Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Why I dump stats


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

1 to 50 of 277 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

There is a lot of hate on people using dump stats. I think that is silly.

10 is an average score. So if you do not dump stats that would mean your character is atleast or above average in everything. You are a hero so that is a given, but are ALL heroes above average in everything?

I find it interesting to have dump stats. Espcially if you get a racial penalty to it. Running around with a 5 strength or worse yet 5 con(then I guess there would not be much running) makes it interesting.

In my local gaming group and in the cons I went to heard a lot of hate for characters dumping stats. Claiming it is a cheap way to power game, it is stupid, and it makes you rely on your team. Yes it can and usually is used to min/max your character.

The sad part of the arguements that those metagamers told me is that all but one of them had a charatcer with a stat set to 8 or lower. The most vocal against dumping stats had a dwarf barbain with a 6 cha and 7 int. So before you stand on that soap box make sure you are not a Larry Craig and not dumping your CHA like evey other stat dumper has done. Yes it can be stupid.

It is stupid to have my gnome with 5 strenght. A shadow can one hit him with his 53 HPs. I choose what challenges I want to play with and I fully understand there may be issues I do not see coming that could side swipe my character off the map. I choose to give him a 5 strength and I roleplay the heck out of it. I cried when my faction mission was to gather 10 pounds of stone. I throw tantrums when there are ladders that most people could easily climb. I usualy ride in someones backpack, all 35 pounds of me. I enjoy it. I also refuse to buy a wand of cure light because that is a part of the game I do not enjoy is that almost EVERYONE has one. If an item is so good everyone shoudl have, then that is an item the developers should look at reducing.

Yes I rely on my team. No matter what there will be situations where you will need to rely on someone else. I guess you could make a summoner type of character that can solo everything, but I bet a situation will come up you need another person. This is written as a team game and I think the best team specialize. This is why sports team have positions. My character with a 5 str has a 23 CHA currently. I am a face. I will make those diplomancy checks you can not because you dumped your cha while complaining I dumped my STR.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, the only necessary answer to "why did you dump that stat?" is "Because that's the character I wanted to play."

Just try to ignore people who tell you that your version of a fun character is wrong. If it works in your game with your group and you enjoy it, that's all that matters.

Unless you're breaking the rules at somebody else's table, no one has standing to tell you how to run your character.

Cheliax

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am fine with dump stats as long as people understand that I am not going to pay to help them come back from the dead if their decision gets them killed

So if your 5 con, 5 St, 5 cha, 5 wis etc gets you killed for whatever reason (shadows, ghosts, wisdom damage poisons, con poisons, low hp etc), then your on your own with regards to raise dead or in some cases resurrection costs (shadow ST drain means you die and rise as a shadow making your body unsuitable for raise dead).


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)


Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

I had the same dislike, but I solved it differently due to my other dislike (that of characters with too much good going on form them in the way of high ability scores).

It's a bit tricky, but I have managed to make those "irrelevant" ability scores more relevant by altering the style of adventures I run and being a bit strict about certain things like knowledge, how NPCs react to the party, and illness. (example: yes, the wizard knows that your flaming sword isn't going to help against that lizard... he hasn't had a chance to yell that to you since he felt it was more important to warn of the beast's fire breath this turn, so your low intelligence fighter has no clue he is making a poor choice).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, because a 15 in dex for TWF costs too dam much. WTF, why not 13 like all other feats!?!?


Multiweapon fighting is 13 dex.

So if you have 18 arms it is easier than 2 I guess.


I have a question, Finlanderboy. And anyone else interested in answering.

What about when someone dumps a stat (STR in my group's case) and then fails to role-play it at all? All the necessary penalties are still applied and all (checks against being buffeted by wind two sessions ago), but if they're doing it purely for mechanical advantage without any interest in changing how their character would behave from 10 strength, does that make it any different?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

if (s)he fails to RP it, then use encumbrance and count every GP (s)he owns.
I've played a 7 Str PC and I can say that it's very efficient... I was refusing lots of items/activities due to this limitation :)


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.

Then Vestrial is correct by your assessment Shuriken Nekogami. They weren't truly interested in playing a weakness, they just wanted the high stats. If they played low stats despite having no reward for doing so then they are really doing it for the role play involved. If they all stop as you suggest then indeed they just wanted more points and were merely using role play as an excuse.


