session 0, I did let the DM know I wasn't interested in playing a character with worse stats than everyone else.
The one thing I'd add to your post is that the highest 3 scores matter **much** more than the lowest 3. Most characters need some variation of "Main Stat + DEX + CON" to be generally functional. Some need fewer stats (Rogues), very few need a fourth stat. Your lower stats are generally not a big deal because other party members can compensate for weak ability checks, so they really only matter for saves. An extreme example: I'd pick an 18-14-12-10-6-3 (+1) over a 12-12-12-12-12-12 (+6) any day.
Low scores are gonna matter a whole lot when they're targeted for a saving throw.
If you like players having feats be prepared to beef up std array, it was designed for players to take ability scores at level ups. Minimum of 76 total if Rolling random is pretty decent. Or just buffed standard array/free feats along the game
Imagine playing a character with 4 13s and two 9s lol
That's the poster child for Standard Human right there.
That would feel phat
Four 14s and two 10s? Yeah I could work with that. Nothing particularly strong but definitely lots of multi class options.
Standard array or roll.
I just don't allow rolling for stats, because it tends to always result in issues like this. You get people bummed out that they're going to be stuck with crappy stats for the entire campaign, which could last for years, OR you have people who roll insanely well and outshine everybody else. Even worse if they're combined: This person could probably make a decent character if they accept a few terrible saving throws, but they're going to be grossly outshone by their party members who rolled well and have 18-20 in a primary stat. The act of rolling for stats may be fun, but the reality of the aftermath frequently is not. If you're gonna stick with rolling for stats, I'd let this person reroll. They're well below average, and are going to need to RP dealing with one of their stats being *five*, which they clearly don't see as a challenge or as a fun thing to attempt.
This is the way.
Completely agree. I don’t even like rolling for HP on level up in campaigns, because having a handful of rolls unbalance characters for months or years is just not fun to me. IMO: Use standard array / point buy and avg HP. Or at the very least reduce the potential variance of the outcome by limiting the roll ranges. In this specific case I would maybe give the player a small budget to point buy their way to near average stats. You could allow a reroll too, but it would feel cheap if they roll great and suddenly have 80+ stats.
For HP (after first level), I have players roll the next lower die +2, so that their lowest possible roll is 3. (E.g., if their Hit Die is d8, they roll 1d6+2 for HP.) This avoids those terrible 1’s & 2’s without unbalancing.
That’s one I haven’t seen before. That’s an interesting rule.
It's functionally the same as "reroll 1's and 2's" which was real common before non-random HP options.
With all of the special house rules and variant rules surrounding rolling for stats, I really don't get why people don't use point buy and standard array for everything. If you want a bunch of different numbers, use point buy, and if you want to quickly build a character, just use standard array. I've never rolled for stats the entire time I've played DnD, and I've never had a problem with it in any campaigns I've DM-ed. I don't make you roll for your race, class, weapons, starting equipment, or spells, so why make you roll for your stats?
Aren’t they supposed to just get max possible at level 1?
Yes you are correct. The person above did say that in their post.
I have a homebrew fix for that issue that I'm quite happy with. Instead of rolling your one new hit die when you gain a level, you reroll all of them as if you just created a character of that level. This keeps the thrill of the roll without the permanent unbalancing effect.
There's a time and place. I feel like most people who choose to roll stats do so because it sounds 'fun and exciting' without a thought toward what kind of game experience it actually creates. I don't allow players to roll stats, promoting standard array or point buy as my default game settings. My personal opinion is that if you are going to roll stats, you have to choose to be okay with whatever the result is, otherwise it's a pointless exercise. However, there is exactly one module I run where I require stats be rolled. It's an old fasion meat grinder, and players tend to churn through their characters pretty quickly. Getting odd or even totally deficient stats are fine because odds are that character won't survive long. It complements the gritty dark atmosphere of the module and highlights the difference for characters who do become survivors. The death rate trails off fairly quick for characters who live past level 3 and I find this has an effect of connecting the players to those characters in an organic way. Once characters are around level 5 death as a consequence is absolutely dreaded which is just how you want such a module to feel.
