Rolling dice to generate your character,ability scores,race,class, etc...

[Gamerlord]

Just wondering, does anyone actually do this? I have heard rumors and tales about it (Including at least one webcomic who's name I forget ATM.) It seems like a spectacularly inappropiate way to make a character, my google-fu is too weak to find an answer, and I am curious.

[oxybe]

yes, i've gamed with one of those. it was funny at first level to his his skill points all over the place.

not so funny seeing a halfling Bard 1/Fighter 1/monk 2/wizard 1 with an eclectic choice of skills, nonsensical feat choice and a name that sound like a synonym for some sort of venereal disease due to the weird dice method used to generate things.

he then rolled up a normal character.

[Gamerlord]

I see, thank you for confirming this.

[Swordgleam]

I rolled for everything (except race and class) when I played 1st edition - race and class were determined by the stats.

Since I rolled spectacularly poorly for stats back then, I now prefer point buy for everything but one-shots.

[sambo.]

i once managed to (de)generate myself a 1ed Paladin via the old 3d6-straigt-down-the-character-sheet method.

while point-buy systems allow you a lot of flexibility, randomly generated stats can lead to characters that look "meh" but are great fun to roleplay out.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

i once managed to (de)generate myself a 1ed Paladin via the old 3d6-straigt-down-the-character-sheet method.

while point-buy systems allow you a lot of flexibility, randomly generated stats can lead to characters that look "meh" but are great fun to roleplay out.

Generally speaking, the "roleplayabiltiy" of a character is independent of stats. Just saying.

[oxybe]

i prefer point buy myself, since i would rather play the character i want to then one the dice chose for me.:smallwink:

[dragonfan6490]

My group almost exclusively rolls for stats, we never use point buy. For some games we roll for race and class also, but its becoming more common for us to roll for starting level. Which is really fun, we roll 1d4 and keep what we get. It puts a little bit of level discrepency, but we don't mind, it adds to the realism...sort of.

[Stompy]

I rolled for everything (except race and class) when I played 1st edition - race and class were determined by the stats.

Since I rolled spectacularly poorly for stats back then, I now prefer point buy for everything but one-shots.

I rolled poorly for stats 90% of the time in 1st ed, meaning that I was railroaded into a race and class. I was "forced" to play a 9 wisdom human cleric, with a 15% spell failure due to the low wisdom. He also had a 3 dexterity, meaning that his AC was 14 at the start. (normal AC is 10 and you want it to be low in 1st ed.)

I've seen people in these sorts of systems roll a totally ineffective character, and then try to kill off their own characters through roleplay.

[oxybe]

I rolled poorly for stats 90% of the time in 1st ed, meaning that I was railroaded into a race and class. I was "forced" to play a 9 wisdom human cleric, with a 15% spell failure due to the low wisdom. He also had a 3 dexterity, meaning that his AC was 14 at the start. (normal AC is 10 and you want it to be low in 1st ed.)

I've seen people in these sorts of systems roll a totally ineffective character, and then try to kill off their own characters through roleplay.

i imagine this scene:
Player A: "OH NOES, MAH MANS GOTS HERT! HE BLE3DS TO DETH! BLAARG!!!" *drops to floor*
Other Players + DM : :smallconfused:
Player A: "So, can i now roll up a cleric who can actually be a cleric"

With Player A doing the biggest, cheeziest, over-acting death scene, then dropping the last line in cold, deadpan fashion

[chiasaur11]

Yeah, rolling's fine for one offs, but for longer term, well, it seems it could hurt fun sometimes.

I mean, if you get "sorta bad" then you can roll with it, especially if you pick a SAD class. If you get "entirely hosed", well, then suicidally inclined characters come up more often and you don't care about your guy. You care about his stats.

[Swordgleam]

I rolled poorly for stats 90% of the time in 1st ed, meaning that I was railroaded into a race and class. I was "forced" to play a 9 wisdom human cleric, with a 15% spell failure due to the low wisdom. He also had a 3 dexterity, meaning that his AC was 14 at the start. (normal AC is 10 and you want it to be low in 1st ed.)

I've seen people in these sorts of systems roll a totally ineffective character, and then try to kill off their own characters through roleplay.

Wow, that beats my human cleric with 5 dex. But we were using a "roll 5, drop two lowest" system at the time, so that 5 was a result of 2, 2, 1, 1, 1. So in terms of probability, I think my 5 is still more amazingly godawful.

I rolled for "useless former profession" on the profession table, and wrote down "tattoo artist."

