I actually kind of like the point buy system, as it does add another layer of planning and complexity to developing your character.

On the other hand, I find a bizarre, pathologically demented satisfaction out of rerollling again and again until I end up with a 95 total ability point Demi-god Mary Sue.

I’d like to think that when we can roll characters I will only do this occasionally and will mostly stick to point buy generation, but who am I kidding?

How about everybody else.

I think I prefer the rolls to be honest, taking a little bit of control out of my hands feels a bit better like I'm not powergaming it. I suspect I'll probably do point buy my first playthrough once full release hits, and roll every subsequent playthrough just to keep it a little more interesting.

Point buy is good because it balances power, but often it merely prevents you from taking feats.

Only a few feat choices are a power increase, while the rest are there to make the game more enjoyable. Choosing between +2 str/dex or mobile will lead to you having to sacrifice power for the fun of mobile and hit n run tactics.

So while I appreciate point buy, I think I'd rather play a character starting with a 20 so I can have more fun with feats.

Point buy all the way. Some classes will be seriously unbalanced if you can roll several high stats. Barbarian and maybe Paladin probably being the worst offenders

Being able to play as a multi-class monk / spellcaster with high dex, con, wis, and casting stats is a guilty pleasure of mine.

Personally I dm with rolling, but allow to reroll a single total to curb out the pesky double 8s. (and allow keeping either total, if you happen to roll lower than originally)
I find the results more interesting, than rather stale point buy :p

When I DM my rules are you roll one character 3D6, and can reroll one dice (so if you roll a 6 6 1, you can reroll that 1). If you don’t like what you roll, then you can point buy.

When they add rolling for stats, they should probably make sure to force the minimum jump distance to be 4.5 meters, even for STR scores 7 or lower, otherwise people who have less than 8 STR will get stuck at the mandatory jump.

Been playing D&D for 4 years and i've never rolled for my stats.

You guys making me feel like i've been missing out.

Let's just say it wasn't unusual for a player to spend minimum 10 minutes clicking the reroll button in the original Baldur's Gate games. Add 50 minutes to that time and that wouldn't be unusual either ...

Rolling is a mixed bag. Sometimes you will get amazing characters, but sometimes you will get trash. I personally don’t mind playing trash, as that can be fun, but a lot of people I know get really discouraged by it, so I always provide point buy as a back up.

In my current campaign my sorcerer’s stats are 11 20 12 13 14 20 at level 14, and I’ve only needed to take ability points over feats once, so that is pretty fun.

I like the option.

I never did point buy until I jumped into my first 5E campaign.
3.5E and Pathfinder saw me roll for stats every time. My DM either did 3d6 & drop the lowest, or, if he wanted us to be a bit stronger, 4d6 & drop the lowest & reroll 1's & 2's

Point-buy really makes sense in a party, where you don't want the other PCs to be overshadowed by the one PC whose player 'somehow' managed to roll three 18s and nothing under 14 (yes, those with a few years experience of PnP have all played with That Player). It gives a nice level playing field. We use the set stat array, which is similar (you allocate a preset set of numbers to your stats). That would also work for BG3 should the designers be able to implement it.

In addition, I generally have an idea what the character is going to be before I put pencil to paper (or, increasingly nowadays, finger to keyboard). If I want to play a Norse warrior with a Big Hammer, I'm going to very disappointed if I roll 6 for STR. Spread rolling is better, where you roll six sets of stats and then allocate them, but even this doesn't really ensure your hefty warrior is going to have anything more than slightly-above-average STR. Especially when the party wizard is stronger than you are.

My first ever AD&D character, a cleric back in 1980, found his class calling because we used the old method of rolling 3d6 in turn for each stat. I ended up with my best stat being WIS 13, and thus was a cleric. It sucked, especially as I also rolled 1hp, and I was not sorry when he was killed by orcs. Luckily I persevered with RPGs, but swiftly converted to Runequest which became the start of long and beautiful relationship with classless RPGs.