I like Vestrial's method more each time I look at it. Normally I just ban stat buy downs. But I really am denying role play options by doing so... so if a low stat is important to your role feel free to lower it. You just don't get points for it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I prefer not having a character always have some kind of crippling flaw.

Being average in the fields other than your specialty isn't especially reality-breaking from an RP perspective.

Having everyone who is strong be an uncharismatic dumbass or every Wizard be a socially inept maniac is what breaks reality.

And that is why I prefer rolling over point-buy, both as a DM and as a player. It makes for more realistic characters whose strengths and weaknesses vary.


Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats. Every other issue with rolling is solved by my 4d6 drop low but roll in order (one swap allowed), reroll if your set is inferior to everyone else's. It never seemed fair to also make the high roller reroll till he is at group norm too. But maybe you do that?

Lately I have been using 16 point buy, no buy downs. And I have yet to try out the organic point buy method another poster came up with either, though it did sound fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Our new player rolled some pretty insane stats (his lowest stat is a 12), yet nobody has cried about the spotlight being stolen or that character of his being OP. Perhaps it's simply that my players solved the problem with me, by just being that good at playing this game and having a lot of fun doing so. In addition to all that, they're of the rare "mix RP and optimizing" type of players, though the new guy is holding back on the RP part for now.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Aranna wrote:

I like Vestrial's method more each time I look at it. Normally I just ban stat buy downs. But I really am denying role play options by doing so... so if a low stat is important to your role feel free to lower it. You just don't get points for it.

You could make 8 as the lowest score. This way you can have dump stats but players can't dump down to seven for the 4 point buy bump.

Andoran

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Aranna wrote:
Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats.

Have each player roll a set, and then pick any of the sets rolled. So everyone gets to choose which one they want, allowing the group to all have the same rolls unless a different set looks better for them b


Icyshadow wrote:
Our new player rolled some pretty insane stats (his lowest stat is a 12), yet nobody has cried about the spotlight being stolen or that character of his being OP. Perhaps it's simply that my players solved the problem with me, by just being that good at playing this game and having a lot of fun doing so. In addition to all that, they're of the rare "mix RP and optimizing" type of players, though the new guy is holding back on the RP part for now.

Yeah, my players mutinied and demanded point buy after the same guy rolled huge stats through four campaigns. But I was quite happy with rolling. Not rewarding buy downs is a good equalizer for point buy however.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd allow buy-downs if I ever used point-buy, because the casters need to up their DCs somehow.

Then again, I'd also give the MAD classes higher point-buy which would automatically make it "unfair".

And that's two more reasons why I'd rather roll. Point-buy brings more grief to my players than rolling ever could.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats.
Have each player roll a set, and then pick any of the sets rolled. So everyone gets to choose which one they want, allowing the group to all have the same rolls unless a different set looks better for them b

This might have the unintended consequence of a table full of super men. But... I might try it and see if they like it. Ohhh it might work well with Roll in Order! That way there would be more reason to not have everyone as a cookie cutter of the highest set.


What's wrong with having heroes* who are actually competent?

* = or villains, if the players like that kind of thing. I personally don't.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Caderyn wrote:

I am fine with dump stats as long as people understand that I am not going to pay to help them come back from the dead if their decision gets them killed

So if your 5 con, 5 St, 5 cha, 5 wis etc gets you killed for whatever reason (shadows, ghosts, wisdom damage poisons, con poisons, low hp etc), then your on your own with regards to raise dead or in some cases resurrection costs (shadow ST drain means you die and rise as a shadow making your body unsuitable for raise dead).

Really? Maybe I'm misreading you, but that sounds like super metagaming to me.

What if your character really liked the other PC? I'm going to make an assumption here, namely that as you sound like you don't like min/max stuff, you consider yourself a character- and story-driven "role"player.

Doesn't it ruin your immersion/suspension of disbelief when you make a decision like that based purely on "you the player" not liking how someone built their characte? I mean, your PC Bobby the Well-Rounded doesn't know that Joe Minmaxilus actually prenatally decided he would be born with low intelligence so he could swing a greatsword better.

