# Character Creation Stat Draft (Trial Draft Complete!!)



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

So today I was hit with the idea  that for the next D&D game I run I'd do a stat draft instead of a point based system or individual rolling.


Instead, I would roll up a number of sets of stats ahead of time based on the number of starting players.  And then we'd roll randomly to see the order of the picks.  

Each stat number would be attached to a specific ability, so the first person to pick would say, "I'll take the 18 Strength" because (for example) they wanted to make a barbarian.

The next person could then take from whatever is left "I'll take the 16 strength" (b/c they want to be pretty strong, too) or "I'll take the 17 Intelligence" because they want to play a wizard, etc. . . 

In the next round, the person that picked second picks first and then all the way through.

In the third round, the person that went 3rd in the first round goes first, etc. . . 

If at any point someone wanted to skip their turn and pick last in a round they would be allowed to and it would not affect their overall positon in the draft.

I figure for people who might join the game after it begins, or who are replacing a dead character, we'd figure out what the average scores were and then using the point system figure out how many points that'd be and they can use that amount to set their scores.

Does anyone forsee any problems with this method?  Anyone ever do something like this?


----------



## Crothian (Nov 20, 2005)

Sounds fun, I did something similiar once.  Instead of a draft I had the players talk it over and decide among them who got what scores.  It worked really well sicne the players were all nice and no one tried to bully themselves into getting lots of good scores.


----------



## Umbran (Nov 20, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Does anyone forsee any problems with this method?




Can't speak to your players, specifically.  In general, I think this isn't a hot idea.  Competition between players in character generation is asking for trouble.

The average gaming group is not nearly large enough to ensure against luck or unluck.  Somoene may always go early in the rotation, or someone else always late.  So now the lucky guy is responsible for taking all the good scores, and the unlucky guy feels like he's getting shafted by everybody else.  In standard character generation, with each person just rolling their own dice, someone may get the short end of the stick, but at least the other players in the group weren't responsible for handing it to them.

Possibility 1 - don't make it a random roll.  Set some form of order that at least tries to make sure that everyone gets a fair shake - Perhaps the higher the stat a player picks in one pass, the later he goes in teh next pass...

Possibility 2 - Don't open up all the stats in each pass.  Make only as many stats as their are players available, and mix them up, so there are high and low stas available in each pass, and they don't know for certain exactly what's available.  

Possibility 3 - make it fully cooperative, rather than competetive.  Allow the players, as a group, to shuffle the stas around as they collectively see fit.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Possibility 1 - don't make it a random roll.  Set some form of order that at least tries to make sure that everyone gets a fair shake - Perhaps the higher the stat a player picks in one pass, the later he goes in the next pass...




I like this idea. 

Of course, the random roll was only for the first round, after that 2nd goes first and 1st goes last, next round 3rd goes first and 2nd goes last and 1st goes second to last, etc. . .

But I like the idea that the person who chooses the highest stat in a round goes last, etc. . .and if two people pick the same score in the same round, then whoever has the lowest total so far of the two gets to pick ahead of the other.

As for competition among players, my players tend to be more cooperative than competetive.  I can totally imagine a conversation like this:

Player 1: "Do you have your heart set on that wizard character?  Because if so, I'll just take the 14 Intelligence and leave the 17 to you."

Player 2: "Eh, take it if you want, I can take the 14, I plan to make him a multiclassed ranger as well, so I'll want to get a decent wisdom and strength."


----------



## Hodgie (Nov 20, 2005)

I'd suggest allowing a liberal dose of swapping and communal picking as Crothian suggested.  Stat-draft was our official method for a while and I really enjoyed it because it randomized stats while assuring that everyone was approximately equal.

I'd also consider not tying numbers to specific stats.  You'll find that players who have certain concepts are unable to create those concepts because one or two stat arrays just weren't up to snuff.  Imagine if the highest Int was a 14... but the Str arrays is filled with high scores.  It can create tension.


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Nov 20, 2005)

Personally I dont think it is fair. Either let the players determine their stats or go with the elite array. JMHO.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Nov 20, 2005)

Or use points buy to create the characters before doing the draft. Getting the worst character because you got one bad die roll does not sound like fun. 

Getting the choice between a character with middling-high stats across the board, or one with a mix of great and mediocre stats on the other hand...

The Auld Grump, who likes points buy more these days...


----------



## pogre (Nov 20, 2005)

Ben Durbin used a stat draft style system for his campaign a couple of years ago. I don't remember the details, but he was happy with the results.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

Would anyone be willing to do a mock stat draft just to see how the characters turn out?

I'll take the first six people interested (as that will be my likely number of players).


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Nov 20, 2005)

Nemm, what are your reasons for considering stat-draft instead of point buy or rolling dice? 

I considered stat-draft for my current campaign, but decided against it because of the issue you point out - it treats later created characters differently than the starting characters.  Instead I went with a card draw system (e.g., 24 cards, 4 each ace, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, deal into 6 stacks of 4, take best 3).  I found this achieved my primary goal of randomized stats while assuring that everyone was approximately equal.

-RedShirt


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

RedShirtNo5 said:
			
		

> Nemm, what are your reasons for considering stat-draft instead of point buy or rolling dice?
> 
> -RedShirt




I don't like point buy because I like a little more variety in PCs and I think it penalizes people who want to take a very low stat in something without any chance of something in return.

On the other hand, pure random stat rolling can lead to a VERY wide variation in characters' stats which can be disruptive to a degree (at the same time I have seen plenty of high stat characters die while the "weaker" ones lived).

And lastly, because I think it would be fun to have a communal character creation experience.


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Nov 20, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> And lastly, because I think it would be fun to have a communal character creation experience.



 Then you should do it.  

Did you consider having the players roll the dice to create the draft?  Benefit is player bonding through tension in creating the draft.  Drawback is what Hodgie alludes to, i.e., some stats may simply not have good values, limiting availability of some character classes.  This could be addressed by letting the players swap one or two pairs of stats after rolling but before order of picking has been set.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 20, 2005)

The weakness of any random creation system is that, to some extent, the stats will determine the character concept rather than the other way around. If I want to play a particular character--a charismatic, womanizing fighter, for instance--odds are pretty good that a straight-up random roll like 3d6 six times in order won't be able to support that character. Too low a strength or con and he won't go the distance with Apollo Creed. Too low a charisma and he'll be the ugly thug rather than the underdog contender. The odds of getting the three important stats all in the right range to support the character are not particularly high. With a more generous random method of character generation, the odds of the dice supporting a particular character go up--especially if you can rearrange stats, but since it's still basically random, odds are pretty good that you're going to be deciding between the talented but undisciplined renaissance man who's smarter than average, moderately charismatic, fairly strong and reasonably tough and the weak genius who, like Rasputin, can survive amazing scrapes based upon whether you rolled a 15, a 14, three 13's and a 12 or whether you ended up with an 18, 16, 11, 12, 10, 6.

So, if you prefer concept to preceed creation, a random method of character generation probably isn't going to support that goal.

Point Buy and other choice systems, on the other hand, allow players to develop a concept and choose stats that support the concept... with one big caveat: The concept has to be "balanced" in some way. You can play the really strong but not so bright lug, the renaissance man, the weakling or antisocial genius, etc, but on most point buys you can't play James Bond or Ethan Hunt. The category of concepts that falls under the "really good at everything/unbalanced" category is not supported. If you want to be as strong as Sir Gawaine, you'll have to give up on either being clever or being as charismatic as Sir Galahad.

So, how about the draft idea? I think that is going to combine some of the concept follows stats characteristic of random generation with some of the limited concept support of point buy.

For the first, let's consider these options. I'm sitting down with 4d6 and rolling a stat for six characters:

Str 15, 15, 12, 9, 10, 15
Int 17, 16, 14, 13, 15, 15

Obviously, I rolled pretty well. (Especially that second set--I'll take that character please  But with the lowest int score as a 13, the player who had walked in thinking "I'll play a dumb barbarian is going to have to adjust his character concept. Similarly, the guy who had planned on making a hulking, he-man fighter is going to be out of luck. He can make a strong fighter, but he won't be the strongest guy out there by any stretch of the imagination--he's more 75th percentile than 99th.

So, with a fairly limited set of options you're going to have the dice and the social dynamic of the draw determining possible character concepts. (And, the two obvious changes to the system--rolling more dice to get more variation and allowing characters to draft the numbers instead of drafting attributes (numbers connected to a specific attribute) won't help. The first will simply skew the results higher. (Let's say that you decided for 8 strength rolls and took my first two int rolls and put them in strength--now you're likely to end up with 17, 16, 15, 15, 15, 12 as your characters' strength scores. The available stats still don't support a low-strength concept; they're just higher than than they would have been otherwise.) The second would simply make it a question of choosing the highest numbers--I mean, everyone would make a better, tougher character with higher numbers rather than lower ones, right? And it's not like the higher numbers will be around on the second draft pick if you forgoe them in the first round).

