Do most people prefer rolling or point buys for ability scores?

[Eric]

2 hours ago, Talya said:

Just to be clear ... You have to go back to AD&D at least for this to be true.

I am aware of my age 😆 Though there are a lot of retro-clones that try to evoke the same feel.

I did, once, go with the alternate method from AD&D 1e: Let the players pick whatever values they think best represent the character. It was an interesting data set, to be sure, but most of the players ended up picking not-too-outlandish scores, and even a penalty in some cases. Ultimately, the whole point is to have fun, so making people play something they don't find fun is... well, not fun!

[TheFred]

18 hours ago, cailano said:

You hit the nail on the head. Some players prefer to bring to life a pre-conceived idea they have in mind before character creation. I like to see their creativity revealed by what the dice tell them. But then, I'm the sort of gamer who thinks "backstory" is what happens between level 1 and level 5.

You say "forced," but I would like to say "inspired."

"Inspired", huh? Sounds like a crutch for a lack of creativity, honestly.

Every now and then, it can be fun to make a character completely randomly. There are systems for example with randomised "lifepath" generation methods. Often though they just say "if you don't like it, go back to picking what you want" - which makes sense because the overwhelming majority of the time, I don't want to be "inspired". Yes, I do say "forced", because that's correct; if I haven't got the option, then it's being forced, whether I want it or not. The dice aren't "revealing" my creativity, they're constraining it.

Eric's experience is relevant here too - sometimes I want a character who's deliberately bad at something. If I roll all 14s or something then I can't really do that.

Now OK, realistically, the dice might set you off on one path or another if you didn't already have an idea. Personally, though, I think the DM should just put a tiny bit of effort into the setting and describing the premise so that I can be inspired by that instead, and then allowed to make what I think fits the game well. If I'm really stuck, I can always just choose to roll some aspect of my character (I've seen people do that in fact, occasionally) without needing this weird antiquated stats thing. I honestly thought this was dying out when I was having debates about it ~10 years ago (because, you know, it makes zero sense). 🤷‍♂️

12 hours ago, cybersavant said:

if people drop a game because they rolled low, well then, that sets of alarm bells for their play style, and i don't want them in my game anyway, do you?

I think the converse is true; a DM demanding rolled stats is already an alarm bell for me. I don't really want to be in the game of someone who thinks they should hand out totally different scores to different players and force them to stick with it, before the game has even started. It's not normally enough alone to make me skip on those games (after all, beggars can't be choosers) but it's an instant red mark, and more so if it's a system where you can roll really bad stats and are forced to stick with them.

It's worth remembering that these are games where the stats matter and there are certain expectations about them. Indeed, in old editions it probably didn't really matter. Here, well, I personally might actually go for it, make a character with terrible stats, roleplay them as generally useless, and contribute very little. Once in a while, that might actually be a lot of fun! Not, though, if the DM is going to expect us to overcome level-appropriate challenges and fit some kind of planned power scale as is normally typical in later D&D or PF. This basically only works in more freeform games, at which point you didn't even really need to roll stats in the first place.

[Powderhorn]

I'm just going to toss out that there are systems where the player can choose rolled or an array, and both are equally valid :)

[Eric]

2 minutes ago, Powderhorn said:

I'm just going to toss out that there are systems where the player can choose rolled or an array, and both are equally valid :)

🪙 ▶️ 🫙

[Kylia Quilor]

I loathe Point Buy in D&D and PF, because it leads to aggressively flat characters that are annoyingly not exceptional. I like rolling because it gives the chance of being really standout exceptional at something. Point Buy means at best, you're either going to be exceptional at one thing and shit at the rest, or you're going to just kind of mildly good at a few things and medocire at the rest.

For some tones and feels, that's great and I see why a lot of GMs and DMs like to even things out, but I much prefer the chance of a 17 or 18.

[MrAndrewJ]

17 hours ago, Eric said:

Player creativity often trumped mechanics in the older editions.

GM creativity also meant a lot. I knew a guy who loved running Rifts games, and thinking on-the-fly about how every character could have their moment. You could never balance such a game mechanically. Narrative balance became a necessity.

[Heretic Burger]

If you're playing a game that has (in my experience) an aggressively mechanically minded player base and the need for a GM to to balance the repeated combat encounters then point buy just seems...pragmatic? That way people who aren't obsessed with squeezing optimisation out of a character build are given a portion of the playing field that is level and GM's then aren't having to consider whether to alter an encounter by 0.25 of a threat level or something because Sandra has rolled duff stats.

