Chainsaw wrote:

Great thread! So, I guess I’m basically becoming an old softie... I pretty much let people play whatever they want, raising attributes to the minimums as necessary. To be honest, if someone really lobbied hard for having a higher this or that, I would probably shrug and let them have it. They’re probably going to die anyway!

Truth.

I guess I'm a hard-ass. This coming from someone who plays Skyrim hardcore (remember Rogue?); I've deleted 39th level characters for dying for the first time, after over a hundred hours of play-through...

I like to think that playing Ye Olden Waye fosters more creative and cunning play, since players focus more on surviving and less on on "I'm here to kick-ass and chew bubble gum... and I'm all out of bubble-gum."

I wasn't always this way. I played for decades with the time-honored 4d6-drop-lowest-arrange-to-taste method. I think it strikes a good balance of play styles, especially if your campaign is deadly.

nemomeme wrote:

I've done 3d6-in-order for most of the d20 fantasy RPG games I've run going back to the very early 80s - sometimes with some kind of house-ruled lifepath that helps flesh out a PC's background and average nets one or two abilities being one or two higher.

But for the vibe I get from AS&SH, I'm going Method V (2d6+6 in order) for a four-player game I'm about to start up. Just feels like the correct choice for this system and for the game I want.

Odd that's what I chose for my first campaign.  I like characters with good stats.