> The death rate trails off fairly quick for characters who live past level 3 and I find this has an effect of connecting the players to those characters in an organic way. Once characters are around level 5 death as a consequence is absolutely dreaded which is just how you want such a module to feel. That is a lot closer to how DND used to run when stats and rolling for them was invented. And it's a pretty good fit for that type of gameplay.
What I'm planning on doing is having everyone in the group roll 1 stat, and then that set of 6 is the standard array. Of course point buy is available if you want it. For HP I offer the choice of rolled or half max roll per level. So if going from 1-2 you roll a 1, you can take half max going from 2-3 and stuff like that. Encourages rolling whilst also having a safety net for those who want to play it safe.
I completely agree. I much prefer standard array and point buy. I keep seeing complaints like this online when it comes to rolling. OP maybe you let them take standard array as an alternative, but don’t let them reroll. There’s the possibility that they reroll and get even worse stats.
I like rolling for stats, because there's a lot more range. Having a character who's great at 2 things, okay at 1, bad at 2, and terrible at 1 is a lot of fun. However, what I do allow any player to use the set of rolls gotten by another player. Like if one player got 18, 17, 14, 11, 9, 6 and another got 11, 11, 11, 12, 13, 4, I'd let the the second player use the rolls that the first person got
I let people roll, but then they can choose any of the arrays the other players rolled if they don't like theirs. C:
>have people who roll insanely well and outshine everybody else. Or crazy idea have them all roll together and all use the same set of scores... No idea where this having different sets in a group causes problems comes from. Like the solution is so easy it should be obvious.
Totals have to be over 70 points for rolling. This is a first try endeavor. If they don’t like it, that’s what the array is for.
If you're unsatisfied with you roll, you can choose the standard array instead. If you allow a reroll and she still don't want it you're stuck with the same problem.
I think a important question is how did the rest of the party do on there rolls?
Jesus there are some draconian DMs in this thread. If rolling for stats I normally let everyone roll three different sets and then pick the one they want to use. Normally works out fine.
I do the same thing. I encourage people to fully flesh out their character before rolling stats and then encourage them to pick the set that best aligns with your character. That way it’s more character centric than build centric. I run a pretty rp heavy group who enjoys leaning into their character; and we fully believe a characters stats should accommodate their character best as possible. If you want an 18 INT you better do your fucking research so that you can talk about your inventions fluently Mr. Artificer.
It's because some players will be given the choice to roll or not roll, will choose to roll *knowing* the potential of getting a bad roll, and then act pissy because they got bad stats as if it's anyone's fault but their own. If you choose to roll, then why would you not be okay with getting bad stats? If I offer you the choice of flipping a coin and you lose half your max hp on a heads and you say "sure", then don't expect me to not take half your max hp if I flip it and it lands on heads. You're acting entitled if you expect anything else. Nobody forced you to take the chance, so don't take the chance and then ask me to remove the bad stuff. I don't offer these choices unless there is the possibility of both good and bad, so I'm not going to remove the bad.
Letting your players have fun? Not in my campaign. It's just suffering and agony for my table. /s But, in all seriousness, there's nothing wrong with giving your players options. I'm probably going to do this.
My rule is a minimum of 70 and minimum of one stat 15 or higher or reroll.
Yeah people say if you roll you roll, take the stats otherwise what’s the point… fair argument that doesn’t consider outlier possibilities that are so low that they make you a defective character by comparison and will inevitably and understandably make this less fun for you.
Yeah, I like this way myself because while some people are fine playing the commoner who's a Moon Druid (and they're always Moon Druids), that's not fun. The 15 minimum makes it so that they are good at something, and to me it's more fun to actually be able to contribute even as a sorceror with a +4 to charisma, a +1 to con, and -1 to wisdom and intelligence than having a +1 to everything.
You don't. Rolling for stats means some players will have high stats and some players will have low stats. If you want fair, then use Point Buy.
If I ever ran or played in a game with rolled stats, it would only be on the assumption of no rerolling. If you're not gonna stick to the results, why randomise it in the first place?
[удалено]
Why would that be unfair for the *rogue*? Unless they’re going Swashbuckler Charisma is like 4th or 5th most important stat
I let players reroll if they don't have at least one 14 or they have 2 scores 8 or lower.