The mandatory jump is from high to low. You can go beyond your "range" if you jump from high to low. It just hurts a bit and leaves you on your knees for a short while. You can see this easily in the very first room by jumping from the ledge to beyond your range line on the floor.

Reminds me of a character I rolled back in middle school. We were using an unofficial D&D supplement that used mana for wizard spells. Rolled a crap wizard, and it wasn’t until we were an hour in that I realized I didn’t have enough mana to cast any spells. The DM asked if I wanted to reroll and I said no, I’d go with it. In the first fight against a kobold I fumbled and broke my quarterstaff. I did kill the bigger though. My only kill of that session.

I enjoyed myself, but that was the one and only time I played that character. 😂

At first when I read the "10 minutes" I was thinking "wow you must have be lucky" then I saw your "Add 50 minutes to that time and that wouldn't be unusual either" and was thinking yeah yeah that's more like it.
I had a lot of fun doing it.

That's me setting up a party for Icewind Dale.

I know some people actively enjoy playing crap characters (because there is no pressure to succeed?), but I usually like to have something that makes my character important or unusual. A high stat is not essential, but if I am a wizard I don't want another wizard in the party who is better than me in all areas. Unless I deliberately play a rubbish wizard, of course.

Our first session was terrible because we had no idea of the rules and the GM had little idea of how to run a game. We encountered a Leucrotta (we were 1st level and just starting out) and, because we had a character who was the fighter, the rest of us stood back and watched him fight. I did try to help at one point, but with only 1hp I decided to throw my mace at the Leucrotta. I missed and hit the fighter, who was not best pleased.

No; random rolling on 3d6 offers no appeal to me now. I like to design characters rather than generate them.

I'm saying that right now with 4.5 meters, most of the destination is not "beyond the range", it says "Too far". If the distance modifier drops, that jump likely won't be allowed. But the solution is to leave the minimum at 4.5.

Even if you can make it, you don't have a lot of HP to spare to take damage, and the next healing station is past some combat. Probably not an insurmountable obstacle, with the autosave, though.

I had a thought on this topic overnight and came to another conclusion.

If you use point-buy or standard array (where you allocate 15,14,13,12,10,8 as you wish), the chances of getting a 15+ are very good to the point of guaranteed. Now compare that to a random 3d6 roll:
* chances of rolling 15+ are 9.26%,
* chances of rolling 16+ are 4.63%,
* chances of rolling 17+ are 1.85%,
* chances of rolling 18 are 0.46%.

Some players choose 3d6 because they have the chance to roll 18 (there is a 2.75% chance of rolling an 18 among your six stats), but I wonder if they know exactly what their chances actually are? Of course, the roll chances follow a bell distribution curve, so the chances of rolling very low are equally small. 3d6 is a good way to generate an 'average' character because of the way the distribution falls, but it is not great for when you 'need' that particularly high stat.

Later editions of D&D began offering differing ways to roll, of course, 4d6 and dropping the lowest die result being the most common, but this still leaves you open to chance. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has rolled 4d6 and still ended up with 8 or less.

Then there are the 'go on, have another go' GMs and players. Either through pity, pressure or because they believe they will have a better game with higher stats, sometimes players will simply keep rolling until they get the result they want. It will happen eventually. This is, of course, the early BG/Icewind Dale approach because on a PC, nobody can see your shame (how annoying was it when rolling STR for a fighter and getting 18 but ending up with 18/03?). If this method is used, would it not simply be faster to let the player have an 18 straight off the bat and save all that meaningless rolling?

To be honest, I always liked rolling due to the randomness of it and the potential to actually be unique. That said I abhor any restriction not placed on you by the actual rules them selves such as "you cant play X class/subclass, cant pick X feat, you can't roll stats in case you are too good...."
Its a single player experience mostly(bg3 not table top lol), and I wouldnt mind being able to play the way I want for a change with out having to listen to what 3-5 other voices say. If we dont get rolling implemented, I could always use real dice to roll my stats and cheat engine to change them so I guess there is that.

For random characters, rolling is obviously the way forwards. You cannot start any more random than rolling, and the stats will generally suggest your class. You'd still need to pick a race, of course, but that sometimes comes with the class and stats (high CON fighter might suggest a dwarf, rubbish STR but high DEX might be a halfling, etc).

