|
I am a beginner GM. Yes I admit it, I'm not an uber knowledgeable RPG guru. The first time I played any sort of tabletop RPG was earlier this year when a friend of mine at collage convinced me and another friend to try it. I tried DMing once, but trying to remember which stats were in which books, figuring out all the stuff related to multiclassing, and especially trying to understand how a grapple worked just confused the heck out of me. (but to be fair, it confused my DM too. It was an unofficial house rule that you just didn't grapple). Through all of the games I played in, and even the ones I GM now, all players role dice to determine their stats. Now the thing I like about this is that it gives them a nice pool of generally decent numbers to pick from, and for some reason everyone in my groups generally rolls nearly identical sets of stats to pick from (one 18, one 16, two 13 or 14s, and eleven, and either a twelve or a 8-9).
Now until recently, I've never even TOUCHED the point system when making characters for a campaign. (I have played around with it on test characters though). But then, something rather strange happened. One of my players got three 18s, a 17, a 16, and a 14. I just gaped at his stats, but I let him keep them because I know he didn't cheat. In the very same session, another character rolled terribly sucky stats. I don't remember exactly, but it was something like a 9, a 10, two 12s, and maybe a 13 or two (something terrible like that). This wasn't their first session, so they knew that the dice rolls are law when generating characters, so there wasn't any complaining for the most part. But it just seems so imbalanced sometimes, leaving it up to the dice. I'm even debating using the point system for our next campaign just to avoid something like this in the future.
Now for what I'm getting at. Which system do you guys think is better, a dice rolling method, or the points method? And why?
This topic should rank right up their with the other verboten topics of religion and politics!!! You may get much heated discussion! (lol)
However, since you did ask, I use point buy just because of what happened to the two guys in your post. It 'evens' things out and the players at the beginning of a campaign start even.
-- david
Papa.DRB
|
I like the 4d6 best 3 method. As you pointed out otherwise you end up with "attack of the clones". But some hate the idea of one person being "better" (whatever that means in an RPG) than someone else.
End of the day, if your players are happy doesn't matter. Mine like the excitment of rolling dice and seeing what stats you get.
S.
Somewhat to my own dismay, I recently switched to Point Buy, primarily for the reasons you stated above. I'll always miss rolling for stats, though, even as a DM. The joy of rolling that 18 is unlike anything else, but leaving that much up to luck can be dangerous. If the campaign is casual enough, I would probably let my players roll for stats just for kicks. If not, I'll be going for a more balanced approach, ala Point Buy.
One of my players got three 18s, a 17, a 16, and a 14. I just gaped at his stats, but I let him keep them because I know he didn't cheat. In the very same session, another character rolled terribly sucky stats. I don't remember exactly, but it was something like a 9, a 10, two 12s, and maybe a 13 or two (something terrible like that). This wasn't their first session, so they knew that the dice rolls are law when generating characters, so there wasn't any complaining for the most part. But it just seems so imbalanced sometimes, leaving it up to the dice. I'm even debating using the point system for our next campaign just to avoid something like this in the future.
Now for what I'm getting at. Which system do you guys think is better, a dice rolling method, or the points method? And why?
I tend to like rolling, but to avoid the problems with party balance, I usually roll a single set that everyone builds their character from, arranged how they like. It adds some of the variety of having random stats back in, but keeps one person at the table from considering killing off their character just to get rid of his terrible stats.
Every now and then I'll go with either point buy (when I'm feeling generous) or go all old school and make people roll their stats in order (when I'm feeling not so generous).
If I'm feeling rreaaaallly evil I'll go super oldschool and make them roll 3d6 in order. 1st edition up in the house! (kidding, but the threat of it does inspire some amusing looks from my players).
All depends on you...
Rolled stats tends (note, TENDS) to lead to slightly more organic characters. You got some strengths, got some areas your average, and maybe a weakness or two. Sometimes means if your dice aren't with you, you may have in mind one charcter type, but roll up a set of stats that makes that a very uphill battle (like, oh, say, wanting to play a wizard, and rolling a 10, a 10, and 11, and 3 12's, which I've done...made a half ogre barbarian instead).