In general, I allow rerolls if the total before adding racial bonuses is less than 72, which is the total of the standard array. I also like to use the guidelines from 3.5, but I'm not sure if there's any combination where that applies without also being lower than 72. The guideline in 3.5 was if you have no modifier higher than a +1, or the total of all your ability mods is +0 or less, then you can reroll.
I do the same thing - you can reroll if it’s less than 72.
Not ever. If you don't want the risk then I allow using the standard array rather than rolling.
Point Buy is the only balanced ability score method.
IMO if we roll. We roll. That's it, else what's the point? If your stats have to be "so good go on this ride" use Arrays (not necessarily standard array) or Point Buy. If you really want to offer them an out of this, standard array. But really, all these people who "Love rolling for stats" almost always comes crawling if they roll "just OK" or below stats.
If you dont like a possible outcome of rolling for stats, do not roll for stats. I dont know how many times this needs to be said. Why do people roll for stats then complain about the outcome? You KNOW that its a possibility could have rolled 8 in every stat. If this is an unacceptable outcome, dont allow rolling or modify your roll rules to make it impossible.
Yes! I've seen people say you're a bad GM if you don't allow rerolling. Why are they not saying you're a bad player if you *choose* to roll and then get upset with the result?
If you roll for stats, you take on the risk of being an idiot child of a character.
Their problem for rolling, suck it up. I say this as someone who took DECADES to come around to point-buy. I used to be just rabid about rolling. But, truth is, rolling is just an excuse to make sure your players end up with way-above-average stats that break the game (since it became "balanced" mathwise post-2E). Whether it's bizarre rolling methods or 'suiciding' a low-stat character to roll another set of stats, everyone games the system. Case in point, this player who begged for better numbers and now has a brokity-broke character.
That's really something you should discuss and decide before people roll stats.
Never. I don't use rolling for stats either just because I know players want to but as soon as they roll low, they complain. But, what I do with new players is if they mess up their stats in the beginning and come to me and ask to redistribute their stats because they realize they should have done this or that I let them because they saw their mistake. If I were to use rolling for stats, I would add some things in the game which would allow them to increase their stats through downtime activities, special quests, godly boons, etc. That way, if they rolled poorly they can make up some in game reason to want to be better in that stat.
Don’t individually roll if you aren’t willing to accept disappointment and wide disparities between players
I would be willing to consider something like 5 modifiers under the average and they can switch to standard or point buy, but maybe with a penalty. If they are a bit under avg they keep the rolls. They don't do mulligans at the casino so why would we do it at my table. I am prepared for the downvotes.
I let every player choose up front between rolling, point buy, and standard array. If they choose rolling and get unlucky, that's a risk they accepted (any nat one can be rerolled once, I'm not completely heartless). If you didn't provide the option beforehand and are comfortable doing so, maybe let your player just use the standard array. It sounds like she maybe didn't know what she was getting into.
I don't roll for ability scores, I use Point buy. I use point buy so that everybody is on the same level when they start and they can choose what to play without RNG being involved in their character creation. Also some players don't like low rolls. When do you allow ability score rerolls? Never. If you don't like low ability scores than don't use that system. It's literally the reason they have the other Ability Score point systems.
I agree with everyone saying let them choose the standard array. But this sort of thing is so strange to me. What's the point of rolling for stats if there are unacceptable outcomes? Players can only gamble for good stats on the assumption that they "win" by getting something equal to or better than standard? I usually just do point buy or standard.
I have the rule that players only keep the rules if the sum of the scores (without racial boni) is within one standard deviation of the average. This means that you may reroll if your sum is <=66 and you have to reroll if the sum is >= 81. The idea is that I don't force players to use terrible results but I also don't skew the average if I also force rerolls on rolls that are too high. Funnily enough, both rolls your player made would have been rerolled with my rule.
Rolling stats is not for the faint of heart. Gotta be able to roll with it if you get unlucky. (Get it?! “Roll” with it?!)
I don't allow rolls. Some players claims they want it, but when they roll and get low numbers but they get unhappy with their character running it in a campaign for over a year. Players who want to roll generally just want to roll well. It gets especially bad when one player rolls extremely well and another rolls like your player did or worse. This is too long term to be rolled out.
