Allowing rerolls in character generation

[Riggswolfe]

Is anyone planning to houserule in something about rerolls in chargen? I was thinking maybe if a player doesn't have a total of 8 (or 9) in his or her stats that I'd let the player reroll.

[psychodrive]

I planned on saying something like "Wow, them's the breaks." but I intend to discuss this with them prior to character creation. If the general consensus is that "this is like totally uncool bro", I was thinking "Reroll one stat of your choice, but you have to take the second roll".

[Batgirl III]

Will doing so enhance or diminish the amount of enjoyment you and your players get from the game?

That's the only question that matters.

[Ryngard]

I'm allowing if your stats total less than 10 (since 10 is the standard point-buy target number). However, I'm firm on USING the random rolling method. I really like it!

[Aldaris]

I handled it the same as Ryngard. If a set of stats was less than ten combined, player got a reroll. For the WHOLE set.

[Zapp]

I think 10 is way too high - that's higher than average (meaning more than half the characters generated through random roll will have to be scrapped).

I would choose a more modest minimal result to be allowed a mulligan, say something like one of these quick ideas...:

* If you don't get even a single positive score (all 0's, -1's and '2s) you get to scrap your entire array and start over.
* If the sum of ability scores isn't positive, you get to scrap your entire array and start over (you really only need this criteria, as the one above is a subset)
* You get to replace a single score with a 1, if you like. (Like "Shallya's Mercy" in WFRP - feel free to replace with some legendary or historic figure of mercy appropriate to Thedas)

As for myself, I'm inclined to reduce the variability between players. The default system in DA is at a significant risk of one player getting way better scores than another.

So probably I will come up with a system where a player is allowed a complete reroll if they end up with a ability score total 6 or more points lower than the luckiest player in the group.

In other words, if ALL players have totals around zero, that's actually okay. It's when one player rolls all 3's and 4's the idea of a completely unstructured random roll falls down.

All imho.

[Saisei]

I have to say that I've rolled up about 6 characters and each of my 5 players has rolled up a character and no-one has gotten less than ten. I think at the moment the group has 10, 11. 12. 12 and 14 and that suits me fine.

One of the players was just starting last night (The new system. We've all been RPing for years) and he just said "I fudged one of my background rolls. It didn't make sense for my character." That's no problem with me. It's not like certain things are better on the table anyway. It depends on what you want.

But I would go with exactly what Batgirl said.

[Ryngard]

Actually 10 is the baseline the DEVS set. The point buy is 10.

The generated characters on the site are between what 13-15 pts (which is post Origin mods, which too supports a base of 10 points).

These guys are the heroes, their stats SHOULD be above average (of 1, which totals 8 btw).

[discuit]

Im of the thoery that if you want your players to have a stat total of a minimum of 10, well then, um, just use the method Pramas posted, because in the end this is what you will end up having anyhoo.

[jaguar451]

With the importance of abilities in DA:RPG (especially over the first five levels), I'll probably do something to ensure balanced out between the party members (within a few total points.)

[Maliki]

To start with, I'm going to run everything btb. Houserules, if any will come later.

[jc_madden]

In my game there's no rule. I make a judgement call for each player on an individual basis. In the current game I'm running one player had absolutely horrible rolls (I think only one or two possitive scores) and I said reroll all of them. Two of the other players chimed in with something like "I don't feel back about rerolling my stats now". I was certainly a little miffed that they didn't just come out and tell me first, but if it was obviously going to effect their enjoyment of the game, it's worth it to let them get a character they are happy with. The fourth player actually had natural stats so good that he asked if he could lower them, first he pitched a trade off for and extra focus and I said, "No, if you feel like one of your scores is too high for your concept, just lower it. You don't get anything for that, other than having a character you're satisfied with." He was okay with it.

I tell my players in all my games basically this: I will find a way to challenge your characters. If your characters are above average, they will face above average challenges. In this way, balance is maintained.

[Riggswolfe]

In my game there's no rule. I make a judgement call for each player on an individual basis. In the current game I'm running one player had absolutely horrible rolls (I think only one or two possitive scores) and I said reroll all of them.

I have done things that way but I think it makes things a bit more fair if I have an actual rule.

[Zapp]

I tell my players in all my games basically this: I will find a way to challenge your characters. If your characters are above average, they will face above average challenges. In this way, balance is maintained.

Exactly this. The only balance worth worrying about is the one between player characters.

If all roll horrible or all roll all-fours is of no great consequence, compared to the problems you could get if one rolls incredibly much better or worse than the rest.

[Brokensoul]

The only balance worth worrying about is the one between player characters.

QFT

For this reason when we finally sat down and made characters for a campaign I let my players know up front that they were going to roll in order and keep them but if the total points was less then 10 they could place points how they like up to 10 with a max of 3. For them no one got a total less then 10 anyway so it didn't matter.

I just know I hate it when using random generation and you draw the short straw (roll low on the dice) so this way it made the short straw not so short.

[angel_lord]

On the other hand, many of us find such rolled low stat characters to be a role playing challenge.

In your game the only thing that matters is ballance between the characters, in my games the only thing that matters is the story and how it unfolds. Those happen to be the kind of games I enjoy playing in as well.

So unless I'm playing Gurps, where all characters are the same points but not necessarily 'balanced' against one another - I don't worry so much about the stats I'm given as too low or too high. The very best DnD character I ever played had no stat above a ten.

What's important in all cases is just doing what makes your players have fun - so the game is already being set up for a good variety of GM styles with these house rules.

[Zapp]

Random roll does guarantee everybody will get a character suited to their playing style. At least some of the time.

Which is why it was such a good choice for the first box set.

[Bill]

I would try to get the players to go with what they roll, unless it is truly horrible. The GM can find way to help out a 'weak stated' character during play. Like finding an enchanted item or learning a new skill they normally could not get. But its all about a balance between player fun and campaign integrity.

[Neras]

For my group we use the system from DSA: you roll a Set and assign the results as you like to your stats.

[Zapp]

the system from DSA

That would be this DSA, right?

[Neras]

Yeah, its TDE in english, my bad