D&D 5E 4d6 Drop the Highest?

[Gradine]

So, I'm one of those nerds who still likes rolling for stats. I grew up with 4d6 drop the lowest, and I'll be damned if I give it up now because of such silly notions as "bounded accuracy" or "game balance" or the like.

But I'm also one of those precious snowflakes who loves building characters with significant flaws, which, back when I used to play (which was 3.5) was often represented by that one really low stat.

I'm DMing a new campaign starting up and our session zero is on Saturday. An odd and almost certainly awful idea crossed my mind recently. I had every intention of making them roll for their stats (4d6 drop lowest), but what if... what if on their six and final roll, they roll 4d6 and drop the highest?

Now, I may be a nerd, but it's been at least a decade and a half since I was a math nerd, so I'm not sure what the implications of terrible, no-good idea would be. Yeah, 5e has backgrounds and flaws and this probably isn't necessary at all, and as mention, this idea is horrible. But what would be the typical results of such a roll?

 

[aco175]

I do not think that it is a bad idea. I would allow the player to assign the 6 rolls rather than assign them down the line. Another idea is to take the "drop 2, add 1" idea and expand on it. If someone rolled a 15 for his fighter's strength and wants it higher, he can drop 2 from Int or another one to bump Str 1 higher. I would think about capping it to only twice or make it drop 3 rather than 2 to get what you are going for.

Rolling also brings in the problem with total modifiers not being high enough and I'll just roll another set of stats. I think the players go with how they like to play.

 

[Sleepy Walker]

From Rumkin.com

*edit* To be honest, it does not look that bad. A good amount of the time the player will get a -1 modifier or better, though the scores are certainly depressed compared to just 3d6.

 

[5ekyu]

4d6 drop highest has the following specs:
Median roll is 9 compared to 10-11 for straight 3d6.
Mode is 8 vs 10-11 for 3d6 straight
Odds of 14+ (a +2 or higher bonus) is around 1 in 20 (~5%)
Odds of 7 or less (a -2 or worse penalty) is ~35%

i would recommend (looked it up for this post) looking at http://anydice.com/ (but i have now used it once so my impression may be based on insufficient info.) google Dice odds calculator for many options.

Now that i answered the actual question, i will make a suggestion as an alternative.

Use 4d6 keep highest.
Allow any player to voluntarily reduce any of his rolls to whatever level you and they can agree on.

See, to me all that stuff about how much fun **you** find **you** "loves building characters with significant flaws" is all well and good for **you** when you sit at the table as a player but now you are talking about pushing that onto other players and doing so in an unpredictable/unreliable way. Lucky players may manage to get an average stat on their "joy of the flaw" roll while another might get a 6 (odds of getting exactly precisely a 6 is DOUBLE the odds of getting a +2 or higher bonus at all by this method.)

So, maybe the player who like you loves flawed characters rolls no flaws and maybe the character who is not so thrilled rolls the 6... or maybe even one loving the joy of the flaw gets a bad result on their nrmal 4d6 rolls and then also gets a bad result on the "joy of the flaw" roll for not one bad stat but two (or three.)

Instead, why not let your base system play itself out as a single favorable set of rolls for everyone and then allow those who want to experience the awesome joy of "building characters with significant flaws" to just lower their stat(s) to whatever level they think will maximize their joy?


That will also give you a clear idea of how many of your players also share your particular joy.

but for Gm it is always important to differentiate between what they enjoy doing when sitting at the table as a player and what the players in the game now enjoy - cuz often they are not the same.

Now, sure obviously a player who voluntarily lowers his stats may find that creates some balance issues but to that i say two things:
1 - You are rolling for stats so any expectation of abilitiy balance never gets to the table.
2 - The decision is made with full knowledge, completely voluntarily and is done for the "joy of the flaw" and not the balance.

But basically, what give you the tingly leg when playing as a player may not be as tingly leg for others so... might want to make this a voluntary thing.

 

[Oofta]

Just have my wife over for a visit and have her roll up characters. The dice hate her.

 

[Azzy]

Just have my wife over for a visit and have her roll up characters. The dice hate her.

With me, the dice gods are are actively at odds.... The last two times I started to create a character for a campaign, the dice rolls were so abysmal, the DM told me to abort and start over. The second set then ended up near the other end of the spectrum!

 

[Blue]

If you really want to roll, and want to have flaws, give the players 24d6 (same as 4d6 x 6). Tell them to arrange as many dice as they want in order for each ability score and then roll them, taking the three highest. There must be at least one "3d6".

Rolling 5d6 or 6d6, three highest, brings up the lower end, but doesn't change the average a great deal - it's not broken.

This also has the advantage of since they are rolling them is a specific order (5d6 for STR, 4d6 for Dex, ...) that you can get some really unexpected and organic characters. Back in AD&D 2nd I had a bard with an 18 CON - back when only fighters got HP bonuses for more than a 16 CON. But he ended up being able to drink just about anyone (except those pesky dwarves) under the table and that ended up being a part of his personality. And dang it if the dwarves aren't still impressed with you if you can keep up for a while.