[Stompy]

i imagine this scene:
Player A: "OH NOES, MAH MANS GOTS HERT! HE BLE3DS TO DETH! BLAARG!!!" *drops to floor*
Other Players + DM : :smallconfused:
Player A: "So, can i now roll up a cleric who can actually be a cleric"

With Player A doing the biggest, cheeziest, over-acting death scene, then dropping the last line in cold, deadpan fashion

Actual scenes in 1st ed. where I've seen this happen.

1. I decide to roll another character, because I didn't want to be a thief in an all thief party. I roll a worse thief. Our group gets into combat with an ogre, so I decide to sneak up behind it and wait to strike. I fail, it sees me, massive damage death. Oh well. :smallwink:

2. A friend of mine made a magic user. He rolled randomly for spells and got nothing useful. He decides to PvP our "Don Quixote" character, but can't until he falls asleep. He tries to murder him (with darts), our party kills him for disloyalty.

3. Another friend had a really low stats fighter (with I think 5 INT). She decides to explore a dark hole, finds a river, explores into the river, going underwater, and yells out to the party want she sees. She drowned.

[jmbrown]

I'm an improviser and prefer rolling. If a character dies then he goes into my memorial folder with the rest of the unfortunate adventurers. I usually roll up 3 or 4 characters in front of the DM at the start of the game for such an occasion.

Edit: Okay, a lot of these death related incidents I'm reading are totally 100% the fault of the player. An animal knows I HAVE TO HOLD MY BREATH UNDERWATER BETTER NOT TRY TO BARK. Roleplaying a dumb/unwise character doesn't mean playing a toddler.

[Swordgleam]

Edit: Okay, a lot of these death related incidents I'm reading are totally 100% the fault of the player. An animal knows I HAVE TO HOLD MY BREATH UNDERWATER BETTER NOT TRY TO BARK. Roleplaying a dumb/unwise character doesn't mean playing a toddler.

That's the point. People actively try to kill off useless characters so they can invest the time in a character with decent stats.

[Temotei]

Wow, that beats my human cleric with 5 dex. But we were using a "roll 5, drop two lowest" system at the time, so that 5 was a result of 2, 2, 1, 1, 1. So in terms of probability, I think my 5 is still more amazingly godawful.

I rolled for "useless former profession" on the profession table, and wrote down "tattoo artist."

Tattoo artist could be powerful now, with all the tattoos out there granting magical abilities.

[Stompy]

Wow, that beats my human cleric with 5 dex. But we were using a "roll 5, drop two lowest" system at the time, so that 5 was a result of 2, 2, 1, 1, 1. So in terms of probability, I think my 5 is still more amazingly godawful.

Wow, that's "impressive". I have seen someone roll 4 1s for a 3.5 stat before.

I will also tell you I rolled a 3 CON 1st ed. character before that. (He was by the rules unplayable.)

My first ever 3.X character, "Jikan", had something on the order of 14 point buy. (The rolls were 16 10 9 9 8 6 if I remember correctly.) He was a wizard (but of course me being new I wanted to blast things). He had a positive CON modifier because he was a dwarf (10-->12). However, when I rolled for hit points for 2nd level, I rolled a 1. At 3rd level I rolled a 1. At 4th level I rolled a 1. At 5th level I rolled a 1 and was told to reroll it, so I rerolled a 2. My 5th level wizard was walking around with 14 HP and 5 near-death experiences. :smallfrown:

[jmbrown]

That's the point. People actively try to kill off useless characters so they can invest the time in a character with decent stats.

It's a pretty dumb point. Just play the character as written. Shoot, you might even discover a few tricks or quirks that you like about him. The idea of rolling an undesirable character, getting pissed off, and actively doing ridiculous suicidal acts is completely baffling to me. You already committed the character to paper, you might as well see him through to a satisfying end.

If you really wanted to kill someone off you might as well fall on your sword saving yourself, your DM, and the other players time. Don't be a **** by acting dumb and wasting everyone's time by trying to kill yourself or leave the group hanging in a tough fight.

[Primehunter74]

Being a 3.5 player, I roll for the 6 stats and then assign them to skills. This seems better than point buy to me. Sure you may roll all 18s, or even all 3s and 4s, but this way you can at least put the higher numbers in the skill that matters. This way, it's still random, but you wont end up with a cleric with wisdom score 3.

Edit: Also, If your character has all terrible stats, don't kill him off. Being terrible, he may just die quickly, dont kill yourself in a way that makes others embarrased to be around you, go down fighting (or quite possible get bull rushed off a cliff... heh heh...)