The second point is that, like point buy, the draft system is likely to favor the creation of certain kinds of characters. In point buy, James Bond is impossible. The characters that are encouraged either strongly favor a couple stats (the 20, 10, 16, 6, 8, 6 half-orc barbarian) or are moderately good at a lot of things (a 14, 14, 14, 14, 10, 10 fighter/mage for instance). In the draft system you're proposing (as I understand it), everyone has a big incentive to grab the highest roll available to them and create a character based off of it. So, if the five highest rolls on the table are 17 int, 18 wis, 17 cha, 16 int, and 18 dex, odds are good that they will be the first five choices and the players will then pick from the 16 dex, 15 str, 15 str, 15 str, and 14 con that are on the table. After three choices or so, players may be less picky (after all, it does you no good to pick the 16 Int if you already have the 17 Int). And there is probably an incentive to depart from that paradigm in the case of Constitution (It's everyone's secondary stat. If there's a 15, 10, 7, 13, 8, and 14 Con on the table, I'd be tempted to give up the possibility of a 17 or 18 on my primary stat in order to make sure I didn't end up with the 7 Con). But, on the whole, I would expect characters chosen with the stat draft method to look something like [Really high score] [fairly high score] [three middling scores] [one lousy score]. In general, I'd expect characters to have one or two really high scores and the rest above average to poor.

So, I guess it comes down to these questions:
1. Do you want the dice to dictate character concepts?
2. Do you like the kind of character that a system is going to encourage? (No system invariably creates one kind of character--I've seen 15, 13, 12, 10, 11, 14 characters come out of 28 point buy just like I've seen 18, 10, 16, 8, 8, 8 characters and 14, 14, 14, 10, 10, 14, and 14, 10, 14, 10, 15, 12 characters come out of it, but you rightly observe that it encourages certain tendencies).


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

RedShirtNo5 said:
			
		

> Then you should do it.
> 
> Did you consider having the players roll the dice to create the draft?  Benefit is player bonding through tension in creating the draft.  Drawback is what Hodgie alludes to, i.e., some stats may simply not have good values, limiting availability of some character classes.  This could be addressed by letting the players swap one or two pairs of stats after rolling but before order of picking has been set.




That is how I originally planned to do it, but then realized I should do it myself to tweak the stats as needed before the players see them.

Perhaps a compromise is have each player roll seven stats, one attached to each attribute and one "wild" that if chosen can be put in any slot (but would not neccessarily be high).


----------



## Thanee (Nov 20, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> In the next round, the person that picked second picks first and then all the way through.
> 
> In the third round, the person that went 3rd in the first round goes first, etc. . .




I would probably swap around the order completely each round.

i.e. with 4 players...

R1) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
R2) 4th 3rd 2nd 1st
R3) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
R4) 4th 3rd 2nd 1st
R5) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
R6) 4th 3rd 2nd 1st

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Thanee (Nov 20, 2005)

Rolled up some example stats:

STR 12 09 13 14
DEX 10 16 13 11
CON 12 11 14 13
INT 08 13 10 08
WIS 18 07 16 13
CHA 11 15 14 18

ONE decides to play a Cleric, TWO does not want to play a spellcaster and decides to play a Rogue, THREE decides on a Druid and FOUR then goes for a Sorcerer. Using the draft order I posted above.

ONE Wis 18 TWO Dex 16 THREE Wis 16 FOUR Cha 18
FOUR Con 14 THREE Int 13 TWO Int 10 ONE Str 14
ONE Con 13 TWO Str 13 THREE Con 12 FOUR Dex 13
FOUR Wis 13 THREE Cha 15 TWO Cha 14 ONE Dex 11
ONE Cha 11 TWO Con 11 THREE Str 12 FOUR Str 09
FOUR Int 08 THREE Dex 10 TWO Wis 07 ONE Int 08

The final abilities in order:

STR 14 13 12 09
DEX 11 16 10 13
CON 13 11 12 14
INT 08 10 13 08
WIS 18 07 16 13
CHA 11 14 15 18

T-M +6 +4 +8 +6
P-B 33 25 33 33

The Rogue looks a little weak, but TWO didn't want to play a spellcaster. 


Another try with the draft order based on highest ability picked last round.

ONE Wis 18 TWO Dex 16 THREE Wis 16 FOUR Cha 18
THREE Int 13 TWO Con 14 FOUR Con 13 ONE Str 14
FOUR Dex 13 THREE Cha 15 ONE Cha 14 TWO Int 10
TWO Wis 13 FOUR Str 13 ONE Con 12 THREE Str 12
THREE Dex 11 ONE Dex 10 FOUR Int 08 TWO Str 09
FOUR Wis 07 TWO Cha 11 ONE Int 08 THREE Con 10

STR 14 09 12 13
DEX 10 16 11 13
CON 12 14 11 13
INT 08 10 13 08
WIS 18 13 16 07
CHA 14 11 15 18

T-M +8 +5 +7 +4
P-B 34 27 33 30

This probably works a little better. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Nov 20, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Perhaps a compromise is have each player roll seven stats, one attached to each attribute and one "wild" that if chosen can be put in any slot (but would not neccessarily be high).



Hmm.  My intuition is that, unless the rolled stat distribution was pretty strange, the result of this would be that no character would have a stat below 9.

There's something to be said for the old-school feel of having the stats determine the character.  In the card draw system, I had players considering class combinations and character concepts that they would not normally select.  Also, since the stat generation was restricive, I was more permissive in what books could be used - I let players use base classes from the Complete series and Expanded Psionics (usually I would limit classes to the core books).


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

Yeah, I am not overly concerned with stats determining character - stretch thos creative muscles.

I still am curious to run a mock draft here on the boards just to see how it works out.  Thanee's examples were cool, but formated confusingly.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 20, 2005)

Sorry! 

The first block is just rolled in order (top to bottom, left to right).

The 6-line blocks (ONE Wis 18 TWO Dex 16 ...) are the six rounds of the draft with the order in each round from left to right.

The blocks after those are the results, where the four columns stand for the four players (ONE, TWO, etc).

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Umbran (Nov 20, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> I still am curious to run a mock draft here on the boards just to see how it works out.  Thanee's examples were cool, but formated confusingly.




I'll be happy to help with this, if you need it.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 20, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> I'll be happy to help with this, if you need it.





Well have stats rolled up for it - now all we need is 5 more people and we can run through one.


----------



## Aust Diamondew (Nov 20, 2005)

I'll have to a stat draft sometime.  Usually I do point buy or the standard 4d6 (drop 1) six times.  But I think a stat draft could be great!  I'll even let my players roll the stats for the stat draft and I'll roll a set and they pick from those.  I'll probably use thanees suggested for whoever picked lowest stat last round picks first the next round.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 20, 2005)

Aust Diamondew said:
			
		

> I'll probably use thanees suggested for whoever picked lowest stat last round picks first the next round.




If you meant the second version in my example, that was the idea posted by Umbran. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 20, 2005)

*Count me in for the draft if u need 1 more*

I don't post very often, more of a lurker.  But your thread has peeked my interest if you still need someone else for the Draft I would be happy to help out.  

I am online pretty frequently so I will post back here pretty quickly anyway should be an enlightening experience, as I may try this myself in the future.

Finley


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 21, 2005)

Finley DaDum said:
			
		

> I don't post very often, more of a lurker.  But your thread has peeked my interest if you still need someone else for the Draft I would be happy to help out.
> 
> I am online pretty frequently so I will post back here pretty quickly anyway should be an enlightening experience, as I may try this myself in the future.
> 
> Finley




Four more and we can go. .  It doesn't really matter how long it takes. .


----------



## Thanee (Nov 21, 2005)

Well, if it doesn't matter, then I can certainly help out as well. I thought you would be better off with people from your time zone. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Nov 21, 2005)

Aye, if time doesn't matter too much, count me in as well. I'm be interested to see how this works out and would have followed the thread anyway.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Nov 21, 2005)

pogre said:
			
		

> Ben Durbin used a stat draft style system for his campaign a couple of years ago. I don't remember the details, but he was happy with the results.




For each player, I made a set of stat cards like this:

+2 STR
+2 CON
+2 DEX
+2 INT
+2 WIS
+2 CHA
+1 "special" card per player-- things like a bonus feat, or bonus starting money, etc.

Everyone started with a base of 10 in each attribute (you could also do a base of 9 or 11), plus one set of cards. 

If you just held on to all your cards, you'd have a 12 in every attribute.

Then I encouraged the players to get together and trade the cards around as a group.

It worked pretty well.

It would work just as well as a draft, of course. Instead of everyone getting one set of cards, all the cards are put into the pool, and you take turns picking cards.

By the way, I think the standard draft order is a constant ABCDE, EDCBA, ABCDE, EDCBA until you're all done.

If you are having the players pick cards (as I outlined above) instead of picking actual scores from a list, the order in which they take their picks won't matter as much. 

If there's only one 18 in your sample rolls, for example, then you have a huge advantage for the lucky guy who picks first.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 21, 2005)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> By the way, I think the standard draft order is a constant ABCDE, EDCBA, ABCDE, EDCBA until you're all done.