As I mentioned upthread; I think the difference in approach is between creating a character that you are visualising before sitting down, and generating a character about which you know nothing at the start. Sometimes the choice is not completely yours, such as if you are joining a party and they need a cleric, but if you are playing solo on the computer then that's not such a restriction.

I'm ambivalent. With point buy the game is better balanced, and you get to start playing sooner. On the other hand, it may not allow you to play the character you wanted to play, in the earlier games most obviously with dual classing.

As for folks who want to dump strength after rolling is added, I'd consider it a better solution to let you find a strength potion that will enable you to get off the ship and then let you experience the consequences of your choice. I don't think the game should lower requirements to support major stat dumping.

On release, I hope for all 3 methods of character creation. In a single player game all work fine. It is only in a multiplayer game where you need for pure balance. BG3 is a single player game with mutiplayer, so perhaps that would need some kind of gate keeping?

I'd like the option for both!

Rolling and getting a high amount of points was part of the fun in Baldur's Gate 1 & 2. But it could take ages, so good to have point buy available too.

I'm liking the current system, it lets me get in and get rolling on playing instead of fussing over stats. I have to admit, however, that I did a lot of rolling in BG/BG 2/IWD/IWD 2, I can't remember in NWN if that was a thing or not now...

What I was more disappointed with was not being able to bank points for later.

The solution for that is the well known "I throw ____ over the cliff"

NWN2 used points-buy. I never played NWN so I can't be sure, but I imagine they would have used the same points-buy system.

My experience was players deciding that their characters 'fall on their sword' if they didn't have high enough stats when rolled. Apart from the complete waste of everyone's time that simply disposing of a poorly-rolled character represented, it also suggested strange in-game scenes where people dragged themselves into the obligatory tavern to be recruited and then committed suicide when they compared themselves to the other party members. Some of those taverns must have ended up with piles of bodies by the end of a particularly poor recruiting session.

The game has probably been designed around a minimum jump distance of 4.5 meters. I think the best solution is to leave that as the minimum even if STR is less than 8.




There's no one to throw you. You don't get a second party member until AFTER you make the jump.

Long story short. Attribute assignment is one of the most disputed topics in all of D&D. There are three primary models to work from.

1) Rolling. 4D6, dropping the lowest roll. Repeat this six times. Assign each total to the state of your choice (there is a lot of variation here in terms of how many dice to roll as well as what type of dice to roll, but this is the official way in 5e). This model is, to my surprise, the actual default method of character generation in 5th edition. After a half dozen 5e campaigns, I went back to review character generation while I was considering new ways to run character generation and was shocked to see that rolling was the default, because I assumed it was one of the following methods.

2) Point buy. The system set up in Baldur's Gate 3 uses this and it is exactly translated from the 5th edition rules. This is the most popular way of making characters in 5e.

3) Standard array. Take the following numbers: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8, and assign them in any order you wish to your six stats. Then apply your racial or template benefits on top. This is meant to be a way to quickly generate balanced characters, and is a very useful tool in maintaining balance in 5th edition. I actually think this method is best as both a player and a DM. As a player, I find that it helps to prevent me from over-optimizing my characters and results in more interesting choices as a result.

There is that 4th rare option of 1D20 re-rolling anything 3 or less or for the super hardcore - no rerolls.

I'm sure mods will let you cheat to your heart's content. Random character generation really has little place in modern games.

my groups have almost always done rolling, and it's definitely my preferred approach, usually 4d6 drop lowest. Sometimes even with rerolling 1s.

The issue with points buy, is in a game where it assumes you're the one doing all the dialogue, you HAVE to have a good charsima and probably wisdom too, then ideally also take insight + social skills. Which basically makes most classes kind of suck - which isn't the experience you want.

going for rolled stats in a CRPG is basically an excuse to have someone spend an hour rolling till they get amazing stats across the board (which is, similarly not how pnp works).

An obvious solution, is to "simply" provide more points.