[AshDesert]

For one-offs my group likes to roll 4d6-drop-worst straight down the side for attributes, then decide class by rolling anywhere from a d4-d20 on a table we came up with based on your highest attribute (i.e. if you ended up with a high Int, the table would be Wizard, Psion, Factotum, and other Int based classes), and then roll a d% against a table we came up with for races (you have about a 75% chance to roll up a PHB race, the rest are all oddballs like Tibbit).

I once ended up with an intelligent Cat (yes, as in pulled from the MM and non-Int stats given racial bonuses based on stat -10 or 11, based on whether it was even or odd) Wilder, devoted to freeing his brothers from the "slavery" of domestication. Luckily, the DM for the session just said "Don't worry about the cat's Cha penalty, they shouldn't even have one anyway, they're all fluffy and cute and manipulative.":smallbiggrin:

[CTLC]

a friend once rolled, mind you the rules were roll4 take top 3 and use in the order they are rolled, and had to re roll as he had a negative int.

[DSCrankshaw]

I think the OP's point is not just rolling for stats--lots of people do that. But rolling for everything--class, race, skills, feats, name, etc.

I can't imagine doing that, to be honest. I like trying to play a large variety of characters, but a completely random character wouldn't just be sub-par, but there's a good chance of him being something I have zero interest in playing.

[Grumman]

What DSCrankshaw said. I've got a whole lot of characters I'd like to play. Random McSuck isn't one of them.

[Stompy]

It's a pretty dumb point. Just play the character as written. Shoot, you might even discover a few tricks or quirks that you like about him. The idea of rolling an undesirable character, getting pissed off, and actively doing ridiculous suicidal acts is completely baffling to me. You already committed the character to paper, you might as well see him through to a satisfying end.

If you really wanted to kill someone off you might as well fall on your sword saving yourself, your DM, and the other players time. Don't be a **** by acting dumb and wasting everyone's time by trying to kill yourself or leave the group hanging in a tough fight.

I agree. However...

Whenever I play a roleplaying tabletop game, I usually have a character concept in my head before grabbing a character sheet. I usually have his personality, his quirks, his ideals, and his past and current profession in my head. I refuse to play any system what would randomize this to the point where this goal is nigh unobtainable.

I understand that some people like realism, and like the adversity of playing random characters in a fantasy world. I like playing the farmer that due to his meekness and his generosity was given miraculous powers by Pelor, and now randomly adventures because he was exiled from his kingdom because he failed to save the Noble's son from death. (Hopefully one day he will grow in influence and be the DnD equivalent of Martin Luther.)

[jmbrown]

I think the OP's point is not just rolling for stats--lots of people do that. But rolling for everything--class, race, skills, feats, name, etc.

I can't imagine doing that, to be honest. I like trying to play a large variety of characters, but a completely random character wouldn't just be sub-par, but there's a good chance of him being something I have zero interest in playing.

Not just that but you end up with completely illogical characters. There's a reason why every edition of D&D goes Roll Ability Scores -> Select Race -> Select Class.

A person with 9 wisdom isn't going to become a cleric unless the rest of his ability scores are equally low (and in 3E he can't even cast spells, not even 0-level ones). Even in a "comedic" game, rolling for everything is entirely pointless and self defeating.

[jmbrown]

I agree. However...

Whenever I play a roleplaying tabletop game, I usually have a character concept in my head before grabbing a character sheet. I usually have his personality, his quirks, his ideals, and his past and current profession in my head. I refuse to play any system what would randomize this to the point where this goal is nigh unobtainable.

I understand that some people like realism, and like the adversity of playing random characters in a fantasy world. I like playing the farmer that due to his meekness and his generosity was given miraculous powers by Pelor, and now randomly adventures because he was exiled from his kingdom because he failed to save the Noble's son from death. (Hopefully one day he will grow in influence and be the DnD equivalent of Martin Luther.)

I'm not going to argue with differing play styles, but you know when you come to the table how the DM handles character creation (if not, ask). If he wants you to roll, and you accept, you willingly agree to his terms and shouldn't complain when you get something undesirable. If after rolling an undesirable character, don't be a monumental jerk by distracting everyone else for the game.

If everyone is enjoying your wacky antics, more power to you. However, as soon as people start groaning loudly or playing with their dice because you decided to go off on your own little adventure to take on the entire giant army or because you want to coup de grace the fighter at night, I'm going to ask you to cut it out or leave.

