How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
5
down vote

favorite












Rolling ability scores is a time-honored tradition across many editions of D&D. However, it can sometimes cause problems for players and/or the DM. For example, one player character may end up much weaker or much stronger than the rest of the party, which can result in a poor experience for some of the players. In other cases, a player may have their characters repeatedly commit suicide-by-monster so they can try to reroll for higher stats, which can be quite frustrating for the GM.



What approaches are available to mitigate these problems?










share|improve this question

























    up vote
    5
    down vote

    favorite












    Rolling ability scores is a time-honored tradition across many editions of D&D. However, it can sometimes cause problems for players and/or the DM. For example, one player character may end up much weaker or much stronger than the rest of the party, which can result in a poor experience for some of the players. In other cases, a player may have their characters repeatedly commit suicide-by-monster so they can try to reroll for higher stats, which can be quite frustrating for the GM.



    What approaches are available to mitigate these problems?










    share|improve this question























      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite











      Rolling ability scores is a time-honored tradition across many editions of D&D. However, it can sometimes cause problems for players and/or the DM. For example, one player character may end up much weaker or much stronger than the rest of the party, which can result in a poor experience for some of the players. In other cases, a player may have their characters repeatedly commit suicide-by-monster so they can try to reroll for higher stats, which can be quite frustrating for the GM.



      What approaches are available to mitigate these problems?










      share|improve this question













      Rolling ability scores is a time-honored tradition across many editions of D&D. However, it can sometimes cause problems for players and/or the DM. For example, one player character may end up much weaker or much stronger than the rest of the party, which can result in a poor experience for some of the players. In other cases, a player may have their characters repeatedly commit suicide-by-monster so they can try to reroll for higher stats, which can be quite frustrating for the GM.



      What approaches are available to mitigate these problems?







      gm-techniques character-creation dungeons-and-dragons ability-scores






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 1 hour ago









      Oblivious Sage

      40.5k14124184




      40.5k14124184




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          10
          down vote













          Option One: Non-Random Ability Score Generation



          Rather than giving up control of how powerful player characters are to the whims of fate, you can instead use systems that attempt to consistently produce ability scores at an established level of quality. The two most popular schemes for doing so are standard arrays and point-buy systems.



          Standard arrays present players with between one and three pre-generated sets of ability scores. Players select a set and assign the scores within to their abilities however they want. For example, players may be given two arrays: 16 14 13 12 11 10 and 16 14 14 13 10 8. Carol wants to make a fighter, and chooses the second array. She then picks the 16 for her strength, the 14 for her constitution, the 13 for her dexterity, the 12 for her wisdom, the 11 for her intelligence, and the 10 for her charisma. Bob wants to make a wizard, so he chooses the first array, and assigns the 16 to his Int, the 14s to his Dex and Con, the 13 to his Cha, the 10 to his Wis, and the 8 to his Str.



          Point-buy systems instead give the player some sort of base ability scores and then a pool of points they can spend to increase ability scores. In some systems each point you spend increases an ability score by 1, while in others getting a single high score costs more than getting two medium scores. The Pathfinder point-buy scheme is an example of the latter. Point-buy systems give the players more control over their characters' ability scores, which generally makes them happier, but it can also increase the potential/temptation of heavily min-maxing characters (e.g. a fighter with 18s in Str/Dex/Wis and 6s in Int/Wis/Cha), which can still result in some frustration for the DM.




          Option Two: Collective Ability Score Generation



          Most problems that arise from rolling ability scores ultimately center around large differences between player characters. We can resolve this issue, and still roll ability scores, by stealing the idea of having a set of arrays from the first option. Instead of each player rolling an array of ability scores for their own character, each player rolls an array of ability scores for the party and then chooses any of the rolled arrays to use for their character. Once generated, these arrays should be saved and used again for any characters created later, rather than rolling an additional array.