The average of 4d6 drop lowest is 13.5ish so lets assume 3 14s and 3 13s... or 36 points. Probably remove or increase the max 15 before racials restriction in such a scenario I suppose, but in theory isn't mandatory. 32 or 34 points is probably plenty assuming the max of 15 before racials is kept though.

This gives players enough points to ensure they aren't making their character suck because they want to not suck at social stuff, and similarly allows them to not suck at social stuff.

Thing is, rolling stats isn't cheating, rolling stats (4d6 drop lowest score) is actually the default rule. But I agree that because a game can't say "nu uh, you rolled those, so stick with them" it basically amounts to it. Which is why I suggest above that perhaps just providing more points than pnp is the way to go

Rolling cheat characters is already confirmed. We don’t need mods.

Blindhamster: sorry, but I don’t like your idea. The stat point allocation number is well balanced and doesn’t need to be increased. If want to play a low CHA character then you can have another party member operate as the face. Also 4d6 is fine, but 4d6 dropping 1s is criminally lenient. 😂

The points suggested was based on 4d6 dropping lowest, not 4d6 dropping lowest and rerolling 1s

If you check online, though, you'll see both are quite common.

My suggested points, again, is what the average for 4d6 drop lowest (the default character creation system) would give you. So, no technically, 27 points isn't balanced considering it's lower than an average roll with the default system would give. That being said, I did also suggest going for 32/34 (still lower than the average) because unlike rolled stats, you could allocate however you liked.

Would love to be able to roll for characters. Just like in DnD i reckon it should be an option

We roll dice in all of my campaigns.

People like rolling dice.

I want to roll for my stats, for my starting money and gear, etc. Crafting the character is as much the spirit of the RPG as the game play. I don't care for "quick and efficient starting" .. I care about making the character I want to make. My players are the same. In fact, our first night of any new campaign is to have fun rolling characters together and planning origins and cross overs so I can populate the world with custom side quests etc that are relevant. A big part of that night is the sound of hundreds of dice rolls.

I got that the 4d6 drop 1s was a separate thing, but I was just saying that is too lenient for me.

Again, when I DM the rule is 3D6 with 1 reroll of only 1 dice. If you roll utter crap you do point buy.

Since I’m clearly a bit on the stricter side, the lower point buy total seems more balanced to me. If hits a pretty sweet spot with characters being strong enough to be satisfying to play without being too OP right out the gate.

makes sense, in the nearly 23 years I've played/GMd (which i know is rookie numbers for many), I don't think I've had a GM do 3d6 so I guess I got lucky, and as a GM I've always done 4d6 myself, IMO the issue with 3d6/27 points is players tend to optimise for their classes primary stat to the exclusion of just about all else. Whereas 4d6 drop lowest, or a higher points buy (with limitations in place) tends to result in more interesting and diverse characters.

Hard to explain, but especially with games like Pathfinder 2e and D&D 5e, the classes are very keyed to their primary attributes, if a player doesn't invest relatively heavily in whatever those attributes are, they end up struggling to pull their weight/feeling frustrated because of how far they lag behind their companions, so in 27 point builds, fighters are almost always stupid/uncharismatic and often not very wise either, wizards are always scrawny and often uncharismatic too etc. Which sucks because the more interesting characters who had a few extra points and could place them where they wanted to without resulting in a character that falls too far behind the systems bounded accuracy.

e.g. my wizard in our current game has a decent charisma score, he's still not as high on that as the party rogue, but he doesn't suck at it, and I took persuasion as a skill on top so he can be eloquent and talk his way through things sometimes, whilst actually being the party wizard didn't suffer for the fun character option.


All the above being said, I've recently been running RuneQuest, and in that, you roll for a specific stat, no swapping them around. Even with that I allowed 4d6 drop lowest (or 3d6+6 drop lowest in the case of Size and Intelligence, because their baselines are 2d6+6 in that game), but i didn't allow the players to swap attributes around. I did let each player roll two sets of attributes (in order) and decide which spread would suit the idea they were building up better though. So yeah, I'm a fairly lenient GM but I believe there are ways as a GM to ensure players are happy and don't break the game at the same time.