[Stompy]

jmbrown, I agree. I'm just trying to show through my observations and my roleplaying rationale that these systems (mainly through the way my DM changened in 1st ed.) can lead to people who are uninterested in the characters they rolled, and thus don't roleplay seriously.

[DementedFellow]

The group I used to play with would always roll for stats. We would roll 5d6 and drop the lowest two, rerolling ones. Even with the increased odds of having a higher score, 12s are very much commonplace.

I prefer rolling to point buy because you aren't necessarily locked down to one score at 18.

[SurlySeraph]

Rolling for everything can be amusing in systems that are designed to support that (i.e. Warhammer Fantasy). In DnD 3E? Not so much.

[Swordgleam]

Tattoo artist could be powerful now, with all the tattoos out there granting magical abilities.

Okay. You get in line to get a tattoo from the person with 5 dex. I'll be right behind you. :smallsmile:

[Glass Mouse]

In my group, we roll 4d6, drop the lowest and arrange them as we like. If we roll poorly (as in; average way below 10-12), we reroll the whole thing. Also, it depends on what you'd like to play (if you want a wizard, and you roll an 18 while the rest are crap, you keep it. If you want a monk, you might reroll for more MAD-friendly scores).
Randomness coupled with a certain degree of costumizability. I like. It just needs a solid gentleman's agreement to function well.

I could see myself roll for race, or maybe even class, if I had a concept that wasn't set on anything specific. But then again... Maybe not. And I'd definitely allow myself the option to reroll if I didn't like the result.

I never played with anyone who did this consistently, though.

[bosssmiley]

i imagine this scene:
Player A: "OH NOES, MAH MANS GOTS HERT! HE BLE3DS TO DETH! BLAARG!!!" *drops to floor*
Other Players + DM : :smallconfused:
Player A: "So, can i now roll up a cleric who can actually be a cleric"

With Player A doing the biggest, cheeziest, over-acting death scene, then dropping the last line in cold, deadpan fashion

This was the expected and accepted way of getting rid of a no-hope character you didn't want to play. Just make sure that your "suicide by dungeon" helped the party and it was all good. :smallwink:

Of course, some people take poor rolls as a sign from the Dice Gods that it's time for a "preserve the gimp" self imposed challenge (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SelfImposedChallenge). Those who achieve greatness despite weak PCs are acknowledged as King Nerd.

SurlySeraph beat me to an expression of love for WFRP as the exemplar of "use what you got" random chargen. But then if I had my way, the random career chart would read:

01: Beggar
02-99: Rat catcher
00: Gravedigger

[eepop]

The first time we played 3E, I rolled most things:
Race: Gnome
Class: Druid
Ability Scores: Roll 6 then arrange to taste.

Notably, I rolled a 4 for one of the rolls, so I had a 6 CON after racials. Played the character through 36 levels, and true to druid form, he was overpowered and I routinely had to hold back or make sub-optimal choices in order to not get way past other players. I took these feats for example:
Point Blank Shot
Rapid Shot
Far Shot
Brew Potion


So yes, people do this on occasion, and sometimes they even stick with it.

[Jayabalard]

Just wondering, does anyone actually do this? I have heard rumors and tales about it (Including at least one webcomic who's name I forget ATM.) It seems like a spectacularly inappropiate way to make a character, my google-fu is too weak to find an answer, and I am curious.Yes; I've done this in several game systems,

There are several systems where this is a key feature of the system: look at traveler, for example.

There are at least a few games where it's possible to die (or be horribly maimed) during character generation.


Generally speaking, the "roleplayabiltiy" of a character is independent of stats. Just saying.I have to disagree; "is" is not correct, substitute "can be" or even "often is". Stats are something that can be character defining, in thoses case they are something that should drive how a character is roleplayed.

[SurlySeraph]

SurlySeraph beat me to an expression of love for WFRP as the exemplar of "use what you got" random chargen. But then if I had my way, the random career chart would read:

01: Beggar
02-99: Rat catcher
00: Gravedigger

You know you're not in DnD-land anymore when "Owns a terrier" is one of the most powerful class features in the game.

[skywalker]

It's a pretty dumb point. Just play the character as written. Shoot, you might even discover a few tricks or quirks that you like about him. The idea of rolling an undesirable character, getting pissed off, and actively doing ridiculous suicidal acts is completely baffling to me. You already committed the character to paper, you might as well see him through to a satisfying end.