          For example, Alex, Betty, and Charles are making character's for Dana's new campaign. Alex rolls 6 11 8 13 9 10, Betty rolls 18 7 12 11 15 10, and Charles rolls 16 12 14 13 15 9. Alex and Charles decide to use the array that Betty rolled, so they can put the 18 in their main ability score, while Betty opts to use the array Charles rolled so she can make a more MAD character. When Alex's character dies a few levels in, he doesn't roll a new set of ability scores for his new character. Instead, he goes back to the three arrays generated when the campaign started and chooses one of them. If Eric joins them a few levels after that, he also would use one of the same arrays everyone else picked from when they created a character.



          This approach means that if a single player rolls poorly, they're not stuck with a weaker character. If a single player rolls well, everyone can make characters who are just as strong. While this approach tends to slightly increase average party strength, having all the characters on an even playing field makes it easier for the DM to adjust encounters appropriately.






          share|improve this answer




















          • I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
            – nitsua60♦
            1 hour ago











          • Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
            – enkryptor
            1 hour ago










          • @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
            – Oblivious Sage
            1 hour ago










          • @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
            – Oblivious Sage
            1 hour ago

















          up vote
          1
          down vote













          Consider placing high/low caps on the total stats rolled.



          One method that you can try is setting a maximum and/or minimum value for the stat total rolled by the players, and have them reroll if their total is above the maximum or below the minimum. This allows some of the variation and randomness that dice rolling offers while preventing too much disparity between party members or abuse by players.



          For example, if you decide to set the minimum cap at 70 and the maximum cap at 80, one player might roll: 18 6 11 9 14 16, for a total of 74. Another might roll 14 16 13 12 10 14, for a total of 79. If your third player rolled exceptionally well: 18 16 15 11 13 12 (total 85), and your fourth player rolled poorly: 10 13 9 11 14 10 (total 67), both would need to reroll until they landed a total between 70 and 80.



          You might need to experiment a little to find the right limits for your group. You could increase the difference between your caps if you wanted to allow greater disparity between players, only set a minimum cap if you're only worried that some characters will be too weak, or only set a maximum cap if you're only concerned with players killing their characters for a chance to reroll a better one.





          share




















            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "122"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f133350%2fhow-can-i-avoid-problems-that-arise-from-rolling-ability-scores%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            10
            down vote













            Option One: Non-Random Ability Score Generation



            Rather than giving up control of how powerful player characters are to the whims of fate, you can instead use systems that attempt to consistently produce ability scores at an established level of quality. The two most popular schemes for doing so are standard arrays and point-buy systems.



            Standard arrays present players with between one and three pre-generated sets of ability scores. Players select a set and assign the scores within to their abilities however they want. For example, players may be given two arrays: 16 14 13 12 11 10 and 16 14 14 13 10 8. Carol wants to make a fighter, and chooses the second array. She then picks the 16 for her strength, the 14 for her constitution, the 13 for her dexterity, the 12 for her wisdom, the 11 for her intelligence, and the 10 for her charisma. Bob wants to make a wizard, so he chooses the first array, and assigns the 16 to his Int, the 14s to his Dex and Con, the 13 to his Cha, the 10 to his Wis, and the 8 to his Str.



            Point-buy systems instead give the player some sort of base ability scores and then a pool of points they can spend to increase ability scores. In some systems each point you spend increases an ability score by 1, while in others getting a single high score costs more than getting two medium scores. The Pathfinder point-buy scheme is an example of the latter. Point-buy systems give the players more control over their characters' ability scores, which generally makes them happier, but it can also increase the potential/temptation of heavily min-maxing characters (e.g. a fighter with 18s in Str/Dex/Wis and 6s in Int/Wis/Cha), which can still result in some frustration for the DM.




            Option Two: Collective Ability Score Generation



            Most problems that arise from rolling ability scores ultimately center around large differences between player characters. We can resolve this issue, and still roll ability scores, by stealing the idea of having a set of arrays from the first option. Instead of each player rolling an array of ability scores for their own character, each player rolls an array of ability scores for the party and then chooses any of the rolled arrays to use for their character. Once generated, these arrays should be saved and used again for any characters created later, rather than rolling an additional array.