What you say about build diversity does make sense; the 27 points doesn’t leave too much room for experimentation, but I personally do still see variation. I know some players who hate having any stat below 12, so they will pump up their main stat, and spread out the rest a bit, and i think trying to determine how much you are willing to compromise with certain stats like this is an interesting strategic choice that gets lost the more points you have to play with.

Cool, feels like we can see eachothers points, both of which are valid. I do like a good even handed discussion online

Yeah, you are right, this does feel fat too amicable for the internet in 2020. Wait, I’ll get my Shakespeare insult generator (a must have for bard players).

You are a ... puny full-gorged minnow, an errant hedge-born hugger-mugger, and an infectious crook-pated giglet.

There. Much better.

i wish there was a like button, know you have one in spirit

I prefer point buy, particularly for multiplayer.

There seem to be artificial restriction to the point buy mechanics in this game too. I tried to make a half-elf fighter a few sessions ago and I couldn't get her strength past 16. Dumped Int to 8, had 4 stat points free, no chance. 16 strength max.

Why would anyone not want to roll for their stats? It's fun, just like a one-armed bandit in Atlantic City. Keep playing until you win!

The initial character statistics in D&D were meant to follow the bell curve, so that 3's and 18's were equally rare. It was very possible to roll a mage with only 12 INT, for example, which creates anxiety because you need 18 INT to cast 9th level spells, and who wants to start out with a limitation like that? But that is not really a problem at level 1, and to solve this problem for later levels, D&D offered many methods for character to increase stat scores through adventuring ... magic pools, wish spells, tomes, artifacts, belts of giant strength, etc. In other words, obtaining high level ability scores was meant to be part of the D&D reward system during play. I think that should have been explained better in the character creation section of the books.

I haven't actually checked if they follow the point buy rules for 14 and 15 (2p cost per ability score increase) but that would be the system used by Larian. Abilities can't be lower that 8 and not higher than 15. The only way to get higher scores at character creation is to have a racial bonus in that stat, so the max is 17.

Thanks for clearing that up, I wasn't aware of that. My thinking was that stats above a certain threshold just cost more points but that "hard cap" is news to me.

Rolling a lot of dice as the game goes along: awesome. The more rolls, the more things average out and are fair.

Rolling dice at the beginning that can effectively give some players +3 or +4 to everything and others permanent negatives .... eh, that can be fun for one shots, but not a campaign, and I don't think it makes sense in a campaign-like CRPG either.

Since there is a coop option, I think it´s fair that everybody would point buy, so all have the same amount of points you can assign at your ablities.

Let´s be honest, roll would make 90% of the players rolling +20 times just to have good scores, and that could take a lot of time of waiting to start playing.

Rolls are awesome. I don't know much about dnd, so I assumed that it's something only the BG dnd version had. I would be very much in favour of implementing it if possible

One solution for multiplayer would be the host rolls the abilities, and everyone has access to the same pool, so you don't have multiple 18's for some, and nothing higher than a 13 for others.

This would of course be standard 5e rules, where you roll 4d6, dropping the lowest each time, and doing that 6 times, and players get to freely assign the scores where they want. Not "roll 3d6, in order".

BG 1-2 had multiplayer

Rolls sound like fun until you are stuck with a character that is so weak, stupid, unappealing, and foolish that you struggle to create an interesting PC. Rolling makes random characters and, if that's your thing then it is for you. If you have an idea of the character you wish to create, however, point-buy or standard array are the ways forward.

Rolling should be limited just like in real DND not the roll as long as you want crap in BG1/2

Nope.

Then use a cheat/hack/trainer/edit your savegame all of which give you the same result just without having to waste your time.

Nope

My vote? Rolling stats! I love the diverse potential for an OP, god-o-war Warchief that crushes his enemies, drives them before him/her, and hears the lamentation of the children...sorry. My barbarian was speaking. But seriously, I would love to see a stat roll system for the potential of creating such awesome characters. This game doesn't have PvP. There's no concern of being able to steamroll or dump on other players. It's literally you vs the game. It's pure PVE, so I say, let folks have fun. For those who want something more moderate, there is point buy, a completely viable-yet-bland option.

