User:Ghostwheel/Blogs/5

An argument against rolling for ability scores

By Max7238

Recently, I had a player in my Tuesday game make a very compelling argument against ever rolling stats again:

"I've had so many bad experiences with every system I've ever heard of for rolling for stats. Even with a 'roll 4d6, reroll 1s, drop the lowest number' I had a character with TWO 6s before. My DM just shrugged, so I had to watch as other players passed saves and played the game with nothing less than a 10, while I had to constantly break character to avoid running face-first into one of my 6s. If you want your players to all be of a certain power level - if you want us to only think about taking feats in your setting, or not even look twice at feats because the stats are so important - make your own 'standard array.' You're the DM; if you tell me I need to roll, I won't refuse. I want to be in this game. But I'll hate it. And it'll give me flashbacks to my previous games constantly when those stats are the reason I fail to make important plays or can't RP my character as I feel they should be. But if you want things to be fair, you have that authority, and you should exercise it. It puts everyone on the same playing field, lets them customize the character to suit your setting's expectation of overall power, and best of all there's no luck or head-scratching about what stat to sacrifice for that one extra point to make them viable."

It's mostly paraphrased, because it was about two weeks ago, but it captures the heart of his concerns and communicates the exact reasons he gave me. I didn't have a single compelling argument against it, either. It solves any problem a player might have with point-buy systems, the PHB standard array, or whatever convoluted system for rolling you can come up with (my table was using 4d6, reroll 1s and 2s, drop the lowest, which can STILL be a 9). I did as he said, and haven't seen an issue since. I highly recommend giving it a try while keeping racial ASIs in mind.

Addendum

For me personally, the standard array is less optimal, though it's better than rolling; life can suck and we can constantly be unlucky in life. Players should at least have an equal opportunity compared to everyone else, rather than having to rely on luck to feel like their character is meaningful and can contribute effectively.

I like the customization you can have under this system that arrays don't allow, but it still allows everyone to start on a level playing field, even taking racial modifiers into account.

My decisions as a player should define my character, not rolls of the dice before the game even starts, especially when my character is the only thing I have control of in a game.

When it comes to rolling for ability scores, I'd be just as screwed if I wanted a low-Int character and rolled nothing but 16s and higher as I would be if I wanted a balanced character but got rolls that were all over the place, or if I wanted to be especially good at one thing and didn't roll over a 14.

Rolling takes a decent amount of the decision-making and the ability to customize your character as you see them out of the character creation process, and taking away player choice and agency is a negative, especially when the only thing they can control is their character. --Ghostwheel (talk)