Not taking the piss here either, it just struck me as odd that an anti-minmaxer would decide their character's actions in this way. I mean, death is a pretty huge roleplaying opportunity. I've never played a PC that didn't want to resurrect his teammate, even though as a player I might grumble a bit. "Oh man, why did you charge in like that? I was so close to getting my new headband..."


Aranna wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats.
Have each player roll a set, and then pick any of the sets rolled. So everyone gets to choose which one they want, allowing the group to all have the same rolls unless a different set looks better for them b
This might have the unintended consequence of a table full of super men. But... I might try it and see if they like it. Ohhh it might work well with Roll in Order! That way there would be more reason to not have everyone as a cookie cutter of the highest set.

Roll in Order might get you everyone wanting to play whatever class fits the best set: None of them get a high str, you get no melee class, for example. But I generally hate Roll in Order, since it's a good way to drive someone to play a concept they're not interested in.

You can use a rolling method that doesn't generate such high scores though, since you're not worried about avoiding the one guy who gets a low set. 3d6 reroll ones? That avoids the worst 3d6 rolls, but stays well below 4d6 drop 1.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats.
Have each player roll a set, and then pick any of the sets rolled. So everyone gets to choose which one they want, allowing the group to all have the same rolls unless a different set looks better for them b

I wrote a program that did a few hundred thousand runs, calculating the average point buy as if people did 4d6 drop lowest, choose the best point buy of a set of six (5 players plus GM). Any score below 7 I set the point value as if it was 7.

The average point buy value of the best set of stats was a little over 33, about 33.2 or so.

I also did it with 5 sets, and it was around 32 points on average.

I'm sure you could get the exact mean using statistics, but writing the program was faster. :)


Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.

No, dump statting is a dumb idea, with the only exception that the player's concept is with a lower stat.

How many of the 'heroes' in our own world would have a dump stat? Most of them i am guessing would not, and prolly higher averages across the board, with exceptions like Hawkings, well he would have some dump stats.

How is having a super negative stat make your character more interesting than one that doesnt?

Aren't you suppose to be the heroes? I am of the opinion that 'heroes' are not a bunch of broken people doing amazing things. Then you have all the attribute gear/items, which can give you +11 to each stat, and it is expected that you will have many of them eventually which guess what, gets rid of your dump stat failure.

Many people like playing joe avg or the underdog (who has dump stats hence why he is the underdog) which is fine, but they definately are not 'heroes' to me.

Simple solution here is give more stats, but make stat padding magic items less / rare, it balances out and then you dont have the vast majority of Pathfinders/characters looking like some dis-functional motley crue.

OP if fine, he answered the one question i had for him in his OP, that he role plays.


Dilvias Wasn't the point equivalent somewhere around 20ish if I remember correctly.

Icyshadow what do you throw at your players? Class wise a wizard is competent with a 16 Int stat. That is a 14 before racial adjustments. With a 16 they cover all class expectations and minimum requirements with flying colors. The only reason to go higher is to try to game the saving throw DCs. So I am guessing you use stronger challenges than the book suggests?


Actually, many heroes of myth seemed to lack dump stats. Arthur, Beowulf, Hercules and Gilgamesh didn't have huge weaknesses from what I know.


thejeff wrote:
Aranna wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats.
Have each player roll a set, and then pick any of the sets rolled. So everyone gets to choose which one they want, allowing the group to all have the same rolls unless a different set looks better for them b
This might have the unintended consequence of a table full of super men. But... I might try it and see if they like it. Ohhh it might work well with Roll in Order! That way there would be more reason to not have everyone as a cookie cutter of the highest set.

Roll in Order might get you everyone wanting to play whatever class fits the best set: None of them get a high str, you get no melee class, for example. But I generally hate Roll in Order, since it's a good way to drive someone to play a concept they're not interested in.

You can use a rolling method that doesn't generate such high scores though, since you're not worried about avoiding the one guy who gets a low set. 3d6 reroll ones? That avoids the worst 3d6 rolls, but stays well below 4d6 drop 1.

Thanks thejeff I hadn't considered that.


Aranna wrote:

Dilvias Wasn't the point equivalent somewhere around 20ish if I remember correctly.