            For example, Alex, Betty, and Charles are making character's for Dana's new campaign. Alex rolls 6 11 8 13 9 10, Betty rolls 18 7 12 11 15 10, and Charles rolls 16 12 14 13 15 9. Alex and Charles decide to use the array that Betty rolled, so they can put the 18 in their main ability score, while Betty opts to use the array Charles rolled so she can make a more MAD character. When Alex's character dies a few levels in, he doesn't roll a new set of ability scores for his new character. Instead, he goes back to the three arrays generated when the campaign started and chooses one of them. If Eric joins them a few levels after that, he also would use one of the same arrays everyone else picked from when they created a character.



            This approach means that if a single player rolls poorly, they're not stuck with a weaker character. If a single player rolls well, everyone can make characters who are just as strong. While this approach tends to slightly increase average party strength, having all the characters on an even playing field makes it easier for the DM to adjust encounters appropriately.






            share|improve this answer




















            • I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
              – nitsua60♦
              1 hour ago











            • Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
              – enkryptor
              1 hour ago










            • @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago










            • @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago














            up vote
            10
            down vote













            Option One: Non-Random Ability Score Generation



            Rather than giving up control of how powerful player characters are to the whims of fate, you can instead use systems that attempt to consistently produce ability scores at an established level of quality. The two most popular schemes for doing so are standard arrays and point-buy systems.



            Standard arrays present players with between one and three pre-generated sets of ability scores. Players select a set and assign the scores within to their abilities however they want. For example, players may be given two arrays: 16 14 13 12 11 10 and 16 14 14 13 10 8. Carol wants to make a fighter, and chooses the second array. She then picks the 16 for her strength, the 14 for her constitution, the 13 for her dexterity, the 12 for her wisdom, the 11 for her intelligence, and the 10 for her charisma. Bob wants to make a wizard, so he chooses the first array, and assigns the 16 to his Int, the 14s to his Dex and Con, the 13 to his Cha, the 10 to his Wis, and the 8 to his Str.



            Point-buy systems instead give the player some sort of base ability scores and then a pool of points they can spend to increase ability scores. In some systems each point you spend increases an ability score by 1, while in others getting a single high score costs more than getting two medium scores. The Pathfinder point-buy scheme is an example of the latter. Point-buy systems give the players more control over their characters' ability scores, which generally makes them happier, but it can also increase the potential/temptation of heavily min-maxing characters (e.g. a fighter with 18s in Str/Dex/Wis and 6s in Int/Wis/Cha), which can still result in some frustration for the DM.




            Option Two: Collective Ability Score Generation



            Most problems that arise from rolling ability scores ultimately center around large differences between player characters. We can resolve this issue, and still roll ability scores, by stealing the idea of having a set of arrays from the first option. Instead of each player rolling an array of ability scores for their own character, each player rolls an array of ability scores for the party and then chooses any of the rolled arrays to use for their character. Once generated, these arrays should be saved and used again for any characters created later, rather than rolling an additional array.



            For example, Alex, Betty, and Charles are making character's for Dana's new campaign. Alex rolls 6 11 8 13 9 10, Betty rolls 18 7 12 11 15 10, and Charles rolls 16 12 14 13 15 9. Alex and Charles decide to use the array that Betty rolled, so they can put the 18 in their main ability score, while Betty opts to use the array Charles rolled so she can make a more MAD character. When Alex's character dies a few levels in, he doesn't roll a new set of ability scores for his new character. Instead, he goes back to the three arrays generated when the campaign started and chooses one of them. If Eric joins them a few levels after that, he also would use one of the same arrays everyone else picked from when they created a character.