Yep, that's what I had proposed, too, but I think Umbran's idea is better, to order the picks each round after the ability scores picked in the last round from highest to lowest (ties are broken up from last to first going by last round's order). 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Conaill (Nov 21, 2005)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> By the way, I think the standard draft order is a constant ABCDE, EDCBA, ABCDE, EDCBA until you're all done.



Actually, a more fair approach is to reverse direction only once. I.e. ABCDE, EDCBA, EDCBA, etc... (This order is also frequently suggested for treasure allocation.)

The order proposed by Wulf (and Thanee earlier) would be ok if the stats were distributed uniformly. But with rolled stats, you're going to get a few high outliers (17's or an occasional 18) and a lot more stats in the "middle of the pack". Those few high outliers will typically be snatched up by the first couple of picks, so after the first two round (ABCDE, EDCBA) whomever picked first will - on average - still have somewhat of an edge, so you might as well let E go first again in the 3rd round.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 21, 2005)

I am going to use my person who picked the lowest stat each round going first in the next and so on in order with ties broken by whoever has the lower stat total so far.  If there is a tie in the first round, the person who picked second between the two (or more) picks first in the second (and so on).


----------



## Enkhidu (Nov 21, 2005)

If you're still looking for more drafters, count me in. I'd like to see how this works.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 22, 2005)

Okay, so far we have

Umbran
Finley DaDum
Thanee
Gold Roger
Enkhidu

Who said they are willing to play along.  I'll take up to one more person.

Let's say we start tomorrow at 12:30 EST - or at least I'll post the stats and first pick order at that time and then after that people can just post their pick in the appropriate order (which I will determine randomly) and we'll go from there (after the first round I will post the order for the next round, and so on).

Just so we're clear on how it will work.  

Assuming we have 6 people, I will post six scores for each stat, plus six "wild" scores which can be put anywhere.

Each round after the first, the order will be decided by the person who picked the lowest score in the last round picking first.  In the case of a tie, the person with the lowest total stat score picks before the other.  If there is still a tie (or if it is a tie in the first round) then it will simply be the opposite order from how those two (or more) people picked in the previous round.


I figure with time differences and the up-coming holiday it might take a while to go all the way through.  Don't sweat it.

So, if you are in the list above and are still interested pipe up, and if you want to be the sixth person, do so as well.

Thanks.


----------



## Umbran (Nov 22, 2005)

I'm all set, el-remmen.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 22, 2005)

Ditto. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Thanee (Nov 22, 2005)

Oh, and we should probably try to make hypothetical characters we would actually like to play, let our own preferances influence the decisions, not just collect arrangements of ability scores, which seem to be best for a hypothetical character given the dice rolls.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Nov 22, 2005)

I'm usually limited to posting once per day in the evenings, but if time isn't an issue then count me in. 

In letting the stats determine the character, are there any particular house rules on character classes?  I remember you had a witch in your story hour.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 22, 2005)

Im good to go 2.  In the interest of some level of realism, i.e. most groups would talk about what kind of characters they might be playing, here are 2 basic concepts that I will be looking at when making my picks.  The first works best with more balanced scores, the 2nd relies heavily on 2 hi scores, each has 1 stat at least that can work with a negative modifier.

A melee fighter build-(Barbarian/Cleric/Fighter)
Stat in order of importance-Str, Chr, Wis, Con, Dex, Int

A sneaky/spellcaster-(Rogue/Wizard/Arcane Trickster)
Stats-Dex, Int, Con, Wis, Chr, Str


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 22, 2005)

Unfortunately, I am going to have to postpone this experiment because I am going to be too busy all day.

Shall we try to do it next week after the holiday?  

Sorry.


----------



## Umbran (Nov 22, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Shall we try to do it next week after the holiday?




That'd be fine for me.  Better, really, given my particular holiday plans.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 22, 2005)

Sure, no problem. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Nov 22, 2005)

I'm alright with doing it later and still set to participate.
On hpothetical chars, I often prefer to roll with what comes along anyway, but I'll watch for a cleric on this one, with a Rogue/x multiclass as emergency plan.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 22, 2005)

With hypothetical character I just meant something you would actually want to play. If you actually want to play whatever the stats dictate, that's it. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Altalazar (Nov 22, 2005)

I think it is a bad idea.  Character creation should not be a zero-sum game / competition with the other players.  That is just asking for trouble.  The only totally fair and balanced method of character creation is point buy.  Any other method can only end up fair and balanced by accident or coincidence.


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Nov 23, 2005)

Yep, after holiday is fine


----------



## Gold Roger (Nov 23, 2005)

> I think it is a bad idea. Character creation should not be a zero-sum game / competition with the other players. That is just asking for trouble. The only totally fair and balanced method of character creation is point buy. Any other method can only end up fair and balanced by accident or coincidence.




Now this is certainly true with an imature group, I don't see a problem with a group with good trust.
I see it less as an competition, than a cooperation between the players to create still decently fair charakters with organic stats. I feel that point buy seems very unnatural and leads to a stronger fokus on power. Also point buy means that everyone can create his charakter 100% on his own, which leats to ununified groups.
A stat draft on the other hand is an aspect that makes the group create their charakters together.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 23, 2005)

I'd be happy to give this a shot.


----------



## angramainyu (Nov 25, 2005)

I was thinking about this some more, and I really like the idea.  There does seem to be a bit of an issue keeping it balanced if the number of characters fluctuates (more characters taking stats each round dilutes the pool more quickly presumming high stats go first, and changing the number of sets rolled changes the distribution), or having to deal with generating a single character (for example, as a replacement for a dead character).

So, I was thinking that you could instead draft a whole block (six stats, already assigned to attributes), instead of just a single stat:  Roll out N attribute blocks for the pool.  Decide your draft order.  First player picks a block from the pool, a new block is added to the pool to replace it, next player goes, and so on.  Each player gets to pick from the same number N blocks, and what is left in the pool can be kept around for replacement characters who would just continue the process from where it left off.

Options for tweaking, depending on the balance of equal vs. random you want in the party:
1) players can swap one pair of stats.  So you can pick the high DEX, low WIS but otherwise decent stat block for a tank cleric and just swap them.
2) the player can have one block tossed and replaced with a new one before they make their pick, giving them a chance to freshen the pool -- adds a bit more excitement, too.
3) while the blocks are random, you could assign whatever conditions are needed for a block to be added to the pool -- e.g., a minimum of one stat below 10, min/max point-buy value, min/max total score, min/max total modifier, etc. -- so that no block is crazy good or crazy bad.

If you use all three options, I think you could get by with just a pool of 3 or 4 blocks.


----------



## Conaill (Nov 25, 2005)

angramainyu said:
			
		

> So, I was thinking that you could instead draft a whole block (six stats, already assigned to attributes), instead of just a single stat:  Roll out N attribute blocks for the pool.  Decide your draft order.  First player picks a block from the pool, a new block is added to the pool to replace it, next player goes, and so on.  Each player gets to pick from the same number N blocks, and what is left in the pool can be kept around for replacement characters who would just continue the process from where it left off.



Well... in that case, you'd be better off just letting people roll N sets and pick the best.

Otherwise, the first player will get "best out of N", whereas the last one will get to pick from N-1 sets that have already been rejected by other players, plus one new one. Not a very equal distribution...


----------



## the Jester (Nov 25, 2005)

This idea is vaguely reminiscent of the stat bidding in character creation in the Amber rpg.  I like it.


----------



## RedShirtNo5 (Nov 27, 2005)

One way to handle later characters is for the DM to generate the stats in sets of 6 using a mock draft (e.g., roll 6 times for the 6 stats, then draft by simply picking best scores available), then let the player choose from, say, 3 randomly determined ones of the pregenerated sets.  When there are only 2 sets left, generate another 6.


----------



## Umbran (Nov 28, 2005)

I'm all set to work the trial draft...

One averaging technique I've seen might be applicable, even if it wasn't originally used in a draft context.

In the original - a player rolled 4d6, drop the lowest, 12 times.  The numbers were then arranged in pairs - highest with lowest, second highest with second lowest, and so on.  A player then got to choose three pairs of stats, and arranged them as they wanted.

If one is worried about fairness, something similar could be arranged so that very high stats came with a balance attached to them.  Though simply changing the draft order in response to how high a stat you got in a previous round might be sufficient.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 28, 2005)

Can the six folks who want to take part check-in?

Once they have I will determine the order of the first round, post the stats and how it will be run and you guys (or gals) can have at it. . .


----------



## Enkhidu (Nov 28, 2005)

Checking in.


----------



## Pielorinho (Nov 28, 2005)

I really like *Wulf's* idea, although I'd want to tweak it a little bit.  As written it leads to (on average) 24-point-buy characters.  The highest anyone is likely to get would be a fairly boring 30-point character (18, 12, 12, 10, 10, 10 or 18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 10).  

I think this could be fixed with two modifications:
1) People can only use the +2 cards to get a score up to 16.
2) Folks get two special cards, which can gain extra treasure, an extra feat, extra skill points, or +1 on any stat (which can raise a stat above 16).