Icyshadow what do you throw at your players? Class wise a wizard is competent with a 16 Int stat. That is a 14 before racial adjustments. With a 16 they cover all class expectations and minimum requirements with flying colors. The only reason to go higher is to try to game the saving throw DCs. So I am guessing you use stronger challenges than the book suggests?

I've actually played Kingmaker by the book so far with my current group, with no need for any major adjustments.

They almost died against a certain two-headed troll (Cleric did die), and some other monsters have given them a good challenge too.


Nether wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.

No, dump statting is a dumb idea, with the only exception that the player's concept is with a lower stat.

How many of the 'heroes' in our own world would have a dump stat? Most of them i am guessing would not, and prolly higher averages across the board, with exceptions like Hawkings, well he would have some dump stats.

How is having a super negative stat make your character more interesting than one that doesnt?

Aren't you suppose to be the heroes? I am of the opinion that 'heroes' are not a bunch of broken people doing amazing things. Then you have all the attribute gear/items, which can give you +11 to each stat, and it is expected that you will have many of them eventually which guess what, gets rid of your dump stat failure.

Many people like playing joe avg or the underdog (who has dump stats hence why he is the underdog) which is fine, but they definately are not 'heroes' to me.

Simple solution here is give more stats, but make stat padding magic items less / rare, it balances out and then you dont have the vast majority of Pathfinders/characters looking like some dis-functional motley crue.

OP if fine, he answered the...

Three words: Caramon and Raistlin :)

Heroes with natural flaws can be the most memorable, while still being awesome. Of course, the unspoken foundation of this idea is that they're roleplayed well.

And of course, you don't want every PC being either as dumb as Caramon or as frail as Raistlin. But those characters definitely have their place.


Adding to my reply to Aranna, I added a random Sea Hag attack when they were crossing the local lake and removed the Kingdom Building rules.

The players were okay with it, since my previous group got bored with them, they took too much time and kinda just disconnected the players from the story.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Have you solved the one issue with rolling I haven't been able to overcome Icyshadow? The one guy with vastly superior stats.
Have each player roll a set, and then pick any of the sets rolled. So everyone gets to choose which one they want, allowing the group to all have the same rolls unless a different set looks better for them b

This tends to work very well in my experience. Maybe because it has a sense of randomness, but also the player has ultimate control.


littlehewy wrote:
Nether wrote:
Shuriken Nekogami wrote:
Vestrial wrote:


What I mostly don't like about dump stats is that the game encourages it due to low point buy, stats that are irrelevant, and a fairly large bonus for dumping.

In my game, you get more points to start, but don't get any bonus for stats bellow 10. You're welcome to drop stats for RP purposes, though. (That separates the RPs from the powergamers with a convenient excuse real quick.)

bad idea. remove the reward for dumping stats, and nobody will do it, in favor of flawless mary sues with no depth.

dump stats, while used by specialists, are hardly a bad thing. the flaws shape a character more than their advantages.

most of the stat dumping classes (anything martial) requires the extra points to keep up with the damned schrodinger's 20 int wizard and his absurd single attribute dependency.

No, dump statting is a dumb idea, with the only exception that the player's concept is with a lower stat.

How many of the 'heroes' in our own world would have a dump stat? Most of them i am guessing would not, and prolly higher averages across the board, with exceptions like Hawkings, well he would have some dump stats.

How is having a super negative stat make your character more interesting than one that doesnt?

Aren't you suppose to be the heroes? I am of the opinion that 'heroes' are not a bunch of broken people doing amazing things. Then you have all the attribute gear/items, which can give you +11 to each stat, and it is expected that you will have many of them eventually which guess what, gets rid of your dump stat failure.

Many people like playing joe avg or the underdog (who has dump stats hence why he is the underdog) which is fine, but they definately are not 'heroes' to me.

Simple solution here is give more stats, but make stat padding magic items less / rare, it balances out and then you dont have the vast majority of Pathfinders/characters looking like some dis-functional motley crue.

OP

...

Raistlin far more than Caramon. And the main reason Raistlin was such a favorite is because the guy that played him was a fantastic role player. If you listen to the interveiw with .. Margarett? or Tracy, can't remember who, but they talk about the player of Raistlin, and how the guy came to the first session dressed up, in character and they were all amazed at the character the guy was portraying. So i am thinking that it would have had very little effect on how likeable Raistlin was even if he didnt have a lower attribute. It was the player that made the character memorable, stats just represented what he wanted to portray.