Point buy tends to lead to more min/maxing in my experience. Since you hardly ever have the points to go around, you focus on whats going to make you good at what you do and survivable first, and if theres something left, you add in some flavor.
Neither way is better or worse, they both have stuff for and against em. It really boils down to what your group is happy with.
And yeah...you could go old school on your group, 3d6 in order. Take that Mr. I wanna play a paladin!!!
I prefer 4d6 best 3, with the exception that if the average is less than 12 then re-roll the set. This typically results in only one person having to re-roll. The end result is a fairly decent range of scores and usually does not leave an unlucky player with stat-envy (not much, anyway).
|
|
We did 4d6 drop the lowest for our current campaign. I rolled 4 characters, scrapped one as it was weaker than an asthmatic one armed kobold, made one a wizard (with two stats - str and cha - with negative mods, but a 19 int - rolled a 17), one a fighter (cha a dump stat - 8, but a 19 str after the +2), and a rogue with two 17s (dex/cha), 10 con, the rest 12s and 13s.
I'm playing the rogue right now, but, as Kirth is DMing, the rest are in reserve as "replacement characters" as I expect to die any time now...
;)
|
I've gone back and forth over the years (and decades!). Rolling, by whatever method, is a lot of fun. It's exciting to have the chance to get a really great score. Then the really great scores don't happen often enough, or, they're coupled with a really bad score that makes the whole set unacceptable (in the player's opinion). OK, so roll an extra die and keep the best three. Someone still comes out under the curve (but with a set of stats that would have been good for the previous campaign). Well, then, go ahead and reroll all ones. The curve goes up again, someone is disappointed again.
So, yeah, now I use point buy. It's guaranteed to be equitable. I may still get a grumble or two that I don't give enough points, but no one complains that it's "not fair". Go ahead and just take max gold for your class at first level, too. It really won't mean that much soon enough. Players can show up to the first session with complete and ready to play characters and we can just get to the action.
I do long for the 3d6 in order, sometimes, but I know it's just nostalgia. I don't want to bring backs the prerolled PCs with no sub-16 scores, and denials of cheating. I don't want the admissons of the dozens of sets of scores rolled and "died at birth", before an "acceptable" set was finally rolled. Except on the days I even miss those guys...
I like the heroic method. The players roll, but the characters never suck in any particular way. If a certain character has ridiculously high scores, he'll be in for a harder time. He can take it.
Perhaps the monsters just "know" he's the bad-a$$, and do their best to hurt him. Doing that too often isn't fair, but it keeps him on his toes.
As a player, my most memorable characters have started with good stats. It helped them survive. My wizard with a 14 int wasn't spectacular in any way, and died pretty early, due to his craptacular con score. That was with 4d6, too. I just rolled bad. If only he'd had just one more spell...
It's easy to deal with high ability scores. Just raise the CR once in a while, throw a spell-and-skill-wasting trap or encounter in for giggles, and watch them squirm. They take damage, burn magic, and lose valuable time. Lesser mortals would have failed by then. They're exceptional in every way.
Really great characters make for really great games, IMHO.
I like the heroic method. The players roll, but the characters never suck in any particular way. If a certain character has ridiculously high scores, he'll be in for a harder time. He can take it.
Perhaps the monsters just "know" he's the bad-a$$, and do their best to hurt him. Doing that too often isn't fair, but it keeps him on his toes.
As a player, my most memorable characters have started with good stats. It helped them survive. My wizard with a 14 int wasn't spectacular in any way, and died pretty early, due to his craptacular con score. That was with 4d6, too. I just rolled bad. If only he'd had just one more spell...
It's easy to deal with high ability scores. Just raise the CR once in a while, throw a spell-and-skill-wasting trap or encounter in for giggles, and watch them squirm. They take damage, burn magic, and lose valuable time. Lesser mortals would have failed by then. They're exceptional in every way.
Really great characters make for really great games, IMHO.
Eh, one of my more fondly remembered characters was a half-elven Dweomerkeeper/Mage back in 2nd ed. Goblins were stronger, kobolds had a better constitution, and he wasn't much to look at, and his reflexes weren't on par with a thiefs, but he was a mental giant. Sure, I had to baby him through the first few levels, but that was part of the fun.