That would put a regular character up to 26 points, or a minmaxed character up to 34 points (18, 16, 10, 10, 10, 10).  A normally minmaxed would be 32 points (18, 14, 12, 10, 10, 10), which is the norm for a high-powered campaign.  And the 34-point character would have such dull stats that I'm guessing most folks wouldn't go for it.

Still, I like the idea!
Daniel


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 28, 2005)

Checking in.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 28, 2005)

Another method would be to do a main/backup draft: Do another draft where the new player creates his main character and the other players all create backup characters.

<edit> come to think of it, you wouldn't even need to assign each backup character to a particular player. If you wanted, you could create a stable of backup characters that any player could claim--or that the DM could use for other purposes <edit>

Or you could do a simulated draft: The DM rolls up six sets of stats and then plays a mock draft with the player, taking five picks to every one the player does. That way, the player ends up with a drafted character that should be fairly similar in power to the existing drafted characters and there are five pseudocharacters out there that the DM can use for NPCs, or throw away.



			
				RedShirtNo5 said:
			
		

> One way to handle later characters is for the DM to generate the stats in sets of 6 using a mock draft (e.g., roll 6 times for the 6 stats, then draft by simply picking best scores available), then let the player choose from, say, 3 randomly determined ones of the pregenerated sets.  When there are only 2 sets left, generate another 6.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 28, 2005)

Im good to go will keep an eye out for the topic.


----------



## Thanee (Nov 28, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Can the six folks who want to take part check-in?




Yes, err... Check. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 29, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk
Enkhidu
Finley Da-Dum
Thanee
Umbran


Who are we missing?

I am all set to post the numbers first thing tomorrow morning - though obviously the choosing will have to wait until the first person makes their choice - and we choose from there round by round (I will post the order each round) for as long as it takes - and see what we come up with.


----------



## Gold Roger (Nov 29, 2005)

check


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 29, 2005)

Ah! Gold Roger!

Okay, so the draft order for the first round shall be. . . 


Finley Da-Dum
Gold Roger
Enkhidu
Thanee
Umbran
Elder-Basilisk

I shall be posting the stats once I get word that you have all seen the order.


----------



## Umbran (Nov 29, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> I shall be posting the stats once I get word that you have all seen the order.




Hm.  #5.  Hail Eris!  All Hail Discordia!


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 29, 2005)

Seen the order....


----------



## Thanee (Nov 29, 2005)

*looks at order*

Yes, I have seen the order.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## luke_twigger (Nov 29, 2005)

Altalazar said:
			
		

> The only totally fair and balanced method of character creation is point buy.  Any other method can only end up fair and balanced by accident or coincidence.



In our group we have a mixture of people who love the randomness of rolled stats and those who love the balance of point buy or a fixed array.

In the end we combined the two. One of the players who loves rolling dice generates a set of 6 stats. Then those 6 stats get used as a fixed array for every player.

Of course this does mean that poor dice rolls mean a weak party and good dice rolls a strong party. But that's OK for a DM to compensate for (e.g. add or subtract a couple of orcs per encounter).


----------



## Thanee (Nov 29, 2005)

Also like combining the stability of point buy with the randomness of dice rolling.

For now I have settled with the following method:

Create an ability array with 28 PB, then roll 6d6 and increase Strength by one for every 1 rolled, Dexterity by one for every 2 rolled, Constitution by one for every 3 rolled, and so on. If an ability would be raised above 18, it stays at 18. If you happen to have multiple such increases, which raise one or more ability scores above 18 you can distribute half of those points (rounded down) to any other ability score(s) of your choice (raising none higher than 18, of course).

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 29, 2005)

Ready to go.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 29, 2005)

Okay, well since Finley picks first in this round anyway. ..  I will post the stats now. 

Below are six stats for each ability, PLUS six "wild numbers" which can be chosen to to be put anywhere.  

Remember, whoever picks the highest in this round goes last next round and so on in order.  Ties are broken by total stat choices so far, and if it is still a tie, then just opposite order from the round before.  Ok?  

Okay.

Here are the stats:


```
Strength	14	16	12	9	17	12
Dexterity	15	8	14	15	10	13
Constitution	14	7	9	[s]18[/s]	11	13
Intelligence	10	14	11	15	13	16
Wisdom	        10	12	[s]16[/s]	12	11	15
Charisma	14	16	15	8	7	13
Wild	       [s]16[/s]	14	12	10	10	8
```

As choices are made I will go back and remove the chosen number and make note of it


----------



## Thanee (Nov 29, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> As choices are made I will go back and remove the chosen number and make note of it




[ s ]-tags around the numbers should work well for that. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 30, 2005)

*Wild 16*

I had 2 builds in mind a melee build and an Arcane Trickster.  The Trickster looks a little tough with the overall low stats for Dexterity.  So I will pick for the more balanced melee build.  

Since I will likely pick low in round 2 - I will keep my options open and pick the Wild:16


----------



## Thanee (Nov 30, 2005)

I thought you need to immediately place the wild numbers somewhere, or not?

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 30, 2005)

I'll check in late tonight to see if my turn is up.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 30, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> I thought you need to immediately place the wild numbers somewhere, or not?
> 
> Bye
> Thanee





No.

But the fact that there are only 6 rounds means that at the end more likely than not whatever you _don't_ have left will be what it is used for.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 30, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> That is how I originally planned to do it, but then realized I should do it myself to tweak the stats as needed before the players see them.
> 
> Perhaps a compromise is have each player roll seven stats, one attached to each attribute and one "wild" that if chosen can be put in any slot (but would not neccessarily be high).




This is the only post I could find on the Wild stat, it doesn't imply that the score has to be assigned when chosen.  I think letting the score be assigned at a later time allows more flexibility, but does increase the value of the wild scores.

Of note if this was for a campaign, I would try and trade for the last position of round #1 since they will almost certainly pick 1st in round #2.  With 7 scores of 16 or above they would get 2 of these.

You posted before I did and made it clear, I edited this to remove any confusion, I will be sticking with the Wild 16.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Nov 30, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Also like combining the stability of point buy with the randomness of dice rolling.
> 
> For now I have settled with the following method:
> 
> ...




Not to derail this with to many other posts but I like this method as well for adding a more organic feel to scores.  I think it encourages more balanced scores, for me I would tend to start 14,14,14,14,12,8 arrangement or some variation of this.  More balanced is not really a bad thing but it is something to look at.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 30, 2005)

And now we wait for Gold Roger. . .


----------



## Thanee (Nov 30, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> No.
> 
> But the fact that there are only 6 rounds means that at the end more likely than not whatever you _don't_ have left will be what it is used for.




Ah, cool. Good to know. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Nov 30, 2005)

sorry, I had long school today (very long indeed). I take the Wisdom 16.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 30, 2005)

Enkhidu. . .


----------



## Enkhidu (Nov 30, 2005)

Sorry - been sidetracked all day.

Ouch! That CON range is pretty wild.

So far we've got someone going with a balanced melee-er and what looks to be a divine caster, if that WIS pick is any indication. So I'm going to see if I can build a AC/HP monkey of a tanker and start with the 18 CON. 

By the way, here's my wish list if others are so inclined to help a gamer out: if I can get that 13 INT it'd go a long way toward opening up a bunch of combat manuever feats.

(Hey, somebody had to do it!)


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 30, 2005)

I am reposting the stats and those chosen here so we don't have to keep clicking back a page.


```
Strength	[s]14[/s]	[s]16[/s]	12	9	[s]17[/s]	12
Dexterity	[s]15[/s]	8	[s]14[/s]	[s]15[/s]	10	[s]13[/s]
Constitution	[s]14[/s]	7	9	[s]18[/s]	11	[s]13[/s]
Intelligence	10	14	11	[s]15[/s]	[s]13[/s]	[s]16[/s]
Wisdom	        10	[s]12[/s]	[s]16[/s]	12	11	[s]15[/s]
Charisma	[s]14[/s]	[s]16[/s]	[s]15[/s]	8	7	13
Wild	       [s]16[/s]	[s]14[/s]	[s]12[/s]	10	10	8
```

Finley - Wild 16
Gold Roger - Wis 16
Enkhidu - Con 18


----------



## Thanee (Nov 30, 2005)

Good idea with the repost. 

Since I like Sorcerers, I will go with the Cha 16.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 30, 2005)

Umbran. . . ?

And Elder-Basilisk on deck. . .


----------



## Umbran (Nov 30, 2005)

Hm.  I think I'll go with a 15 Dex.


----------



## Conaill (Nov 30, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Hm.  I think I'll go with a 15 Dex.



Heh - looks like you'll be able to get at least a 16 in STR or INT next round then.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Nov 30, 2005)

I'll go for the 14 Con. I suspect some of those wild numbers are going to go towards ameliorating some of the abysmal con scores here.

Unless I miss my guess, that gives me the first pick in the next round. On the assumption that Thanee is going for a sorcerer, Enkhidu is going for a melee type, and gold roger is going for a cleric or druid, that leaves Finley, Umbran, and my characters as yet undetermined.