Prolly the most successful dnd fantasy character today is Drizzt, and he is memorable because of the character, his social interactions and what he did. Yes he needs some high stats to also be the 'hero' he is, as well as actually being a step above the farmers/average people, but i think majority of the fans favor strong amazing characters over avg characters with a dump stat.


Aranna wrote:

Dilvias Wasn't the point equivalent somewhere around 20ish if I remember correctly.

What I did was write a program that created 6 sets of stats (rolled 4d6 six times, calculate the point value, and repeated that five more times), and then picked the point value out of that six that was the highest. I then kept a running total of all of the highest point values, and at the end divided that total by the number of runs I did. So, for example if the higest point values in a group of five runs was 24, 26, 28, 30 and 32, the average point value would have been 28.

I then ran a few hundred thousand iterations. The average point value of these runs ended up being over 33. (I did this a few months ago, so I don't remember the exact number. I know it was a little over 33.)

20 may be closer to the average of one set of runs. I didn't check on that. It was a very simple program, less than 100 lines if I remember correctly. If anyone else wants to create a program and check, they are more than welcome to do so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

At the end of Raistlin's career he had a 17 Int... meaning he topped out at 8th level spells. The equivalent in 3e era would be an 18 (but without the DC improvements)

Caramon's strength 18(63) gave him a +2/+3 combat stats or the equivalent of between a 14 and a 16 strength... call it 15 in 3e stat maybe?

They sure seemed epic enough without needing massive modifiers to get their job done for them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yep Nether, I hear what you're saying, but I did already mention that good roleplaying underpins a memorable character :)

Also, I currently have an inquisitor, who happens to have a Cha of 5. The reason being that we used the old "everybody roll 4d6-drop low and you can pick any array that anyone rolls.

Ok, so my inquisitor idea was a bit MAD, and the onl on that gave me nough heroic stats was one that included a 5. So, I took it. The only stat I could bear to have it in (for this character) was Cha.

So,it totally changed my concept. I rewrote his backstory, making him a major burn victim as a child. As a result, he wears body-covering robes to hide his hideous scars, speaks often with a bit of a whisper or growl, and took the Conversion inquisition so he could use his social skills with Wis via his god-touched voice.

I love it. He's very good at almost everything, but his flaw has brought him to life for me.

Of course, this was totally unplanned when I mapped out my concept, and I agonised for hours over which array to take because Ididn't want a 5.

My PCs don't often have 5s though. Maybe never before this, in fact.


Aranna wrote:

At the end of Raistlin's career he had a 17 Int... meaning he topped out at 8th level spells. The equivalent in 3e era would be an 18 (but without the DC improvements)

Caramon's strength 18(63) gave him a +2/+3 combat stats or the equivalent of between a 14 and a 16 strength... call it 15 in 3e stat maybe?

They sure seemed epic enough without needing massive modifiers to get their job done for them.

Ok. I was arguing that they didn't have to be awesome to be heroes, like some others were saying... So we agree!


littlehewy wrote:
Three words: Caramon and Raistlin :)

True for Raistlin. False with Caramon. Caramon was as intelligent as most other party members. He was just used to leaving most of the thinking to his brother and seemed to be dumb in comparison to his brighter brother.


Oh in case your wondering Caramon had no stat lower than 11... so he was fairly smart compared to your average farmer. Str 18(63); Dex 11; Con 17; Int 12; Wis 11; Cha 15

Raist had no stat lower than 10. So he was perfectly healthy and not weak at all. Str 10; Dex 16; Con 10; Int 17; Wis 14; Cha 15

No dump stats here.


Drejk wrote:
littlehewy wrote:
Three words: Caramon and Raistlin :)
True for Raistlin. False with Caramon. Caramon was as intelligent as most other party members. He was just used to leaving most of the thinking to his brother and seemed to be dumb in comparison to his brighter brother.

Well, as it turns out, yes. But I bet many, many people, if they tried to stat out Caramon after the Chronicles,would conceptualise him as having low Int and average Wis.