            This approach means that if a single player rolls poorly, they're not stuck with a weaker character. If a single player rolls well, everyone can make characters who are just as strong. While this approach tends to slightly increase average party strength, having all the characters on an even playing field makes it easier for the DM to adjust encounters appropriately.






            share|improve this answer




















            • I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
              – nitsua60♦
              1 hour ago











            • Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
              – enkryptor
              1 hour ago










            • @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago










            • @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago












            up vote
            10
            down vote










            up vote
            10
            down vote









            Option One: Non-Random Ability Score Generation



            Rather than giving up control of how powerful player characters are to the whims of fate, you can instead use systems that attempt to consistently produce ability scores at an established level of quality. The two most popular schemes for doing so are standard arrays and point-buy systems.



            Standard arrays present players with between one and three pre-generated sets of ability scores. Players select a set and assign the scores within to their abilities however they want. For example, players may be given two arrays: 16 14 13 12 11 10 and 16 14 14 13 10 8. Carol wants to make a fighter, and chooses the second array. She then picks the 16 for her strength, the 14 for her constitution, the 13 for her dexterity, the 12 for her wisdom, the 11 for her intelligence, and the 10 for her charisma. Bob wants to make a wizard, so he chooses the first array, and assigns the 16 to his Int, the 14s to his Dex and Con, the 13 to his Cha, the 10 to his Wis, and the 8 to his Str.



            Point-buy systems instead give the player some sort of base ability scores and then a pool of points they can spend to increase ability scores. In some systems each point you spend increases an ability score by 1, while in others getting a single high score costs more than getting two medium scores. The Pathfinder point-buy scheme is an example of the latter. Point-buy systems give the players more control over their characters' ability scores, which generally makes them happier, but it can also increase the potential/temptation of heavily min-maxing characters (e.g. a fighter with 18s in Str/Dex/Wis and 6s in Int/Wis/Cha), which can still result in some frustration for the DM.




            Option Two: Collective Ability Score Generation



            Most problems that arise from rolling ability scores ultimately center around large differences between player characters. We can resolve this issue, and still roll ability scores, by stealing the idea of having a set of arrays from the first option. Instead of each player rolling an array of ability scores for their own character, each player rolls an array of ability scores for the party and then chooses any of the rolled arrays to use for their character. Once generated, these arrays should be saved and used again for any characters created later, rather than rolling an additional array.



            For example, Alex, Betty, and Charles are making character's for Dana's new campaign. Alex rolls 6 11 8 13 9 10, Betty rolls 18 7 12 11 15 10, and Charles rolls 16 12 14 13 15 9. Alex and Charles decide to use the array that Betty rolled, so they can put the 18 in their main ability score, while Betty opts to use the array Charles rolled so she can make a more MAD character. When Alex's character dies a few levels in, he doesn't roll a new set of ability scores for his new character. Instead, he goes back to the three arrays generated when the campaign started and chooses one of them. If Eric joins them a few levels after that, he also would use one of the same arrays everyone else picked from when they created a character.



            This approach means that if a single player rolls poorly, they're not stuck with a weaker character. If a single player rolls well, everyone can make characters who are just as strong. While this approach tends to slightly increase average party strength, having all the characters on an even playing field makes it easier for the DM to adjust encounters appropriately.






            share|improve this answer












            Option One: Non-Random Ability Score Generation



            Rather than giving up control of how powerful player characters are to the whims of fate, you can instead use systems that attempt to consistently produce ability scores at an established level of quality. The two most popular schemes for doing so are standard arrays and point-buy systems.



            Standard arrays present players with between one and three pre-generated sets of ability scores. Players select a set and assign the scores within to their abilities however they want. For example, players may be given two arrays: 16 14 13 12 11 10 and 16 14 14 13 10 8. Carol wants to make a fighter, and chooses the second array. She then picks the 16 for her strength, the 14 for her constitution, the 13 for her dexterity, the 12 for her wisdom, the 11 for her intelligence, and the 10 for her charisma. Bob wants to make a wizard, so he chooses the first array, and assigns the 16 to his Int, the 14s to his Dex and Con, the 13 to his Cha, the 10 to his Wis, and the 8 to his Str.