So for the second round, I'll pick the 17 strength which leaves me a number of options (fighter, paladin (if I get a decent charisma), archer (if I got the 15 dex), battle cleric (with the 15 wisdom), or fighter/mage with a good dex and int.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 30, 2005)

The order for the 2nd round (& the choice they have made so far):

(1) Elder-Basilisk | 14 Con
(2) Umbran | 15 Dex
(3) Thanee | 16 Cha
(4) Gold Roger | 16 Wis
(5) Finley | 16 wild
(6) Enkhidu | 18 Con


Elder-Basilisk, is the 17 strength your choice for second round?  If so, confirm and then Umbran picks.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 1, 2005)

17 strength. Looks like I'm going last next round


----------



## Thanee (Dec 1, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> Looks like I'm going last next round




I don't think that's very likely. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 1, 2005)

We await Umbran. . .


----------



## Umbran (Dec 1, 2005)

Hrr.  Tough choice.  Especially if I try to strategize when my next pick will come.

But sometimes, you gotta take what will make for teh best concepts, and darn the strategy...

16 Intelligence, please.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 1, 2005)

14 Wild for me then.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Dec 1, 2005)

Con 13 it is for me then


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 1, 2005)

*Str-16*

Wahoo, the Str-16 is still available - yoink.

The run on Constitution really shouldnt have come as a surprise to me, I guess I could have taken the 18 Con since I'm sure thats where my wild 16 will end up, still the Str 16 would likely not have been available at the next pick so I will count my blessings.  

It will be interesting to see how many of the wild scores end up in Con.  Putting aside the 18 it had the weakest stats overall and I rarely see people accept a negative score there if they can aviod it.  Allready mine will almost certainly end up there and I wouldnt be surprised if Thanee's does too.

Enkhidu I plan to pick my Intelligence last.  With the 13 being the 4th highest score for that stat,  you shouldnt have any problems getting it.   I would shoot for the 4th round if it were me.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 1, 2005)

Finley DaDum said:
			
		

> It will be interesting to see how many of the wild scores end up in Con.




Three. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Enkhidu (Dec 1, 2005)

And I'll go ahead and take the 14 Str (Finley was right about me figuring that the 18 Con would mean that the 16 Strength would be gone!).

By the way, this is turning out pretty well, el-remmen.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 1, 2005)

Pick Order for the Third Round (plus stat choices so far): 

1) Gold Roger -  16 Wis | 13 Con 
2) Thanee - 16 Cha | 14 Wild 
3) Ekhidu -  18 Con | 14 str 
4) Umbran - 15 dex | 16 Int 
5) Finley - 16 wild | 16 str
6) Elder-Basilisk - 14 con | 17 str

GR - we await your choice


----------



## Thanee (Dec 1, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> Looks like I'm going last next round




Ok, you were right.

But only because I was still thinking the sum of all picks so far would be used to determine the order, as had been said at some point, but apparantly not right before the draft. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Dec 1, 2005)

Dex: 15


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 1, 2005)

Calling Thanee. . . 

and Enkhidu is on deck. . .


----------



## Thanee (Dec 1, 2005)

Dex 14 then, since the 15 is gone already. 

Bye
Thanee

P.S. Cha is 16 not 15.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 1, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> P.S. Cha is 16 not 15.




Noted and fixed. .


----------



## Enkhidu (Dec 1, 2005)

And the 13 Dex for me.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 1, 2005)

Wow.  Neat.  Everyone ahead of me took a stat I'd already picked, leaving me with a couple of tasty choices...

Hm.  Methinks... the 15 Wisdom.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 1, 2005)

We await Mr. Da-Dum

and the Elder Stone-Gaze Lizard is on deck


----------



## maggot (Dec 1, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Create an ability array with 28 PB, then roll 6d6 and increase Strength by one for every 1 rolled, Dexterity by one for every 2 rolled, Constitution by one for every 3 rolled, and so on. If an ability would be raised above 18, it stays at 18. If you happen to have multiple such increases, which raise one or more ability scores above 18 you can distribute half of those points (rounded down) to any other ability score(s) of your choice (raising none higher than 18, of course).




Pretty much what I do, except I use standard array or 24-pt buy (your choice), roll 6d6 as you said, you're allowed one reroll of all dice if you like, you can't have a stat over 18, and you can reroll all dice that would add more than 3 to a stat (you don't have to, but since you can't get over an 18 you will alway reroll those over 18, but sometimes having +4 to a 14 stat is good).


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 1, 2005)

*Wis 12*

I need both a 12 Wis and a good Chr if I take the Wis now I should get a hi pick next round and can grab the one of them then

I changed my pick after I posted and then I edited hopefully I was quick enuf and didnt screw anyone up.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 1, 2005)

Wild 12.

I think that gives me first pick for next round and, if so, I'll go for Charisma 15 in that round.

It looks like the group may have a paladin on their hands--actually, looking at Finley's stat choices, maybe we've got two budding paladins in the group.


----------



## Conaill (Dec 1, 2005)

Wow - there's still a 15 and 14 INT left on the table, and people are already scrabbling for 12's. Wouldn't have expected that... No Wizards or Rogues?


----------



## Thanee (Dec 2, 2005)

Umbran's stats look pretty roguish to me, or even rogue/wizard-ish. 

And they basically took the 12 to get first picks next round, so they get the 14 or 15 *and* another stat they need at least a decent score in.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 2, 2005)

Yeah, I picked the 12 wild with an eye to either getting a good dex for a fullplate character (10 and 8 are left) or a 12 wisdom if that gets grabbed but I can come up with the 10 dex. Since it also enables me to get a good position in the next round and grab the good charisma, there's not a lot of opportunity cost to picking low. Int, well, if there were still any good dexterity scores on the table, I'd probably go for it and run with a fighter/wizard, but I wouldn't really want to be pushing a low AC, low HP melee character around or dealing with arcane spell failure.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 2, 2005)

The order for the 4th round and the choices so far. . . 

1) Elder-Basilisk - 12 Wild | 14 con | 17 str
2) Finley - 12 Wis | 16 wild | 16 str
3) Ekhidu - 13 Dex | 18 Con | 14 str
4) Thanee - 14 Dex | 16 Cha | 14 Wild
5) Gold Roger - 15 Dex |  16 Wis | 13 Con
6) Umbran - 15 Wis | 15 dex | 16 Int

E-B, please confirm your choice. . .


----------



## Umbran (Dec 2, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Umbran's stats look pretty roguish to me, or even rogue/wizard-ish.




I was, indeed, thinking along the lines of rogue, possibly coupled with some form of arcane caster.  I was going to see what I get for my next draw before figuring it out exactly.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 2, 2005)

Confirming: 15 charisma


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 2, 2005)

*Chr-14*

Well if this were really a campaign we might have a character conflict I had planned my character as a Barbarian/Cleric of Gruumsh or Kord.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 2, 2005)

Finley, I hope you're joking.  A cleric with a starting wisdom of 12?  

The most recent choices have helped me narrow concept a bit - with the decent Charismas taken, I don't have to consider the social-skill focus path much.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 2, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Finley, I hope you're joking.  A cleric with a starting wisdom of 12?




Maybe he wants to play someone who has shaky faith or something. . .  Or only plans to take a level or 3 of cleric. . . 

Heck, today on the way home from work I was thinking if I could come up with a cool way to play a character with a 4 Intelligence - I was thinking of a half-ogre based on the character "Hodor" from the Song of Ice and Fire books.

But then I realized I would find it frustrating to not be able to contribute to planning and tactics.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 2, 2005)

The concept is actually a multiclass Barbarian/Cleric/Fighter, the build is something like Barbarian 1, Cleric 3, Fighter 4, then a likely prestige class.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 2, 2005)

Finley DaDum said:
			
		

> The concept is actually a multiclass Barbarian/Cleric/Fighter, the build is something like Barbarian 1, Cleric 3, Fighter 4, then a likely prestige class.




Curious.  If you don't mind me asking - is the cleric there to get the PrC, or do you find that just a couple levels of a spellcasting class are effective when you're up over 10 character levels?

Note - it isn't like I'm big on optimizing character builds:  if one of the higher Charismas had remained open, I was thinking a socially oriented rogue/bard would be fun, even if it wasn't a powerhouse.  But with a 12 wisdom, the character either never uses higher than 2nd level spells, or he has to use stat raises just to get beyond that point.  And that seems beyond sub-optimal and heading for the pessimal.


----------



## cmanos (Dec 2, 2005)

how about doing a serpentine draft order..

1 -> 2 ->3 ->4 ->4 ->3 -> 2 -> 1 -> 2 ...

That way, while the unlucky person to get the 4th place, can get a good draw in the second round.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 2, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Curious.  If you don't mind me asking - is the cleric there to get the PrC, or do you find that just a couple levels of a spellcasting class are effective when you're up over 10 character levels?
> 
> Note - it isn't like I'm big on optimizing character builds:  if one of the higher Charismas had remained open, I was thinking a socially oriented rogue/bard would be fun, even if it wasn't a powerhouse.  But with a 12 wisdom, the character either never uses higher than 2nd level spells, or he has to use stat raises just to get beyond that point.  And that seems beyond sub-optimal and heading for the pessimal.