Well, I did, anyway. I admit that's a fairly small sample size :)


Aranna wrote:

Oh in case your wondering Caramon had no stat lower than 11... so he was fairly smart compared to your average farmer. Str 18(63); Dex 11; Con 17; Int 12; Wis 11; Cha 15

Raist had no stat lower than 10. So he was perfectly healthy and not weak at all. Str 10; Dex 16; Con 10; Int 17; Wis 14; Cha 15

No dump stats here.

I would argue that the way they were written was different to the way they were statted for gameplay.

If I were arguing, anyway, that's what I'd argue :)

Edit: And yes, I actually knew their scores were like that, I have, not the originals, but the AD&D 2nd Ed four-in-a-book modules around here somewhere :)


Yeah I like when people have lower high end and no dump stats.


littlehewy wrote:

Three words: Caramon and Raistlin :)

Heroes with natural flaws can be the most memorable, while still being awesome. Of course, the unspoken foundation of this idea is that they're roleplayed well.

And of course, you don't want every PC being either as dumb as Caramon or as frail as Raistlin. But those characters definitely have their place.

I'd rather deal with personality flaws than stat flaws. You can have flaws in your character without low stats. They tend to more interesting than just low stat numbers, though players can do fun things with low stats as well. You can also overcome non-mechanical flaws through role-playing and character development without having to tie it to stat boosts to your dump stat.


^^ I posted above about my inquisitor. Not a deliberate dump, but a 5 anyway. Made my character who he is. Made him more than 2d in fact!

But that was a one-off, I admit.


littlehewy wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Oh in case your wondering Caramon had no stat lower than 11... so he was fairly smart compared to your average farmer. Str 18(63); Dex 11; Con 17; Int 12; Wis 11; Cha 15

Raist had no stat lower than 10. So he was perfectly healthy and not weak at all. Str 10; Dex 16; Con 10; Int 17; Wis 14; Cha 15

No dump stats here.

I would argue that the way they were written was different to the way they were statted for gameplay.

If I were arguing, anyway, that's what I'd argue :)

Edit: And yes, I actually knew their scores were like that, I have, not the originals, but the AD&D 2nd Ed four-in-a-book modules around here somewhere :)

These were the characters rolled up by the players in the Dragon Lance campaign (all developers of D&D). So those were their stats... how they are portrayed in the books accurately mimics how they decided to role play those stats.


Aranna wrote:

Yeah I like when people have lower high end and no dump stats.

Well, I suppose that's the crux of it all - people like different things. I'm not a dump statter myself, but I can't help myself, I have to be the devil's advocate :)

I just dislike it when people get all, like, " Folks who play this way suck."


Aranna wrote:
littlehewy wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Oh in case your wondering Caramon had no stat lower than 11... so he was fairly smart compared to your average farmer. Str 18(63); Dex 11; Con 17; Int 12; Wis 11; Cha 15

Raist had no stat lower than 10. So he was perfectly healthy and not weak at all. Str 10; Dex 16; Con 10; Int 17; Wis 14; Cha 15

No dump stats here.

I would argue that the way they were written was different to the way they were statted for gameplay.

If I were arguing, anyway, that's what I'd argue :)

Edit: And yes, I actually knew their scores were like that, I have, not the originals, but the AD&D 2nd Ed four-in-a-book modules around here somewhere :)

These were the characters rolled up by the players in the Dragon Lance campaign (all developers of D&D). So those were their stats... how they are portrayed in the books accurately mimics how they decided to role play those stats.

It's very lucky I'm not arguing then, isn't it? :) Or I'd be losing!

/silly

Are we absolutely sure that's what they rolled up? Because I recall reading in the intro to the modules that the ability scores were made higher than average because these were the heroes of Krynn... 'Twas a very long time ago though...

Edit: ... And those were the days of 3d6 - they are all pretty awesome rolls for 3d6.


*searching for old DL modules frantically...


No clue how their stats were made to be honest. I just used to chat with the creators of Dragon Lance at the cons. So I have a special fondness for that setting. Margaret Weis even complimented my outfit!


Aranna wrote:

No clue how their stats were made to be honest. I just used to chat with the creators of Dragon Lance at the cons. So I have a special fondness for that setting. Margaret Weis even complimented my outfit!

Ok, that's super cool.

Were you dressed as a DL character?

1 to 50 of 277 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Why I dump stats All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.