 

[Blue]

BTW, I love how characters come out when rolling, but 5e has convinced me to use point buy for it. You mention bounded accuracy which is part, but the other is the Faustian bargain of ASI vs. feat. If one player rolls well other players may already be a bit envious, but then when the lucky character starts getting nifty feats to give them more options or big bonuses, and while their characters are taking ASIs just to avoid falling behind bounded accuracy, that imbalance can lead to the players who aren't as lucky feeling a bit put out.

A corollary to that is that if the majority of characters have high offensive ability scores, they probably need more foes to challenge them. Especially if they start picking up feats without the trade-off of being behind bounded accuracy. If that ends up being the case based on the rolls for your group, you may want to increase the number of foes without increasing the XP granted so they don't shoot up levels.

The last point is that some classes do well with just one good ability score, while others need several. For example, pretty every front-liner will also need CON. So while statistically everyone should have at least one nice score, if they only have ONE nice score there are classes they should probably stay away from. I wouldn't mind imposing that on my players if I wanted to roll, just saying it so you're aware. Especially if someone comes in with "I want to play a paladin" (which arguably needs good STR, CHR and CON) and the dice don't agree.

 

[Ed Laprade]

Some interesting ideas here, but be prepared for some serious resistance. For myself, I much prefer to go the other way: 3D6+6, drop the lowest. So the least you can get is an 8.

 

[Charlaquin]

4d6 drop highest has the following specs:
Median roll is 9 compared to 10-11 for straight 3d6.
Mode is 8 vs 10-11 for 3d6 straight
Odds of 14+ (a +2 or higher bonus) is around 1 in 20 (~5%)
Odds of 7 or less (a -2 or worse penalty) is ~35%

i would recommend (looked it up for this post) looking at http://anydice.com/ (but i have now used it once so my impression may be based on insufficient info.) google Dice odds calculator for many options.

Now that i answered the actual question, i will make a suggestion as an alternative.

Use 4d6 keep highest.
Allow any player to voluntarily reduce any of his rolls to whatever level you and they can agree on.

See, to me all that stuff about how much fun **you** find **you** "loves building characters with significant flaws" is all well and good for **you** when you sit at the table as a player but now you are talking about pushing that onto other players and doing so in an unpredictable/unreliable way. Lucky players may manage to get an average stat on their "joy of the flaw" roll while another might get a 6 (odds of getting exactly precisely a 6 is DOUBLE the odds of getting a +2 or higher bonus at all by this method.)

So, maybe the player who like you loves flawed characters rolls no flaws and maybe the character who is not so thrilled rolls the 6... or maybe even one loving the joy of the flaw gets a bad result on their nrmal 4d6 rolls and then also gets a bad result on the "joy of the flaw" roll for not one bad stat but two (or three.)

Instead, why not let your base system play itself out as a single favorable set of rolls for everyone and then allow those who want to experience the awesome joy of "building characters with significant flaws" to just lower their stat(s) to whatever level they think will maximize their joy?


That will also give you a clear idea of how many of your players also share your particular joy.

but for Gm it is always important to differentiate between what they enjoy doing when sitting at the table as a player and what the players in the game now enjoy - cuz often they are not the same.

Now, sure obviously a player who voluntarily lowers his stats may find that creates some balance issues but to that i say two things:
1 - You are rolling for stats so any expectation of abilitiy balance never gets to the table.
2 - The decision is made with full knowledge, completely voluntarily and is done for the "joy of the flaw" and not the balance.

But basically, what give you the tingly leg when playing as a player may not be as tingly leg for others so... might want to make this a voluntary thing.

I agree with this. However, there is one small problem with this method: D&D is a team game. It may be fun for one player to voluntarily take a 6 even though he rolled an 11. But it might not be so fun for the rest of the party who have to carry his weight. I think that’s part of the appeal of rolled stats for some - you can experience the “joy of the flaw” without being That Guy who chooses to play a flawed character even though there are 3 other players relying on you. If anyone gets annoyed at you for binging a crappy character to the table, you get to blame the dice. Likewise, if you like having super high stats, there’s a chance that you’ll get that god roll with multiple 16+ stats, and you can blame the dice instead of risking being called a munchkin.

Here’s what I’d recommend: The stat generation method is ostensibly 4d6 drop lowest. Everyone rolls their own stats, away from the table, at home if they like. At the table, there are no questions asked, regardless of what stats a player has. The players who enjoy the excitement of random stats and want to play what they rolled fairly get to do so. The players who really need high stats to have a fun time can do so with no judgment. The folks who love the “joy of the flaw” can make their characters as flawed as they like without others feeling like they’re willingly hamstringing the party. Everyone wins