Eh, one of my more fondly remembered characters was a half-elven Dweomerkeeper/Mage back in 2nd ed. Goblins were stronger, kobolds had a better constitution, and he wasn't much to look at, and his reflexes weren't on par with a thiefs, but he was a mental giant. Sure, I had to baby him through the first few levels, but that was part of the fun.
I see your point, and playing a less-than-awesome character is fun in many ways. A clever player can deal with it and enjoy staying alive even when the odds are against him. In real life, my victories are sweeter because I'm such a "regular" guy. If I were to give myself realistic PF stats, I would definitely do best as a commoner! :)
I just have a preference for really theatrical scenarios, and characters with high stats are more likely to take risks, rather than worry that they could die in one round, or not be able to hit the baddies because their fighter has a strength of 13, and an even lower dex.
There's no real answer here, of course. The variety of ability generation methods is a testament to that. I just think that if my wizard's best stat is a 14, and the rest are worse, the GM's going to have to take that into account. For me, low-fantasy only works in bronze-era settings, where clerics, wizards and fighters are like prestige classes, if you can take them at all.
Just my 2 coppers. Others see it differently, and that's cool, too.
|
|
Yet I like point buy in other game systems. The difference - point buy as done in D&D/PF/d20 is a static single pool for an isolated set of options. Other systems give you options to vary your point total between characters in the same game by trading other options for points. More skills but fewer stat points; more stat points but less starting cash; bonus points that can be assigned to stats, skills, or special abilities beyond the base purchase.
Agreed. In BESM, everything is point buy, so if you spend less points on stats (Mind, Body, and Soul, which are the equivalent of the 6 D&D abilities), you get more points for other stuff. We do dice roll in D&D because if you use the D&D point buy it's irksome to know that you could have gotten something for nothing by rolling high scores. There is no "something for nothing" in BESM.
Point Buy is great for balance between characters, and for allowing a player to make the character they want.
While some say it allows for "min/maxing", it actually just allows the player to have complete control over the building of his character. If you roll a couple high stats and then the rest are crap, the Fighter's Charisma is no better off than a min/maxed Fighter that lowered his Charisma.
Rolling is great for making characters that have non-uniform stats. What people mean by "organic". Almost no one has an odd score if they had the choice.
It's also great for randomizing the player's choices. If they didn't really know what they wanted to play, or didn't have a particular build in mind, rolling gives them stats that will cut down the choices they have.
.
While it might seem like a little thing, telling the players ahead of time whether you roll or point buy is a huge factor in how the player should approach playing the game.
I personally like building specific character builds, so I prefer using point buy. That doesn't mean I min/max a one-dimensional character.. point buy lets me ensure that I can have the stats for a multi-dimensional character.
However, my friends like to play with rolled stats. So when I go into their games, I roll first, and then come up with a build that fits after.
That way there's no disappointment (or at least less.. depending on the stats rolled).
.
Something I've been thinking of trying if I ever DM again, is to have everyone roll for stats, but then anyone can pick any set of stats for their character. This includes more than one person picking the same set if they want.
This way you have the rolling, but the odds of having a set of scores that are decent for the build you wanted are very good.
I've played a few games in the past where we've rolled 4d6 drop lowest, and if you don't like your rolls you can buy your abilities instead.
One game I remember had the DM letting us reroll our lowest score if we accepted our stats in the order rolled instead of distributing them how we wanted.
Honestly, to me, the point of the game is for everyone to have fun. The stats being above average tends to make the players happy, and they complain less when I drop a Bulette in their laps when they weren't expecting one. :)
I'm serious about that actually, I've found good stats and decent equipment given out judiciously makes the players happy, and when the game doesn't go the way they want, they fall back on the 'Well, at least I got decent stats until I find a new piece of armor, dang that stupid rust beast!'.
So, in my games its :
4d6 drop lowest.
Roll 3 sets.
If any set has a 6 or lower, reroll that entire set.