Well the build is a version of a cohort for a Cleric character for a current campaign.  The Cleric levels are their for 2 reasons, first the cleric levels tie him to the PC, 2nd the cohort is an Orc and I wanted to explore the concept of redemption of a former foe.  

Mechanically it is very unlikely the Cohort will ever rise above 8th level.  If he does I would likely pursue a prestige class at that point.  Leading canindates are Divine Crusader and Pious Templar both have seperate spellcasting so the lower Wisdom is less of a problem.

I do think sometimes people worry too much about having a low score in a spellcasting stat.  For pure casters in can be a problem but for multiclass by the time you get to the level where you would be restricted getting a stat boosting item, a book, a wish, or just using your stat bumps can take care of most problems. 

Anyway if I did pursue a more cleric oriented build (say Barbarian 1/Cleric X) heres how I would handle it:
1. Use my stat bumps at both 4 and 8th level in Wisdom 
2. Make getting a Periapt of Wisdom +2 one of my 1st concerns 

Even if I dont get a Periapt till 10th level I wont be missing out on any spell levels.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 2, 2005)

Finley DaDum said:
			
		

> I do think sometimes people worry too much about having a low score in a spellcasting stat.  For pure casters in can be a problem but for multiclass by the time you get to the level where you would be restricted getting a stat boosting item, a book, a wish, or just using your stat bumps can take care of most problems.




Well, if you're splitting between three classes, and not focusing on the spellcasting one, then perhaps.  But if you've got only two, and are keeping them even or focusing a bit on the spellcaster, I think there's be more problem

The thing is that while you can bolster a bad spellcasting stat, it takes a significant portion of your resources to do so.  If you don't have a choice, it makes sense to spend resources to cover for a weakness.  But actively choosing to make it so you have to do that, rather than makign yourself even better at your strengths, seems a bit odd.  Sure you may not be missign spell levels, but you are missing out on boosts to your strength!  For someone who's primarily a melee combatant, that's not a throw-away point.

Especially in this case - you don't need to be a cleric to have strong religion.  I even think it makes for better roleplaying to have a character be strongly religious when they don't have to be to support their powers.  It's more of a choice then.

To each their own, of course.  Here I was talking about playing a bit of bard.  Useful, but certainly not what you call a heavy hitter.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 2, 2005)

Paging Mr. Enkhidu. .. .


----------



## Thanee (Dec 2, 2005)

Finley DaDum said:
			
		

> Well if this were really a campaign we might have a character conflict I had planned my character as a Barbarian/Cleric of Gruumsh or Kord.




Actually, multiple fighter-types synergize pretty well, and in a party of six there's always some overlap.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Thanee (Dec 2, 2005)

...


----------



## Enkhidu (Dec 2, 2005)

Int 13. (Sorry been in conferences all day!)


----------



## Thanee (Dec 2, 2005)

In that case, I'll take the Int 15 then, so I get at least one odd score. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 2, 2005)

Reposting for convenience:


```
Strength	[s]14[/s]	[s]16[/s]	[s]12[/s]	9	[s]17[/s]	[s]12[/s]
Dexterity	[s]15[/s]	[s]8[/s]	[s]14[/s]	[s]15[/s]	[s]10[/s]	[s]13[/s]
Constitution	[s]14[/s]	7	9	[s]18[/s]	[s]11[/s]	[s]13[/s]
Intelligence	10	[s]14[/s]	[s]11[/s]	[s]15[/s]	[s]13[/s]	[s]16[/s]
Wisdom	        10	[s]12[/s]	[s]16[/s]	[s]12[/s]	[s]11[/s]	[s]15[/s]
Charisma	[s]14[/s]	[s]16[/s]	[s]15[/s]	[s]8[/s]	7	[s]13[/s]
Wild	       [s]16[/s]	[s]14[/s]	[s]12[/s]	[s]10[/s]	[s]10[/s]	[s]8[/s]
```

Gold Roger is up. . .    Umbran on deck


----------



## Gold Roger (Dec 2, 2005)

Charisma 13


----------



## Umbran (Dec 3, 2005)

That leaves me to take.. Constitution 11


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 3, 2005)

The order for the 5th round and the choices so far:


1) Umbran - 11 Con | 15 Wis | 15 dex | 16 Int
2) Gold Roger - 13 Cha | 15 Dex | 16 Wis | 13 Con
3) Enkhidu - 13 Int | 13 Dex | 18 Con | 14 str
4) Finley - 14 Cha | 12 Wis | 16 wild | 16 str
5) Elder-Basilisk - 15 Cha | 12 Wild | 14 con | 17 str
6) Thanee - 15 Int | 14 Dex | 16 Cha | 14 Wild


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 3, 2005)

Interesting, neither Gold Roger or Umbran had a Strength score or a wild score yet. . .


----------



## Conaill (Dec 3, 2005)

5th round... keep in mind that whomever picks highest in this round will go dead last in the next round. And there are 7 scores below a 10, so whomever goes dead last will at best get a 9...


----------



## Umbran (Dec 3, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Interesting, neither Gold Roger or Umbran had a Strength score or a wild score yet. . .




Not really surprising - every step of the way, there's been a stat I wanted that was higher than the available wilds.  The only reason to take a wild, then, would be in strategizing - taking a relatively low wild and hope I then get another pick in rapid succession and still get the high stat I really wanted. I think, though, that if I had tried that, I probably would have lost out.  

Even if I hadn't, there's teamwork to consider.  If I really don't mind a particular stat be low, it pays both myself and my fellow players to not even try to get a little insurance for it.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 3, 2005)

Oh, and gee, it is my turn...

Hmm...

Wild 10


----------



## Thanee (Dec 3, 2005)

E-B should be after me in draft order (not that it really makes a difference at this point, my next pick is already secured ), if we base the order on the last round only. This order looks like it is based on sum of stats, earlier orders were (IIRC) based on last round only. Just wondering... 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 3, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> E-B should be after me in draft order (not that it really makes a difference at this point, my next pick is already secured ), if we base the order on the last round only. This order looks like it is based on sum of stats, earlier orders were (IIRC) based on last round only. Just wondering...
> 
> Bye
> Thanee




Both you and E-B picked a 15, since the sum of his stats is lower he goes before you.  That is how ties have been handled in every round.

*Edit*:

5) Elder-Basilisk - 15 Cha | 12 Wild + 14 con + 17 str = 43
6) Thanee - 15 Int | 14 Dex + 16 Cha + 14 Wild = 44


----------



## Thanee (Dec 3, 2005)

Ahh... I see... was missing the tie-breaker. I thought it was who drafted the same number last. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Thanee (Dec 3, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> I am going to use my person who picked the lowest stat each round going first in the next and so on in order with ties broken by whoever has the lower stat total so far.  If there is a tie in the first round, the person who picked second between the two (or more) picks first in the second (and so on).




Hmm... that's exactly what you said... wonder what I confused it with...   

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Dec 3, 2005)

Strength 12. This will most likely end me with an average Intelligence score.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 3, 2005)

Enkhidu is up. . .   Finley on deck. .


----------



## Enkhidu (Dec 3, 2005)

The 12 Wisdom to mitigate what will be a horrid Will save.


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 3, 2005)

*Int-14*

Well here's a very interesting example of this method leading me to an interesting change in character concept because of a hi score remaining here in the 5th round.  I had planned the character as a slow thinking melee fighter, but this changes the concept to a slow acting but thoughtful fighter I'm thinking combat expertise and improved trip, maybe quick draw and pack a wide variety of weapons.  Lead w/Guisarme for the trip then Quickdraw my Greatsword and powerattack the downed foe.  OOOOhh Im liking that.  Hell I might even change concepts to something else now perhaps a Dwarven Fighter/Rogue - a Boxman (Search/Open Locks/Disable Device).

I realize I risk being stuck with the 8 Dexterity but this may actually prove to be an interesting character flaw.  A Strong, Healthy, Erudite character but clumsy perhaps litterally shortsighted he can hardly see past 20 feet and tends to trip overhimself.  

In point buy I wouldn't have gotten to this point,  but in some ways I find this more fun than the original concept, though some of this may be just the appeal of the new and unknown.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 4, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk is up. . . 

Thanee on Deck. . .


----------



## Thanee (Dec 4, 2005)

Since E-B cannot pick it... Str 12 for me.

And in round six whatever score is left for Wis (11 or 10).

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Umbran (Dec 4, 2005)

Unless I miss my guess, I'm first in the final round.

Bit of a no-brainer, really.  Wild 10.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 4, 2005)

Well, E-B still has to pick, but I don't see why he should take the Wild 10. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Umbran (Dec 4, 2005)

Sorry E-B!  My bad!   I should be able to count to five on a fairly regular basis without screwing up, but apparently I'm a touch deficient  :\


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 4, 2005)

Let's wait for E-B to show up before we move on, okay?