If you really wanted to kill someone off you might as well fall on your sword saving yourself, your DM, and the other players time. Don't be a **** by acting dumb and wasting everyone's time by trying to kill yourself or leave the group hanging in a tough fight.


Not just that but you end up with completely illogical characters. There's a reason why every edition of D&D goes Roll Ability Scores -> Select Race -> Select Class.

A person with 9 wisdom isn't going to become a cleric unless the rest of his ability scores are equally low (and in 3E he can't even cast spells, not even 0-level ones). Even in a "comedic" game, rolling for everything is entirely pointless and self defeating.

No, you are still missing the point. When I've played 1st ed (admittedly rarely, but still), not only has the DM expected rolling for most things (like names, equipment, etc, but not race or class, as far as I can remember), but he has also expected "Random McSuck" (usually one of the dwarf fighters, which tend to be a lot more common in 1st ed) to get thrown into the breach whenever combat occurs. Generally, Random dies, altho occasionally (generally when he got lucky and rolled for a rich family and thus, better equipment) becomes really good thru this attempted suicide, since the way you gain experience is by doing things in combat. So of course, Random gets all the way to level 10 because you keep trying to kill him and he keeps getting lucky and refusing to die.

This is how 1st edition works. There's a reason they wrote editions 2-4.

Also, you didn't necessarily commit him to paper. All my 1st ed characters have been put on note cards, and written up in about 5 minutes each.


This was the expected and accepted way of getting rid of a no-hope character you didn't want to play. Just make sure that your "suicide by dungeon" helped the party and it was all good. :smallwink:

Of course, some people take poor rolls as a sign from the Dice Gods that it's time for a "preserve the gimp" self imposed challenge (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SelfImposedChallenge). Those who achieve greatness despite weak PCs are acknowledged as King Nerd.

Precisely. But of course, how do you preserve the gimp when the only way to improve is thru constant exposure to combat?

This also demonstrates what happens when one rolls for everything but class, "Oh, good stats? You're a wizard/ranger/anything else that doesn't engage in melee combat," and just how dangerous melee combat is, a sort of realism that I found refreshing after years of 3.5.

[Fhaolan]

Several older game systems had background generators, where each 'past event' could modify your stats, skills, etc. Some of them so severe that the character could actually die during the generation phase.

They were amusing to use on occasion. If nothing else there was the fun of trying the *justify* the poor SOB after-the-fact.

[Jayabalard]

This is how 1st edition works. There's a reason they wrote editions 2-4.No, it's not. It may be how your 1e games went, but it's not how that edition worked in general. I've personally never been in 1e game where I rolled for names, and only ever rolled for part of my starting equipment; generally in those cases it was starting equipment + x amount of money to buy stuff that I needed to have (not magic items, regular gear).


Also, you didn't necessarily commit him to paper. All my 1st ed characters have been put on note cards, and written up in about 5 minutes each. Last time I checked, note cards were generally made out of paper.

[Project_Mayhem]

You know you're not in DnD-land anymore when "Owns a terrier" is one of the most powerful class features in the game.

More specifically, a small but vicious dog

[Jayabalard]

More specifically, a small but vicious dogActually, isn't a dog one of the better things you can spend your money on at 1st level?

[Project_Mayhem]

Actually, isn't a dog one of the better things you can spend your money on at 1st level?

ah, but is it small but vicious?

[Jayabalard]

ah, but is it small but vicious?Actually, it's smaller than small, right?

[Project_Mayhem]

Actually, it's smaller than small, right?

a tiny but vicious dog?

[Jayabalard]

a tiny but vicious dog?that's probably right.

[Gamerlord]

I probably will try this at some point if I ever do a one-shot, already came up with a chart for classes (Yes the samuri is on it :smallamused: .)

[Grumman]

I probably will try this at some point if I ever do a one-shot, already came up with a chart for classes (Yes the samuri is on it :smallamused: .)
Does he get Seppuku as a class feature? It would make it a lot easier to reroll something decent.

[Gamerlord]

Does he get Seppuku as a class feature? It would make it a lot easier to reroll something decent.

Nope, but if he wishes, he can will his head to explode.

I just KNOW someone will take advantage of this though...

[Gensh]

I usually don't have my players for things in the hopes that whenever someone else switches with me, I don't have to roll, since my rolls are almost always awful. In my last campaign, though, the guys whose place we were at happened to have letter dice lying around, so they rolled for names (they could rearrange the letters). Interestingly, the oddest name was Quidyx, which really isn't so bad.