If any set has two or more 8 or lowers, reroll that entire set.
Pick one set, use it, place the stats in any order you want.
No buying back stats to boost others.
This *usually* gets everyone at least two 16+ stats, and only one 8 or 9, and one or two 10-11 stats, with the average being 13.5. That's before race modifiers, obviously.
Honestly, the point of all this is that it's a game and people should have fun. If good stats help them have fun, go for it. Additionally, good stats are more important at levels 1-8 than 9-20. 9 to 20 you can afford to boost stats with items. It's at the 1-8 level where good stats save your bacon.
I have players roll up 2 sets of stats - 4d6 drop lowest. Pick the set you prefer. Another friend of mine used to run games where you rolled up stats until you got a 16 or better and then took that and the next 5 stats you rolled (guaranteeing at least a 16).
I prefer rolling stats because, while point buy is good for initial balance between PCs, dice rolling's balance is better when you've got disparate playing styles at the table... particularly when some are optimizers and some are not. Point buy is too friendly to the optimizer, particularly the classes that don't have a lot multiple attribute dependence. Dice rolling usually leads to unexpected weaknesses and strengths scattered about the characters. I have seen more use of stat boost items to compensate a weak roll than a weak point expenditure. In point buy games, the stat boost items usually get allocated to maximization of asset rather than minimization of weakness.
|
|
Ever since my player rolled ridiculously high on most of his dwarven cleric's stats, and I was utterly unable to challenge that little bugger (except the one time he made the mistake of allowing a righteous-mighted cult leader full swings), I use point buy. It keeps things on a more even level with everyone.
Ever since my player rolled ridiculously high on most of his dwarven cleric's stats, and I was utterly unable to challenge that little bugger (except the one time he made the mistake of allowing a righteous-mighted cult leader full swings), I use point buy. It keeps things on a more even level with everyone.
When I do have players to roll their stats, I keep a note of the results, and use the same stat array for all but the mook npcs. (Of course, I just roll one set and have everyone use the same set, so it's a bit easier.)
That way a really lucky roll during character creation doesn't remove all the challenge from the game. It is a bit of work though, but man is it epic fighting something like a Gnoll archer/assassin with player level stats on top of their racial modifiers. Puts the fear back in people.
|
Ever since my player rolled ridiculously high on most of his dwarven cleric's stats, and I was utterly unable to challenge that little bugger (except the one time he made the mistake of allowing a righteous-mighted cult leader full swings), I use point buy. It keeps things on a more even level with everyone.When I do have players to roll their stats, I keep a note of the results, and use the same stat array for all but the mook npcs. (Of course, I just roll one set and have everyone use the same set, so it's a bit easier.)
That way a really lucky roll during character creation doesn't remove all the challenge from the game. It is a bit of work though, but man is it epic fighting something like a Gnoll archer/assassin with player level stats on top of their racial modifiers. Puts the fear back in people.
That's pretty cool sounding, never thought of doing it that way before.
That's pretty cool sounding, never thought of doing it that way before.
Thanks, it is a lot of extra work at high levels, but it's worth it for the really important fights.
Oh, right, I completely forgot to include that point. I roll stats for every character I put in the game that sees combat. No more with the Balors that are all the same lol.
I don't roll NPC stats. I base them off the party and their capabilities. The last time I grabbed anything as was from a MM was when they decided they could take 5 pit fiends at the same time...while they were level 12.
And before someone starts tossing around "killer DM"...they were supposed to be finding out who was behind certain plots (the pit fiends) and return with that information to the king. they decided a bit of heroism would do them better than common sense. I do believe the witty remark of theirs was "Its just pit fiends, how bad could it be?"
My players roll 4d6, drop the lowest, in order. It generally produces playable characters. I've seen characters with great stats drop in the first fight and characters with mediocre stats go on to glory. In the end, the player side of things is probably more important than the stats. As an aside, the assignment of stats in order has led to some of the best role playing that I've seen.
trust me Krigare, I'm a cruel enough DM as it is. It's rare my PC's ever get out of a battle with more than half their resources (and I usually give them a lesser battle after all those resources are used up too, just to keep pushing them)
Well...I pace them out. I don't go out of my way to exaust them every encounter, but I do my best to make sure that when its time to rest, they have pretty much hit the daily limit of what their chars can do.