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 4, 2005)

Well, there' not a lot of room to be picking and choosing at this point. I think I end up 1st in the next round if I pick the dex 10. And, that may well place me first in the next round... but if it does so, I don't gain anything by picking a wild 10 when I could pick up an 11 in Int....

So: Round 5-Dex 10
Round 6-Int 11

And Umbran's still good for the Wild 10.

My apologies for the delay, BTW. I've been at a con and haven't had much opportunity to check the boards.


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 4, 2005)

Looking at the sum of the fourth round picks, it's very interesting to see how close they actually ended up. In straight stat points, I think we're all within two or three numbers of each other and that actually doesn't change if you switch and calculate by point buy values. Of course, the fifth and sixth round picks will make a big difference here (since they are likely to be the most uneven, considering that we can no longer afford to just pick any stat with a number we like but have to pick the dregs in the stats we haven't yet chosen).


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 4, 2005)

Let's hold off on picks for the last round until round is actually done - it is just less confusing that way for everyone involved - esp. me.   

I'll be right back with the order for the last round.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 4, 2005)

The final round (and the picks so far):

1) Umbran - 10 Wild | 11 Con | 15 Wis | 15 dex | 16 Int
2) Elder-Basilisk - 10 Dex | 15 Cha | 12 Wild | 14 con | 17 str
3) Gold Roger - 12 Str | 13 Cha | 15 Dex | 16 Wis | 13 Con
4) Enkhidu - 12 Wis | 13 Int | 13 Dex | 18 Con | 14 str
5) Thanee - 12 Str | 15 Int | 14 Dex | 16 Cha | 14 Wild 
6) Finley - 14 Int | 14 Cha | 12 Wis | 16 wild | 16 str


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 4, 2005)

Out of curiousity, el-remmen, how much meddling did you do with the stats when you created the draft? Was this a let the dice fall where they may draft or did you make alter/select the stats with some goal in mind? If so, what was that goal and how do you think it worked? (I guess the last question will have to wait until the end of the 6th round, but a lot of what is likely to happen is apparent now).


----------



## Thanee (Dec 4, 2005)

Round 6 is pretty straightforward, really.

1) Umbran Wild 10
2) Elder-Basilisk Int 11
3) Gold Roger Int 10
4) Enkhidu Cha 8
5) Thanee Wis 11
6) Finley Wild 8 (or Dex 8 or Con 9 )

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 4, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> Out of curiousity, el-remmen, how much meddling did you do with the stats when you created the draft? Was this a let the dice fall where they may draft or did you make alter/select the stats with some goal in mind? If so, what was that goal and how do you think it worked? (I guess the last question will have to wait until the end of the 6th round, but a lot of what is likely to happen is apparent now).




I rolled six sets of stats and for each individual set I made sure the total bonuses added up to at least +1.  If not, I rerolled the whole thing until it did (only happened once).

And then I choose the wild numbers with a spread meant to mitigate most of the "penalty earning" scores in the other six sets - so no one would be forced to play a character with two 8's, for example, because of some bad luck or bad planning.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 4, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Round 6 is pretty straightforward, really.
> 
> 1) Umbran Wild 10
> 2) Elder-Basilisk Int 11
> ...




Now I really hope someone choose differently just to prove you wrong. . .


----------



## Umbran (Dec 5, 2005)

Well, there's no reason I can see for doing anything other than I already stated - Wild 10.

My stats scream "don't get in a toe-to-toe fight".  So I think the rogue and/or wizard line are the best ideas, and both work reasonably well with these stats, so it's a bit of a tough choice.

I can see makign a straight human wizard out of these stats, though I'd be underusing the Wisdom a bit.  Going rogue (at least first) will give me access to some skills that'll use the decent perception.  Halfling or human rogue, with the idea of taking wizard levels later, might be a good plan...


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 5, 2005)

I guess I'm predictable: Int 11.

My stats are pretty good for a paladin, though I could probably make something else work depending upon the campaign. A fighter/sorcerer wouldn't be a bad way to go with them (though I'd need to be careful about the spells I chose and take Silent Spell for the ones that wouldn't work on). A marshall would also be a good choice--either straight-class or multiclassed.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Now I really hope someone choose differently just to prove you wrong. . .




There isn't really much left to choose differently... 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Gold Roger (Dec 5, 2005)

Wild 8. 
Seriously, all the 10 int would give me is one skill and some boni on skills this char could go without. With the 10 Int my char would look rather cookie-cutterish, but a low int with high wis gives a nice charakter hook.
This makes my charakter:
Str: 12
Dex: 15
Con:13
Int:  8
Wis: 16
Cha: 13

Lots of ways this could go, but most would be at least part Cleric. Maybe a Neutral Cleric/Rogue with weapon finesse, spontanous inflict and razing strike feats. A distinct fighting stile that is streight forward and inflexible enough for a Int 8 guy, but still thoughtfull and propably connected to some interesting philosophies for the wisdom 16 part. Total ability bonus is +7. This way I'd make him a halfling I think.


----------



## Enkhidu (Dec 5, 2005)

And CHA 8 for me.

I ended up with the stats I pretty much thought I would, which fit the tough as nails fighter I envisioned.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

Gold Roger said:
			
		

> Wild 8.








> With the 10 Int my char would look rather cookie-cutterish, ...




Now that seems a bit of an exaggeration to me. 


I'll stay with my Wis 11 choice, of course.

Str 12 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 15 Wis 11 Cha 16

That looks pretty good. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Finley DaDum (Dec 5, 2005)

*Dex 8*

Like I had a choice but overall I like my stats though and I can deal with a low Dex way better than a low Con.  

Str-16 Dex-8 Con-16 Int-14 Wis-12 Chr-14

I could go with an elf to mitigate the Dex penalty.  Elven Paladin would work pretty well.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 5, 2005)

Did we mess up somewhere?  I only have 5 stat picks for Umbran. . .   

Edit: Oh, I see - he got Wild 10 twice. . .


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 5, 2005)

So, we are all done. . .  and personally, I think it went really well and everyone should be pretty happy with what they got - and it has reinforced that I will be using this method for my next D&D campaign.

Here are the final results and their values in point-buy (from highest to lowest):

Thanee - 12 Str, 14 Dex, 14 Con, 15 Int, 11 Wis,  16 Cha  = 37 points
Elder-Basilisk - 17 Str, 10 Dex, 14 Con,  11 Int, 12 Wis, 15 Cha = 36 points
Enkhidu - 14 Str, 13 Dex, 18 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 8 Cha = 36 points
Finley - 16 Str, 8 Dex, 16 Con, 14 Int, 12 Wis, 14 Cha  = 36 points
Umbran - 10 Str, 15 Dex, 11 Con, 16 Int, 15 Wis, 10 Cha = 33 points
Gold Roger -  12 Str, 15 Dex, 13 Con,  8 Int, 16 Wis, 13 Cha = 32 points


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

Yep, those are all absolutely decent stats; also the process is fun and entertaining, and fairly well-balanced. 

It also doesn't seem much of a disadvantage to be in the middle or back of the draft order in the first round.

Only thing I would do different (not that this really work here) is to let the players roll up the stats (one row each, rerolling as per the PHB, you do the Wild stats). I think this will make it even more fun. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Conaill (Dec 5, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Yep, those are all absolutely decent stats; also the process is fun and entertaining, and fairly well-balanced.
> 
> It also doesn't seem much of a disadvantage to be in the middle or back of the draft order in the first round.



I agree. In fact, given the constrainst due to character concepts and previously chosen stats, people don't really tend to go for the highest remaining stat in each round anyway. You could probably simplify it down to a fixed order like ABC CBA CBA etc. and still wind up with equally satisfying results. 


I do think the extra Wild stats inflate the total stats too much to my taste. An average of 35 point-buy is *way* more than I'd like to see. Perhaps rolling the Wild scores with 3d6 might be a good compromise. The Wild scores are more valuable anyway. This should still allow some flexibility, but not skew the final results too much.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

But the point is, it's not point buy. These stats are not overpowering in any way, not even close to what you would get with actual point buy.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## maggot (Dec 5, 2005)

For what its worth, I tried a draft last night as an experiment, and used 4d6 drop 1 rolls without modification for all catagories.  Each player chose a class that they wanted to play ahead of time, but the wizard character immediately changed to sorcerer when he got to choose the 18 cha.

Str 11, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 16 (wanted bard, not happy with results)
Str 17, Dex 13, Con 16, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 12 (wanted ranger, okay with it)
Str 8, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 13, Wis 9, Cha 18 (wanted wizard, switched to sorcerer, not happy with all the odd stats)
Str 18, Dex 12, Con 13, Int 12, Wis 12, Cha 13 (wanted tank fighter, happy)
Str 11, Dex 10, Con 15, Int 15, Wis 15, Cha 15 (wanted cleric of travel, may change to cleric of magic, happy enough)
Str 13, Dex 16, Con 13, Int 15, Wis 8, Cha 14 (wanted rogue, happy)

We had a lot of high cha scores, so the party is pretty charismatic.  The bard player selected last in the first round and it hurt him for the rest of the draft.  We think the last player in the first round gets hosed.