All in all, as long as I get to play a half-orc or Goliath barbarian, I'll be happy, but it would be all the more sweet if I can be a barbarian with a starting 18-20 on STR or CON. ':D

Something more concerning to me than PB-v-Rolls is being able to swap STR for CHA on melee classes. It's one of the reason that numerous friends of mine, and myself, use the optional rule (supported by WotC and DDB) to allow melee classes with high strength to use their primary stat (STR) for their intimidation checks, instead of the largely accepted CHA stat. It's an optional rule for a reason. A big, brawny, mean-faced Terry Crews-arian can be just as terrifying, if not more so, than a highly charismatic Fiend-lock. When the gnome bard can out intimidate a barbarian that eats axe heads for breakfast, there's a serious imbalance, IMO. :-/

On the issue of multiplayer/co-op, it's a simple solution. If you're creating a MP character, it's point buy. If you're creating a you-only character, then you have the option to roll up the most OP demigod in BG history. ;-)

My only experience with rolling characters is rolling so high I was forced to point buy because multiple 18s were a no go with my GM.

I don't care if they add rolling, so long as they don't take the point buy away. There's nothing more obnoxious to me in a D&D game than rerolling 20000000 times for stats. Just let me sort it out and go.

I love rolling! A roll option would be as much of a BG-flashback as Boo going for the eyes! I would roll a thousand times for 95, but never use a character editor to set the abilities to 100. The former is hard work, the second just cheating

I like rolling, but it so often produces a set of bland 11s and 12s that it's not a great method unless you're going to sit there and keep rolling until you get something half decent, and if you're going to do that then you may as well just make up whatever numbers you want. Point buy is fine, and the standard array always feels a bit too low. What I'd honestly prefer is a flat set of 75 points (3 more than the standard array) to assign however I want (restricted to between 3 and 18 per attribute, of course). No increased cost the higher you get, like point buy does. Min-maxers are happy, balanced players get a fair choice.

EDIT - You could even add a basic difficulty option with this. e.g. 90 points for easy, 75 points for standard, 65 points for frequent TPKs...

Yeah, it’s the same for me. In old school BG and IWD, rerolling did actually have a cost benefit paradigm: how long am I willing to reroll for? and how good is good enough? It’s not the same as using a trainer or the command console at all.

I'm already spending too much time playing the game. Also buy systems let you do crazy shit to improve stats later in the game which is always fun, thinking about that sub dermal armor in Fallout 2.

Creating characters may have been the first time I experienced RSI.


...

well alright, possibly the second.

How long am I willing to reroll for? ...AAAND am I willing to risk heartbreak rolling past that perfect score? lol

You can still improve stats of rolled characters.

Yes, it requires active concentration. If you don’t pay attention you will just thoughtlessly pass by a great attribute spread. XD

It's not "work", its just clicking a button until you get what you want. Cut out the middleman, install a mod to cheat with whatever stats you want, and save yourself some time. Don't make the devs code this nonsense.

Dice rolling for attributes in a video games = repeatedly rerolling until you get the exact attributes you want anyhow.

It'll change what the developers have to do to balance the game though, making it a slower developement.

Nah. We like it and according to Swen lots of people have requested it. I don’t understand why people like you insist on games not having optional content that you don’t want. This won’t take long for a dev to code. I’m not a professional coder, but I’ve leaned a bit of Java and C++, and this feature is pretty easy stuff. It’s not going to take away any significant resources from anything else.

Please allow us to roll for our character stats. Please.

Stick with rolling. Basing games around balance ruins them. Rolling allows you to play characters that are more of a challange.
THough if we have point buy, maybe that means we don't have to allocate all of our points...

Personally why not both? i mean why not allow people to choose whether they want to use point buy or rolling for stats before they start making the character? that way people who prefer one over the other aren't pigeonholed into a system they don't like, while allowing people the choice to use either whenever they want.