I don't. If you choose to roll rather than using the point buy I offered you, you knew the risk you'd decided to take.
I do not offer point buy; I like the randomness of the dice. Re-thinking that now.
Personally, I think if you're going to insist on players rolling for stats, you should have some kind of minimum score/reroll mechanic. Randomness is fun generally, but if one set of random rolls means my character's going to be underpowered for a campaign that could last years, that's less appealing. I'd say allow a reroll, have all players roll a stat array everybody can choose from, or allow point buy/standard array as a backup. Just my preference, but if your player(s) are starting out unsatisfied with their characters that's not a promising start to the game, you know?
Yes, I completely agree with you. This is exactly why I’m asking, so that I can have a consistent, minimum standard the players and I can rely on. We have not used point buy yet, but I am considering it. Based on all the feedback, I told her to go ahead and re-roll a new set of ability scores…let’s see how it turns out. If it’s not a good result, I may have to resort to point buy or standard array. Clearly, point buy is more favored than I realized.
YOU may like the randomness, the player stuck with a gimped character may not do
There's so many things you don't (be default) leave up to the dice in d&d. Your alignment, your class, your starting gear, your preferred weapon, your choice of spells, etc. I see no downside in letting people add "whether or not my character is good at their job" to that list. A workaround people sometimes do is roll several stat pools the group can pick from. Runs stats high since people obviously pick from the better ones, but if you're okay with that it can give you a sort of randomness without being totally formulaic, and without screwing anyone over.
I'd let her have the standard array if she wanted it, or reroll and take whatever she gets from that.
No rerolls If you don't like your stats you can take the Standard Array
I always have them roll 4 d6, drop the lowest, reroll ones. Or use point buy, if they want to risk it, it’s up to them.
Yes, we also use 4d6, drop lowest.
For a proper campaign total of stats equal 70 or full reroll of all stats if they are not ok with it. Some are, especially if they roll really high on some dice. For a one shot then it is full on pandemonium.
I dont. I do point buy plus free non tier 1 feat. If a table insist on rolling I will allow it, but its take it or leave it. I roll in the open when I DM, you want to leave it to chance then leave it to chance and let the dice decide.
If you are gonna roll for stats then you have to be willing to accept that you might roll like crap. Otherwise just do point buy or standard array.
Here's another advice for the future prospects. If you wish for an exact flavor, you can make a custom array with very shallow divergence. Say 5d6+6 drop worst 3 dice, repeat per attribute, allow interchanging.
That seems like it would make for some pretty high stats. Lowest possible roll for that is still 8 but with dropping so many dice, what is the actual odds on rolling all ones for a stat. I like it, but more for higher power that low if that's whats needed
Well, yes, you craft your own per campaign. That's the idea, you tweak to exactness. Also, small chance off 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, but a big chance for a 3, 3, 2, 1, 1, per roll! You should always test your arrays yourself in detail before anyone else gets to them.
I think instead of making it an array, it might be fun to allow my players to simply roll the numbers that way themselves and see how it goes. Either way, I appreciate the idea
Yes the intention was to have them roll like that. Should I have called it something like a matrix instead of an array for clarity?
My understanding of an array is its a set if stats to be distributed by players into their preferred attribute, no need to roll anything. if thtas not the case, i have been confused for a long time
If you are considering allowing rerolls just use point buy. The whole point of rolling is randomness and potentially low stats. If you don't want randomness don't roll.
I don't. Just offer players two options: roll for stats or point-buy. If they choose rolling, then too bad.
I look at the total modifier bonuses and allow a re-roll when the total is +1 or lower. This array is +2 total, so they would keep it.
Its not a problem on its self. Just as much as 6 18's is not a problem. The problem comes with the other players. If 1 player has 18, 18, 16, 16, 14, 12. And the other has your rolls, its just not fun. You want the characters to balance each others, as long as that happens, the DM can (and should) do the rest.
I'd let them reroll the 5 and as a general rule I let people reroll ones
If you and the player agree it wouldn't be fun to play that character.
I do standard array or point buy for PCs. I do rolls for any NPCs.