Of course, I also reward playing smart, and penalize playing...I dunno, with a lack of common sense. I don't expect them to all be combat tacticians, or have the rulebooks memorized...but like with the pit fiends...cmon...out of the 6 players, 4 knew how nasty they were, and the other 2 had some kind of clue.
And, since I kinda threadjacked here, one last thing...I also try to keep a certain flow going when I'm running the game, to where its like a good book, or a good movie...no mater whats going on, you wanna turn the page or watch the next scene.
Which is why for NPC's I tend to just pick the stats that are going to work, so that they fit into the adventure how I need them to. Bad enough I'm nice enough to let players see those really important dice rolls if they want (of course, at that point, they also know I ain't fudging the results...its suprising how rarely they ask me to roll em openly, even though they know I will...might be because I have horrid dice luck either way).
As far as PC's, eh, like I said, which to go with varies by the group. The CoT group that I'm trying to get going, I think I'm going to give them point buy (25 points), since about half of them are familiar with point buy from other systems, but haven't ever played DnD in any form.
|
|
Sometimes, I wish I could just let players roll 2d6. Especially if they have Bo9S in their backpacks...
1) You can. You're the DM.
2) The Bo9S is best used as a bludgeoning weapon upon its owner.Don't let any 3PP books in your campaign until your players have at least tried to play Pathfiner core. And yes, now that Pathfinder Final has been released, I consider WotC 3.5 supps third party.
I actually tried to get my players to try point buy, but they won't go for it. They love the results of 4d6 drop the lowest, whether good or bad. Rolling stats is easily one of their favorite parts of a new campaign.
They haven't used it yet, but I give them the point buy option if they really don't like their rolls.
|
|
Sometimes, I wish I could just let players roll 2d6. Especially if they have Bo9S in their backpacks...1) You can. You're the DM.
2) The Bo9S is best used as a bludgeoning weapon upon its owner.Don't let any 3PP books in your campaign until your players have at least tried to play Pathfiner core. And yes, now that Pathfinder Final has been released, I consider WotC 3.5 supps third party.
My DM and one of the players have already houseruled the living daylights out of Pathfinder. Of the players I know, eight or nine of us own the new book, so Paizo got their lucre, but, to be honest, they didn't address our particular beefs with 3x.
We didn't need to play to see that nothing we posted about in the playtest threads (and between the three of us, we probably posted over 5000 posts there) was addressed, so we just welded the fixes we already came up with to the PfRPG chassis instead of 3x.
And, to be honest, one or two things from Bo9S became fighter talents or something.
My DM and one of the players have already houseruled the living daylights out of Pathfinder. Of the players I know, eight or nine of us own the new book, so Paizo got their lucre, but, to be honest, they didn't address our particular beefs with 3x.
We didn't need to play to see that nothing we posted about in the playtest threads (and between the three of us, we probably posted over 5000 posts there) was addressed, so we just welded the fixes we already came up with to the PfRPG chassis instead of 3x.
Same here, and, I kinda wish Paizo would take advantage of that a bit. I know there's an unofficial site for houserules, and a forum here, but I'd really love to have an official wiki sort of site where we could all contribute optional rules, suggestions, etc. (Despite the fact that I'd probably be shaving years off my life from lack of sleep if they did put something like that up.)
Personally i prefer 4d6, drop lowest and assign as desired. But just before converting over to pathfinder for the APs for RotR we reluctantly changed to point buy because one of our players had consistently poor rolls. We still do the organic roll for when we're in the mood for a good old fashioned dungeon crawl though as a change of pace.
|
|
I always figured the solution to a character with crappy stats was to play him suicidally. That leaves the party with a bit of extra treasure, and gives you another chance to roll up a new one, albeit a little behind in the XP.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever done that...
I did. My cleric in Burnt Offerings had the worst stats I've ever played using 4d6 drop. I was giddy when he died and I got to roll up my rogue...