            Point-buy systems instead give the player some sort of base ability scores and then a pool of points they can spend to increase ability scores. In some systems each point you spend increases an ability score by 1, while in others getting a single high score costs more than getting two medium scores. The Pathfinder point-buy scheme is an example of the latter. Point-buy systems give the players more control over their characters' ability scores, which generally makes them happier, but it can also increase the potential/temptation of heavily min-maxing characters (e.g. a fighter with 18s in Str/Dex/Wis and 6s in Int/Wis/Cha), which can still result in some frustration for the DM.




            Option Two: Collective Ability Score Generation



            Most problems that arise from rolling ability scores ultimately center around large differences between player characters. We can resolve this issue, and still roll ability scores, by stealing the idea of having a set of arrays from the first option. Instead of each player rolling an array of ability scores for their own character, each player rolls an array of ability scores for the party and then chooses any of the rolled arrays to use for their character. Once generated, these arrays should be saved and used again for any characters created later, rather than rolling an additional array.



            For example, Alex, Betty, and Charles are making character's for Dana's new campaign. Alex rolls 6 11 8 13 9 10, Betty rolls 18 7 12 11 15 10, and Charles rolls 16 12 14 13 15 9. Alex and Charles decide to use the array that Betty rolled, so they can put the 18 in their main ability score, while Betty opts to use the array Charles rolled so she can make a more MAD character. When Alex's character dies a few levels in, he doesn't roll a new set of ability scores for his new character. Instead, he goes back to the three arrays generated when the campaign started and chooses one of them. If Eric joins them a few levels after that, he also would use one of the same arrays everyone else picked from when they created a character.



            This approach means that if a single player rolls poorly, they're not stuck with a weaker character. If a single player rolls well, everyone can make characters who are just as strong. While this approach tends to slightly increase average party strength, having all the characters on an even playing field makes it easier for the DM to adjust encounters appropriately.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            Oblivious Sage

            40.5k14124184




            40.5k14124184











            • I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
              – nitsua60♦
              1 hour ago











            • Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
              – enkryptor
              1 hour ago










            • @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago










            • @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago
















            • I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
              – nitsua60♦
              1 hour ago











            • Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
              – enkryptor
              1 hour ago










            • @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago










            • @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
              – Oblivious Sage
              1 hour ago















            I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
            – nitsua60♦
            1 hour ago





            I wish this also included some discussion of in-play ways to make "uneven ability scores" =/= "a problem for the table." It seems to assume that assuring parity is the way to avoid problems, but in my experience that's not the only way.
            – nitsua60♦
            1 hour ago













            Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
            – enkryptor
            1 hour ago




            Q: "How can I avoid problems that arise from rolling ability scores?" A: "Don't roll ability scores" ah, okay...
            – enkryptor
            1 hour ago












            @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
            – Oblivious Sage
            1 hour ago




            @enkryptor The second option still rolls ability scores. Do I need to emphasize that some more?
            – Oblivious Sage
            1 hour ago












            @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
            – Oblivious Sage
            1 hour ago




            @nitsua60 Assuring parity is a broadly applicable way of avoiding the problem. There are certainly other ways to deal with the resulting problems, but there's a big difference between, "We're playing 4e and Joe's barbarian's highest stat is a 13, what can we do," and, "We're playing 3.5e and Karen's druid's lowest stat is a 16, what can we do," when you're discussing those alternate approaches. Assuring parity in rolls ahead of time is a solution that can work for almost everyone.
            – Oblivious Sage
            1 hour ago












            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Consider placing high/low caps on the total stats rolled.



            One method that you can try is setting a maximum and/or minimum value for the stat total rolled by the players, and have them reroll if their total is above the maximum or below the minimum. This allows some of the variation and randomness that dice rolling offers while preventing too much disparity between party members or abuse by players.