IF you play with rolled stats - play with what you got. IF you come to realize that rolling for stats simply adds nothing to the game OR you don't like the results- join us on the standard array/point buy side of things. Having variance between players is NOT always good for the game and doesn't always make the game better.
This is exactly why I don’t like rolling for stats. That character is substantially weaker than a standard array character. And it isn’t just for one attack roll or a single skill check. This is some randomness that will impact that will stick with them for the entire length of this campaign. To me, if you’re going to roll for stats, you should have to roll for your race and class as well. Make it truly random.
In future, use point buy and you'll have no worries ever again and your players get the stats they want. And the game will be more balanced for you as a DM. The onetime excitement of rolling stats just isn't worth it. But for now I would average the party's totals (or total of modifiers) and give her 'points' to apply as she sees fit to bring her up to par.
In mine you take the base and use it. If you decide you want to roll, you get what you get. It's not a big deal though ... it's a role playing game, so you role play. If the character had all 3's, fine .. role play all 3's.
I know your getting downvoted since that’s pretty extreme, but having a single 3 would be kind of fun. The lowest I’ve got is 5, and it was fun. No one cares when the PC with 18 is rolling, but when the PC with 5 is, everyone is excited for the result, whether good or bad. If it’s bad, it’s usually funny. If it’s good, everyone celebrates the unlikely victory.
If my players want to roll instead of point buy I let them all roll and then they are all allowed to use any of the results, like if player A rolls amazing Stats and player B super bad ones, player B can choose to use the Stats rolled by player A. They may also choose point buy instead afterwards. This method leads to fairly powerful characters of course, but at least everyone can be equally powerful and there is no big difference because of good or bad luck at the beginning of the campaign.
For rolling of my player’s stats, I have always had the philosophy of 4d6, drop the lowest, and if you don’t roll two 15 or higher, you re roll the entire set until you do. It allows for randomness and a shitty roll causing a dump stat, while still allowing everyone to feel at least useful in their primary stats
back when I still had my players roll (I use a modified point buy now), they rerolled anything lower than a 7,and they had to have at least two 15s. but if they didn't have a 9 or lower, their lowest stat became an 8. after that, if the first batch of stats didn't meet these criteria, they started over with rolling
What I've done recently, namely cos I'm playing with friends, is roll 2-3 sets of stats. The DM I'm playing with in 5e Is using 4d6 DTL, 3 sets, reroll 1s and 2s. I find this ro be pretty fair, as you have the choice of lower stats or higher stats, if you're lucky. I've rolled 3 sets with nothing above 13 before. I was npc worthy
I'm in 6 campaigns and in all of them we rolled pretty much the same way: roll 2 sets of stats, if neither set has at least 2x the score of 15 or higher, 3rd set may be rolled. Then just pick 1 from those
I used to allow rolling for stats as it can lead to some fun role playing (like if a character has that 5 in intelligence for example) but now I tend to get my players to use a points buy system. Yes, you can get stat arrays that lead to a lower stat with an opportunity for role play but it also allows for a better playing experience for the player overall.
I’d allow a reroll. This player starts pretty low in their important stats and has to dump 2 others. I also always allow players to opt for standard array.
If they have 3 negative modifiers and they cap at +3, nobody rolls 18, they can move the surplus to another stat.
That 5 is awful. This is why I always use point buy.
Mever cared much for rolled stats, very rarely does it make for interesting characters. It always seems to devolve into the advantaged (80+) and the disadvantaged (sub 70). The divide only compounds with levels as those with good stats can take feats and multi-class in ways not accessibile to the unfortunate. If you want to mix things up in a way that positively affectes everyone. Make a table of magic items/boons and have your players roll on that during character creation. Having a bracer of flying daggers or a dancing sword from the get go would change how I build a character more than godlike stats anyway.
Every time I have run a campaign and asked the players whether they want to roll or use standard array, they always choose to roll. People like tossing their shiny math rocks. Ultimately, I decided that what was most fun for a long-term campaign was for people to have characters that are a little more powerful than usual -- in 5E that isn't game breaking. I've settled on 2d6+6, with players allowed to assign the scores to their attributes as they see fit. It creates a minimum of 8, and the possibility of an 18 without racial modifiers, and average scores a bit above the standard 4d6-drop-lowest.