If you're not playing that then random is (in my experience) much more fun, and takes more skill. If you're coming to a table with a character build before session zero you're doing it wrong anyway. Nothing wrong with having an idea you'd like to play and revelling in how you've made it fit with some random elements though.

I think WFRP 4e has it about right, random character generation is very much in the spirit of the game and setting (it doesn't just suck to be a beggar in the setting, it sucks to be...well most people really...) but doesn't hold players to it. Yes if you want to play an optimised Dwarf Slayer you can, but Sandra's beggar who is so weak it hurts has a load of extra XP from the get go as they've played within the spirit of the game and setting.

[cailano]

@TheFred shhh.... It's going to be okay. There will be games where you can use point buy.

[Actana]

The amount of low key elitism in this thread is mind boggling. But not unexpected either. There really is no need to belittle or insinuate things about people who don't have your preferred playstyle.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Actana (see edit history)

[Eric]

14 minutes ago, Actana said:

The amount of low key elitism in this thread is mind boggling. But not unexpected either. There really is no need to belittle or insinuate things about people who don't have your preferred playstyle.

I've been trying to keep it on an even keel 😆 Actana has put it more bluntly than I would, but the point stands: there's more than enough room in the hobby for all of us to have fun with whatever is fun for us. Please try to approach the conversation with an open mind, focus on the positives of your experiences, and embrace our differences. If the conversation goes the other way then I'll have to put my staff hat on--which, to be quite honest, is not fun for me.

[TheFred]

I personally believe that rolling for stats not only makes no sense, it actively harms games. Of course everyone is welcome to their own opinions, I just advocate strongly against it because I really don't think it's good for anyone involved. INTERVENING CONTENT REMOVED Why can't I just say "hey, I really want to play a Wizard this time!"? As players we should probably be making characters that fit the setting and the game... but why have to make characters that also fit the dice. Nothing worse than having a brilliant concept that works really well for this specific game only to have it foiled by random chance.

EDIT: Eric didn't want me responding to the "badwrongfun" bit apparently, but this makes a bit less sense now.

Edited November 28, 2023 by TheFred
Failure to heed in-thread warning (see edit history)

[Eric]

@TheFred - Please heed the in-thread warning posted directly above your post not more than 2 hours ago.

@Everyone Else - Any further discussion of "right" or "wrong" with respect to stat selection methods will earn a formal warning.

[cailano]

Exactly. Different things work for different groups. I've personally run games that take randomization to the extreme (Dungeon Crawl Classics) and those that take point buy to the extreme (HERO, Savage Worlds) and I've had fun with both.

[Basil_Bottletop]

I don't mind either as long as the table itself has some way to create a level playing field. If we're doing Point Buy, let's set upper and/or lower limits. If we're rolling, the player that rolls nothing higher than 12 gets a few rerolls. I just don't want anyone to be inherently less because it creates a riff at the table.

[Phntm888]

It depends on the game system. For instance, if I'm applying to join a PF1 game for play-by-post here on Myth-Weavers (or any game with the D&D 3.X paradigm), I'd prefer Point Buy, simply because I don't know what level of system mastery everyone involved has. An optimizer can do more with any stat array than someone with less system mastery or who doesn't try to optimize, but an optimizer with a better than average stat array is going to be leagues above someone with a comparatively worse stat array, even if they optimize that array to the best of their ability. It also makes it easier on the GM if you know that everyone's stats are going to be on roughly the same power level, as you might not have to do as much encounter adjustment to factor in the more powerful PC.

By the same token, if the rules are for rolling, I'd at least like a rule for rerolling a particularly poor array (say nothing higher than a 13 or total modifiers equal to +2 or lower), or else a rule to provide support for getting a poor array, like if you roll nothing above a 13 you can increase any 2 stats to a 15. Regardless, I appreciate having the ability to assign rolled stats where I'd like to assign them. Being able to rearrange a poor stat array can open up options to take that poor array and make it work.

If I am going to have to roll and accept stats that fall where they may, I'd prefer a rolling method that allows me to avoid being too crippled. 2d6+6, for instance, makes sure nothing's lower than an 8. A Focus and Foible method (one 18, one 8, then roll 1d10+7 for the rest of the stats) is another option that at least ensures you'll be good at what you wanted to be good at.

Of course, once you move outside the 3.X/PF1 framework, I'd probably be more open to rolling, depending on the system. Most non-3.X/PF1 systems I've played didn't have rules for rolled stats (like Exalted or PbtA), so I haven't had as much experience with those that do.

I did play AD&D a couple times (rolled stats, in order), but my rolls for those characters weren't bad.