            For example, if you decide to set the minimum cap at 70 and the maximum cap at 80, one player might roll: 18 6 11 9 14 16, for a total of 74. Another might roll 14 16 13 12 10 14, for a total of 79. If your third player rolled exceptionally well: 18 16 15 11 13 12 (total 85), and your fourth player rolled poorly: 10 13 9 11 14 10 (total 67), both would need to reroll until they landed a total between 70 and 80.



            You might need to experiment a little to find the right limits for your group. You could increase the difference between your caps if you wanted to allow greater disparity between players, only set a minimum cap if you're only worried that some characters will be too weak, or only set a maximum cap if you're only concerned with players killing their characters for a chance to reroll a better one.





            share
























              up vote
              1
              down vote













              Consider placing high/low caps on the total stats rolled.



              One method that you can try is setting a maximum and/or minimum value for the stat total rolled by the players, and have them reroll if their total is above the maximum or below the minimum. This allows some of the variation and randomness that dice rolling offers while preventing too much disparity between party members or abuse by players.



              For example, if you decide to set the minimum cap at 70 and the maximum cap at 80, one player might roll: 18 6 11 9 14 16, for a total of 74. Another might roll 14 16 13 12 10 14, for a total of 79. If your third player rolled exceptionally well: 18 16 15 11 13 12 (total 85), and your fourth player rolled poorly: 10 13 9 11 14 10 (total 67), both would need to reroll until they landed a total between 70 and 80.



              You might need to experiment a little to find the right limits for your group. You could increase the difference between your caps if you wanted to allow greater disparity between players, only set a minimum cap if you're only worried that some characters will be too weak, or only set a maximum cap if you're only concerned with players killing their characters for a chance to reroll a better one.





              share






















                up vote
                1
                down vote










                up vote
                1
                down vote









                Consider placing high/low caps on the total stats rolled.



                One method that you can try is setting a maximum and/or minimum value for the stat total rolled by the players, and have them reroll if their total is above the maximum or below the minimum. This allows some of the variation and randomness that dice rolling offers while preventing too much disparity between party members or abuse by players.



                For example, if you decide to set the minimum cap at 70 and the maximum cap at 80, one player might roll: 18 6 11 9 14 16, for a total of 74. Another might roll 14 16 13 12 10 14, for a total of 79. If your third player rolled exceptionally well: 18 16 15 11 13 12 (total 85), and your fourth player rolled poorly: 10 13 9 11 14 10 (total 67), both would need to reroll until they landed a total between 70 and 80.



                You might need to experiment a little to find the right limits for your group. You could increase the difference between your caps if you wanted to allow greater disparity between players, only set a minimum cap if you're only worried that some characters will be too weak, or only set a maximum cap if you're only concerned with players killing their characters for a chance to reroll a better one.





                share












                Consider placing high/low caps on the total stats rolled.



                One method that you can try is setting a maximum and/or minimum value for the stat total rolled by the players, and have them reroll if their total is above the maximum or below the minimum. This allows some of the variation and randomness that dice rolling offers while preventing too much disparity between party members or abuse by players.



                For example, if you decide to set the minimum cap at 70 and the maximum cap at 80, one player might roll: 18 6 11 9 14 16, for a total of 74. Another might roll 14 16 13 12 10 14, for a total of 79. If your third player rolled exceptionally well: 18 16 15 11 13 12 (total 85), and your fourth player rolled poorly: 10 13 9 11 14 10 (total 67), both would need to reroll until they landed a total between 70 and 80.



                You might need to experiment a little to find the right limits for your group. You could increase the difference between your caps if you wanted to allow greater disparity between players, only set a minimum cap if you're only worried that some characters will be too weak, or only set a maximum cap if you're only concerned with players killing their characters for a chance to reroll a better one.






                share











                share


                share










                answered 6 mins ago









                user48255

                95018




                95018



























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f133350%2fhow-can-i-avoid-problems-that-arise-from-rolling-ability-scores%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    Comments

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being “babysat” by supervisor

                    Is the Concept of Multiple Fantasy Races Scientifically Flawed? [closed]

                    Confectionery