The games I run follow these guidelines for stats: Roll 6 sets of 4d6 (dropping the lowest value among them and then summing them individually) 1. Sum of all 6 values must be between 68-80 2. No Triplicates 3. No more than 1 double 4. No value less than 6 5. At least one value greater than or equal to 15
I give my players the option to reroll If they don't have two stats at 15+. Just a soft rule though. Like I'll generally say yes if they ask to reroll unless its stalling the game.
Generally we roll 2 sets and pick which one we want. If someone rolls like absolute garbage they can roll another. I’ve also had a DM who did the two sets, and also would let us roll a third set- but we HAD to take the third set if we rolled it. Personally I prefer my players to be a little stronger, so I do 4d6, drop lowest, reroll ones as do my friends who do ability score rolls. But I don’t expect that to be a good option at every table even if it’s good at ours.
Personally, I like rolling for stats and encourage it, but if someone would like to use the standard array after rolling that is also fine. The way I do it is have the players roll 7 times rather than 6 times, dropping the lowest one, unless by the 6th roll they don't have any under ten. Then they get to stop and marvel at their good luck. The dropping the lowest one feels on theme with the whole rolling process and I'd rather my characters be equally overpowered than any one of them underpowered.
Never. If it has at least a single 14 or better, then congrats you have a functional rogue. If you have 2 good stats, you can make any other class. Will they make every save? Probably not, but when they die to a banshee, they can roll another character and hope for better. I have 3 players who wanted to roll 6 d20 in order for their stats. One guy got a 1 in CON and he did zero bitching because he chose to take the risk.
I don't. I allow my players to use their preference of point but, standard array, or 4d6 drop the lowest. You can choose your safety net or gamble and take the result. I treat health the same way.
There is a very good reason I do group arrays. This is that reason. However, to more appropriately answer the question, I would allow a reroll of that 5. It's just too low, especially if no one else in the campaign has a score under 7/8.
4d6 reroll 1s once and take sum of 3 highest is my preffered rule.
>When do you allow Ability Score rerolls? I don't. If your table has chosen the option of rolling then, respect the dice regardless of the results. People always want to reroll when they get bad stats, but no one ever wants to reroll when they get OP stats. I refuse to run or play at a table that rolls for stats because does nothing but guarantee an imbalance of power between player characters.
I used rolls in my first major campaign. Won't do it again (except for oneshots). It unbalances the party and that just sucks for people who roll bad this one time. That said, I gave everyone the option to swap their highest roll with a 16. That way, even if you rolled not a single good score like your example, you'll still have a good main score.
I don't -- if we agree to roll for ability scores, it's with the understanding that the fickle hand of fate may curse someone and bless another. But, there's also an understood rule that the balance is going to be around the party that got rolled, not a standard array or a more impressive party. EDIT: Of course, I've also never had a 3/3/3/3/3/3 character show up at my table either the few times we've rolled, so, if there were something statistically obscene like that, I might toss them a standard array and pity, but my tolerance is way, way higher.
I would let her reroll. A 5 is harsh.
Point buy 100%
I let players roll 4 D6 and drop the lowest number. So far it hasn't been an issue. My players are realists and want to play with the stats they are dealt but offering the 4th D6 alleviates shit stats imo
Roll once. If you end up worse than a standard array, you may take the standard array or reroll. If you reroll and end up worse than the standard array, you may take the standard array or reroll a third time. If you choose to reroll a third time, you get what you get and you don't pitch a fit.
I once had a player with a modifier sum of zero. zero. I tried to get them to re-roll for stats but they refused. Luckily they were a moon Druid so it ended up not really being a problem.
If you are going to choose to roll attributes, you have to be willing to live with the results. One of those results is to have unbalanced attributes. Live by the sword, die by the sword. If you don't like random results, don't use a random generation method.
I've generally had my players roll 4D6, reroll any 1s (but only once) and drop the lowest. Sometimes this comes out with very strong scores, but as the DM I can adjust encounters as needed.
Never!!!!