;)
|
|
Oh wow, thanks for all the responses guys! I've gotten a lot of good ideas. However, after trying the point buy system out in making a few characters, I decided it's not what I prefer. Right now I'm leaning towards doing what my first DM did, he rolled a set of stats that we all got to pick from (using the 2D6 + 6), and we got to assign each to whatever attribute we liked. My first game, we were given an 18, a 16, two 14s, an 11, and a 9. It worked out, and we each were able to make the character we wanted. Do you guys think that's a good method?
We do point buy, because we like the fact that we are all equal and we are a bit min/maxers all (just the feeling, not really able to make any über-builds). I do allow the players a choice however - either a standard point buy, or a roll, but with my set of rather average dice and keeping the result no matter what (unless it's too sub-par, like when all bonuses added are below +2).
I always figured the solution to a character with crappy stats was to play him suicidally. That leaves the party with a bit of extra treasure, and gives you another chance to roll up a new one, albeit a little behind in the XP.
Now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever done that...
After playing with a stat-whiner muchkin constantly striving for rerolls we started to penalize newly rolled character with level loss :p
Oh wow, thanks for all the responses guys! I've gotten a lot of good ideas. However, after trying the point buy system out in making a few characters, I decided it's not what I prefer. Right now I'm leaning towards doing what my first DM did, he rolled a set of stats that we all got to pick from (using the 2D6 + 6), and we got to assign each to whatever attribute we liked. My first game, we were given an 18, a 16, two 14s, an 11, and a 9. It worked out, and we each were able to make the character we wanted. Do you guys think that's a good method?
If it makes you and your players happy, then it's a great idea. There's no really wrong way to get the stats, if the players are all satisfied and enjoy the game.
To be more specific though, I think it's a fine idea. You'll end up with an average of 13 on the stats, which is respectable and should enable them to have characters they like. So yeah, it works fine.
|
If I'm feeling rreaaaallly evil I'll go super oldschool and make them roll 3d6 in order.
lol...not funny. My first character ever, was a thief from OD&D. I really wanted to play an Elf or a dwarf, but because 3d6 down the line left me with a 9 in Dexterity as my highest score, I didn't have a choice. Amazing that I didn't hate the game after that kind of start.
|
|
My group uses the point buy in all of our campaigns (three DM's). Our fundamental reason for it is because players do not roll their stats and then decide what character they want (at least not since OD&D). First comes the concept, then the background, then the mechanical aspects (stats, skills, etc). Or at least that's how it's supposed to work ;-). Rolling random numbers, particularly the "down the line" method creates the opportunity that you cannot play the character you want (i.e. a wizard with an INT of 8). Although, this leaves a few classes (monks, paladins, etc) more difficult because so many of the ability scores are impactful to the character.
|
|
Of course if uber-PC's are what you are looking for, you can always resurrect the chart from the original Unearthed Arcana with the 9d6 prime score. Now that made for some really memorable characters. I still remember the female paladin with five 18's and a 15. Interestingly enough, she died before 3rd level. I guess high stats do not equate directly with survivability.
This is what we do in my group.
We roll 4d6, drop lowest, and roll 3 sets. On top of that we have a floating reroll, meaning you can re-roll one die and try to get a better score that way. fx if you roll the infamous 6-6-1-1 you re-roll the one and get at least the same score, or if you rolled the 6-1-1-1 in an otherwise fab array you can at least have the chance to negate the negative mod.. we're happy with it...
Point buy.. Not really our thing, though we've tried it a few times... We miss the excitement from the randomness.. :-)
Of course sometimes you get the really amazing characters, like my current ranger with a 17-20-17-15-15-12 set... Rolled on fantasygrounds so no cheating there ;-)
Point-buy.
While I may not be the biggest fan of the whole "fair and balanced" rethoric thrown around so much as of late, I -do- believe that all PCs have the right to be created -equal-.
Using dice only leads to a party being divided in alphas and underdogs, and alphas always end up abusing the underdogs one way or another (even if not with direct violence). While in my latest tables I do cherrypick my players and so I no longer have to worry about my games turning into a repetition of the Stanford experiment, I still believe in equality in creation.