The wizard/sorcerer went first and chose the 18 Cha, and then went last in the next round when the stats he really needed to cover (dex and con) were all down to 13s.  The wild section had a bunch of 8s and 6s, so wilds did not cover as much as we had hoped.

All told, these are some interesting characters, but we want to fix the "last in the first round" problem.  Perhaps introducing rolls after picks would help.  Perhaps.

We first tried the draft with 3d6 straight up, but abandoned it when we each had three picks to go and only a couple of 10s left on the board.


----------



## LostSoul (Dec 5, 2005)

This was interesting to watch.  It looks like it could be fun to play out.

I'd probably let each of the players roll 6 stats, just for fun.


----------



## Conaill (Dec 5, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> not even close to what you would get with actual point buy.



Not even close to what you would get with an actual *25 point pointbuy*, you mean? Well, can't argue with that! 

Fact is, these stats are a good deal higher than what you would get using standard 4d6-drop-1, and far higher than the default 25 point pointbuy. Now, I acknowledge that a lot of people prefer to play with higher pointbuy levels, like 28 or 32. And actual pointbuy will give you more opportunity to minmax scores to begin with. But an average point value of 35 doesn't seem even a little overpowered to you?


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

If you compare it with 25 point buy, of course you get better stats then.

But if you compare it with 32 point buy, I wouldn't be so sure.

I think that 32 point buy is a lot closer to the average that is actually used in games than 25 point buy.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Conaill (Dec 5, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> I think that 32 point buy is a lot closer to the average that is actually used in games than 25 point buy.



If I remember the polls on this topic correctly, I believe 28-30 points was the most common for pointbuy, and 4d6-drop-1 for rolled stats. Too lazy to go dig for the relevant polls though. 

I do agree that a 35 average point value for rolled stats is probably close in power to a 32 poinbuy, because the latter can be optimized better. (For the same reason that 25 point buy is roughly equivalent in power to 4d6-drop-1, even though the latter averages higher than 25 points.)


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

Yeah, 28-30 is most common, 32 is also quite common, 25 is pretty rare IIRC.

4d6DL is close to 28-30, if done by the book. Most groups seem to allow more benevolent rerolling, which makes it closer to 32, most likely.

All in all, I really don't think the above stats would be much different if used in an average campaign.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## maggot (Dec 5, 2005)

If you go with 4d6 drop 1 rolls, you should come up with an average point buy of about 33 which is the same as when you do 4d6drop1 seven times and drop the lowest of those.  I've played in a couple campaigns that have this extra drop.

The draft spreads the scores out so not all lucky scores are with one player.  I'm not sure why my draft had the bard at 27pts while everyone else was at 35+.

In any case, the selection of the initial draftable scores is what determines the average point-buy level, not the presence or absence of the wild column.  One could generate the array of scores in Excel or a program and calculate the average PB based on the fact that the lowest 6 scores will go undrafted.  Then you could regenerate the array until you had a PB average that you liked.


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 5, 2005)

The sets that were arrived at by means of the draft were awful close to that of characters in the games I run and I have allowed players one of two methods to determine stats.

4d6 drop the lowest six times and place it where you like - if the total mods are less than +1 you may re-roll the whole thing (and the whole thing only) by either method.

and 

4d6 drop the lowest IN ORDER twice and pick the set your prefer.  If _both_ sets total mods are are less than +1, you can scrap both sets and roll again with either method.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 5, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> if the total mods are less than +1 you may re-roll the whole thing




Did you never end up with extremely unbalanced stats?

Like 18 17 17 15 12 10 and 13 12 11 10 10 8 in the same group?

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 6, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Did you never end up with extremely unbalanced stats?
> 
> Like 18 17 17 15 12 10 and 13 12 11 10 10 8 in the same group?
> 
> ...




Yep.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 6, 2005)

Well, of course we ran a little high.  Since we get to pick, we get to throw a whole much of crummy rolls down a dark hole.  Imagien the poor sucker who has to be built out of our dregs!

If you want to control the power level a bit, don't include the wild stats.  If you're feeling nice, you can roll one more set of stats than you intend to have characters, so exactly one of each bad stat can be dodged by the group.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 6, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> Yep.




Then you are lucky, that can happen quite easily, if you roll stats that way.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 6, 2005)

However, I expect that, without wild stats, the draft would be a LOT more unsatisfying for those who went later since there are a couple stats that everyone would want a decent score in. In this example, there were two very poor con scores and I know I would have picked a 10 Con in the first round in order to avoid getting stuck with the 7. I suspect that our sample draft would have gone very differently without the wild stats.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 6, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> I suspect that our sample draft would have gone very differently without the wild stats.




Yep, most likely.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## el-remmen (Dec 6, 2005)

Thanee said:
			
		

> Then you are lucky, that can happen quite easily, if you roll stats that way.
> 
> Bye
> Thanee




I meant, yep, it happened all the time.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 6, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> However, I expect that, without wild stats, the draft would be a LOT more unsatisfying for those who went later since there are a couple stats that everyone would want a decent score in.




Yes, but you also get unsatisfying results when you make people roll dice and stick with the first set that's a +1 total mod or better.

Any time you get to choose to toss away low stats, you'll get creep upwards.  Any time you don't, you risk unsatisfying results.


----------



## Thanee (Dec 6, 2005)

el-remmen said:
			
		

> I meant, yep, it happened all the time.




Oh, ok, misunderstanding. 

Guess that's the reason you looked into this in the first place then, to get a better (fairer) distribution.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Elder-Basilisk (Dec 6, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> Yes, but you also get unsatisfying results when you make people roll dice and stick with the first set that's a +1 total mod or better.
> 
> Any time you get to choose to toss away low stats, you'll get creep upwards.  Any time you don't, you risk unsatisfying results.




That's true. However, a stat draft format with no wild stats and a range of con scores from incredibly good to incredibly bad like this one had is more likely to yield unsatisfying results than most other methods. Most of the time people don't roll 4d6 in order and at least have a choice to move their really low score into a stat that won't get them killed. In a no wild score stat draft, someone is going to be stuck with the 7 con--probably the person who picks last. For my part, that would be enough to sour me on the whole experience--especially because I would be expected to then build some kind of a backstory and care about a character who is almost guaranteed to die the first time someone busts out area effect spells against him--or the first time he finds himself in melee combat or targeted by archers.


----------



## Conaill (Dec 6, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> That's true. However, a stat draft format with no wild stats and a range of con scores from incredibly good to incredibly bad like this one had is more likely to yield unsatisfying results than most other methods. Most of the time people don't roll 4d6 in order and at least have a choice to move their really low score into a stat that won't get them killed. In a no wild score stat draft, someone is going to be stuck with the 7 con--probably the person who picks last. For my part, that would be enough to sour me on the whole experience--especially because I would be expected to then build some kind of a backstory and care about a character who is almost guaranteed to die the first time someone busts out area effect spells against him--or the first time he finds himself in melee combat or targeted by archers.



So back to my original suggestion to use 3d6 for the Wild scores...

Let's say we had done a draft with the same scores as in this thread, but Wild scores of 14, 12, 10, 8, 8, 6 (i.e. 2 lower than what you guys were using). Would that be acceptable? If all the Wild scores went to Con, the top 6 Con scores would become 18, 14, 14, 13, 12, 11. That's far from shabby, and you'd still have a 10 Wild left to patch up another low score left (or even an 8 Wild to fix that 7 CHA).

I agree that having the extra flexibility that the Wild scores lends to the process is a very nice feature. I just wouldn't want the stat distribution to be significantly biased by it though...


----------



## Thanee (Dec 6, 2005)

Maybe it would work to give the last (few) person(s) something extra in exchange for being so far behind in the initial draft order.

For example, the option to swap any two stats at the end.

Or 1-2 extra points (at point buy value, so it's not possible to raise anything too high) to use to increase any one ability at the time they draft it.

Something like that.

Bye
Thanee


----------



## Umbran (Dec 7, 2005)

Elder-Basilisk said:
			
		

> That's true. However, a stat draft format with no wild stats and a range of con scores from incredibly good to incredibly bad like this one had is more likely to yield unsatisfying results than most other methods.




*shrug*.  My players are not so fixated upon Constitution, specifically.  Any time you randomly generate stats, you have this issue.  Either the players have to deal with the low stats, or they get to discard them.  The former leads to some dissatisfaction (rarely does a player _like_ a stat with a negative modifier), the latter causes point-value creep upwards.  This is the case here, or if each individual rolls his own dice.


----------



## el-remmen (Nov 10, 2006)

My group is supposed to actually have a stat draft for our next campaign (due to being in January sometime) this coming Sunday.

I'll be sure to come back and post about how it went.


----------



## Gold Roger (Nov 10, 2006)

I've started the campaign before my current one with a stat draft. The stats where quite high (around 42 point buy), but the game was low magic, so it was ok. Since your games are rather low on items, it should work for you as well.


----------



## el-remmen (Jul 28, 2010)

3 and half year bump.


----------