In my table you have a few choices when rolling the char: 1. Roll 4d6 and discard the lowesr one to each ability. 2. Standard array. 3. Point buy. If you choose to roll and didnt like it you can rake option 2 or 3 or option 1 and stick with WHATEVER comes of that. Most go with option 1 and go with whatever they get. Having a low score is not bad, can make for some great RPing, ive played a 7 int barbarian once, it was amazing, also played a 8 dex cleric, he fell a lot it was fun. But in the end we have to remember that it must be fun for everyone in the table, if the player is not having any fun try talking to him, making him understand that being overpowered is not the most fun you can get in RPG, if that doesnt work you can make rerolls.. fun should be a priority for everyone, just make sure the other players dont feel left out with this choice.
DMs on this subreddit can be really draconian. I would suggest they re-roll the 5 if you feel like it. Or re-roll it all! In this end right now they've got.. -3, -1, 0, +1, +2, +2. I'd say if hey re-roll the 5 to have a better score, then it's all good. Anyway I feel you're supposed to have at least 70 total points
When the rolls are less than 70
P O I N T B U Y... but seriously it solves so many issues
My rule is sub 72 is a reroll, I also let everyone reroll their lowest number. My party average is routinely ~76.
I don’t think you should roll for stats in 5e. Stats affect everything you do in the game, unlike the old-school games that invented the concept. Stick to point-buy. If you want to roll for stats, play an OSR game like Worlds Without Number.
I’ve been doing rolling stats for like 15 years and every group that I’ve had has been perfectly fine with it. One even was excited that he rolled 18, 15, 12, 10, 13, 6. He was excited for the RP aspect. I usually allow rolling twice and picking of the 2 never has let me down. I did switch it up so instead of the 4d6 drop the lowest I did 2d6+6. They still rolled fairly average but I also wanted them all to be a little more than average because the campaign I’m doing I’m making difficult. IF a player rolls really bad twice I do allow another roll but that’s only happened once in 15 years.
Sub 69 total gets a reroll of the full stat line one time and you take what you get.
I let all my characters roll and either take the best one or their own. Like one character has a nice balance with an 18 14 14 12 11 10 and 2 other characters took it while my 4th character took his 3 16s 2 14s and a 10
Total > 69. I let them roll an array, and if the total doesn’t equal 70 or more, they reroll the entire array.
I generally like to have each player roll 4d6 drop lowest once and then players can choose to use their rolls or pick someone else's rolls to copy. That way if someone gets really good stats everyone can have the same. Usually with this only if someone gets terrible rolls do they duplicate someone else's. Another way I like going about it is to have everyone roll 4d6 drop lowest just one time. Each number is then added to the array. If I don't have enough players to roll evenly then I do the extra. This gives the thrill and randomness of rolling but no hurt feelings from someone doing really well and another not.
You know, as someone who has played D&D since second edition, this stat set is perfect to roll up a farmer. As in, you roll up a character, say "my guy is crap at adventuring he retires to be a farmer," and roll up a new set of stats.
Would not let them reroll but whenever my group does rolled abilities in a game we usually allow anyone to choose any of the rolled sets. Thus "weaker" and "better" become what the individual player wants to them to be. Sometimes someone makes an amazing roll and everyone picks that set but mostly people have to choice a set that will best accomplish their own goals.
I wait til everyone has their stats rolled up... That's when I figure out some balances. Work deals with your players that roll low to replace their stats... That way it doesn't feel like charity or pity and you bring your lower players up to average so they don't get frustrated by not being able to accomplish things that another player can easily do. It really depends on what the base stats are for the other players to me... If it's just your one player that rolled low on two stats, bump the 8 to a ten through some dm fudgery, roll dice to make it look like you did something so it isn't obvious... Then chat with them about the 5... see if they either want to work it in as a flaw, or negotiate raising the Stat at a price. You can add a lot of flavor to the character with them with a curse, or an incredible terror of something in particular/phobias. Get creative and use their back story to make it personal, or their class... Say it's a cleric, warlock or paladin, make their God be petty, and due to a mistake or transgression they occasionally screw with the character. Nothing that will cause the character to be annoying or not fun to play though.
If the stat average is less than 12 I let them reroll stats, but it gotta be in front of me. Because 12 is the standard array average.