Rolling would be a lot better. But i would have nothing against buying or premade stats for beginners difficulty.

This is totally wrong...

I would think it would be the other way around. Rolling for easy mode and point buy for everything else since you know people will roll until they get high stats (easy mode)

Should have point buy and rolling for all difficulties, makes everyone happy.

I used to roll a lot in the old BG series. I got pretty good at tapping the "Roll Again" button quickly, but then I became too good ....

78, 82, 73, 77, 81, 76, 76, 82, 79, 91, 80, oh @#%!

Personally I'd like to get an option to roll. I might not use it but I think it should be an option that should be available. Denying this option for the sake of "balance" would be a mistake IMO because:

1) If people want inflate stats, they'll find a way to do it anyway (console, mods)

2) It assumes 5e system is somehow super balanced with rolled stats - let's be honest, 5e is far from balanced. And it doesn't need to be


Having a rolled system will justify letting Larian give companions varied stats (instead of based off of a point buy), which I think gives the characters more personality. This was one feature I always loved about the BG games. Some companions are brutally sub-optimized but that's part of their charm.

This again?
One of the directors already said in an interview back in March that there will be the option to roll stats in the full release.

If you actually read the topic then you would know that this thread was asking which character creation system prefer to use, not asking whether rolling would be in the game. The topic takes for granted that rolling will be an option because I had also read that aforementioned interview.

I always enter character creation with a clear concept in mind. I do not need the dice to inform my character idea, nor would I want to depend on their mercy to enable that concept mechanically.

On the DM side, I once told my players that the only way they would get to use rolled stats is if they rolled a single array of 6 stats and then every party member would use that same array (distributing the individual stats as desired).

I have a mod that adds an in game autoroller to IWD's U.I. It just keeps rolling while saving the highest value. (totally have no idea where I got the mod though as I've been trying to find it again but can only find an external auto roller) The actual easiest way to do it without mods is to have cheats on and just press CTRL+8 to give you all 18's and then just lower the points to what you want for the character. The game lets you continue even if you have left over points. Only bad thing about that is the perfect 18/00 Strength it gives you as there's no way to randomize the d100 roll.

Cool! I have the Shadow Keeper editor and that has a random stat score generator as well. In that case, I think it is a true 3d6 per stat, and within a few rolls you can get a decent result much more quickly than with the old BioWare in-game special algorithm. I kind of like the old "Method IV" rolling procedure from the Dungeon Master's Guide: "3d6 are rolled sufficient times to generate the 6 ability scores, in order, for 12 characters, The player then selects the single set of scores which he or she finds most desirable and these scores are noted on the character record sheet." That is kind of a group-roll thing, and I'd be much less likely to hit the re-roll button too soon.

Although I prefer a point-buy system or standard array in 5e, especially for all-around game balance,
it is a bit too severe in 5e core.

Many characters end up with maximum 15 or 16. Even with a more flexible racial exceptions, as made official in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, your Paladin Dwarf would have maximum 16 Charisma or your Dwarf Wizard maximum 16 Intelligence. And 16 is already much better than the official rules of point-buy and races a few weeks ago. :P

Games that allow both point-buy or rolls freely, like in Solasta, means that some players roll with 18s while others play a very moderate array of about 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.

CONCLUSION / SUGGESTION : a standard point-buy for all players, which creates a more comparable playing field, BUT a bit more generous or epic than the 5e standard.
( something along the lines, more or less, of 16 15 14 13 12 11 before any racial bonuses. Which is 13 more buy-points than the 27 usual. )

so much rolling in BG - I would roll for hours to get in the mid 90's, my opinion, point buy - there is already enough in the game to exploit you do not need to rig your stats.

'Tis true that the new 5E rules are very generous in granting ability score increases. Is it something like 10 points by 19th level? That is a lot! It makes me wonder, what if we do the random roll but can't actually see our specific scores, just a simple adjectival rating like "above average"? How would that feel, when we've all been so conditioned to seeing numbers? I'll have to type that into an Excel sheet sometime and see how it goes.