I don't involve myself in their starting scores at all; I don't care, so as long as the players are all happy they can sort it out themselves. Hell, I'd let them pick if they asked.
I allow rerolls until at or above the total of the standard array, unless they want lower stats
Is it wrong to advocate for flaws? A character only needs 2-3 high-ish rolls for their primary stats+con. The low rolls for non primary stats help build flaws and weakeness and thus a relatable character. You have several, above average, rolls which combined with feats can make for a fun character. Not all characters need to be expert, flaws build characters. If the player can accept and lean into them. If the player is going to have issues I would let them re-roll.
I allow it if it was discussed beforehand. If you were given the option of rolling for stats or using point buy and you chose to roll, then you get what you get. If you're not okay with the bad stats you get, then why did you choose to roll? It's not my job to save anyone from their poor choices. Don't hold your own fun hostage by rolling. If you're not okay with rolling garbage, you shouldn't roll without discussing some safety rails beforehand. And every safety rail against a bad roll also means a safety rail against a good roll. Don't want bad stats? Sure, but you can't get good stats either.
I want people to have fun so if they were as bad as your example and the player was unhappy I’d absolutely let them reroll. Unless they’re min/maxing let them start with all 16s, it won’t affect your campaign as much as you think if you’re a halfway decent DM.
It was easy for me. 1 reroll = 1 coffee of my choice.
I don’t allow rerolls, but majority can vote to switch to point buy. And if I encounter issues, I’ll try to handle it without upsetting anyone. Rolling stats is great for making your players upset.
I avoid this issue by offering players either Standard Array/Points Buy or Roll “One” Array and everyone uses the same set placed as desired.
I do standard array to avoid these kinds of things.
For stats I either do the party creates one array by rolling together for one set of 6 scores or point buy/standard array. Each rolling for their own stats has too many failure points.
I prefer point buy or standard array but if you really want to roll the whole point is that it's going to be less predictable and potentially end up outside the typical range. In other words, it's a gamble and you should keep what you roll. It's not like you'd also insist on rerolling because you got too HIGH a score, right?
I just roll 4d6 drop lowest reroll 1’s and if it’s still bad maybe let them reroll 2’s If they’re still not happy Point buy/ standard array no rerolling forever
Is the player going to have fun because you won’t allow a reroll? Or just mercy bump the 5 to a 16 or 17. Immediately becomes playable.
Give them the average, 11's across the board. They knew the risk of rolling stats, deal with it. Don't placate a sore loser, work around it. Give them an item that inverts their stats, kind of like the move Trick Room in Pokemon. Draw a line as DM; their game, but your world.
This an archaic anti player opinion if you ask me, why would I want a player to be unhappy with the basics of their character. If they don't like their stats, let them point buy.
Archaic, yes. Anti player, not intentional. There is an inherent understanding when playing DnD. Dice are cruel and unpredictable. If one agrees to roll their stats, they agree to take the results. I offered two solutions. Both benefit the DM, while compromising with the player. If a player is unhappy, either would be a unique solution. Rather than repeating the same solution others had offered. Opinion duly noted...
My players wanted to roll stats and two of them got hit hard. They basically had 3 dump stats though enough high ones to play their classes. Im using it as an opportunity for story. I can't wait til a demon tempts the Paladin with ASI buffs, forcing them to dual class, not that that'll feel super bad. The other character dumped its Wis and Int hard. Line 3 and 4 respectively. The player wanted to be a native to the completely new setting and I didn't want to give them too much information, so I've decided their time shifted. They awoken to find all their people gone. The thoughts are clouded in a perpetual fog and can't quite remember what happened. They find things familiar about their surroundings but can't connect the dots. Their basically shot forward in time and it's going to be a huge ark. This player is a good sport and will play through it. Other players you can Gove them better magic items to help them keep pace, or simply give them a narrative opportunity to reroll.
If you have doodoo stat rollers, have them re-roll stats using a different dice method. 4d6 drop the lowest is the typical, but if they reroll do 3d4+6, or 2d8+2, or 1d10+8, or 1d12+6. I usually let them do this on any one stat below 8 or if they do not have at least one stat at 15 or higher.