Why bother to roll at all? It's it's about letting people play how they want, why are you forcing them to roll to try to get the stats they want like some draconian Casino master?
Just let them write whatever stats they want on their character sheet.
Joe wants to play Batman? He gets 18s in all his stats and starts with double 20th level Wealth.
Steve wants to play Batman if he had been given Captain America's Super Soldier Serum? He gets 18s in all his stats and the Advanced Template on top of that.
Sally wants to play Toni Stark? She gets to start a 24 INT and a suit of special gold alloy armor that increases her strength by 20, has DR/- 40, and an at Will Fly effect and a 10d6 ranged touch laser.
Anything less is restricting their play style.
Why bother to roll at all? It's it's about letting people play how they want, why are you forcing them to roll to try to get the stats they want like some draconian Casino master?
Just let them write whatever stats they want on their character sheet.
Joe wants to play Batman? He gets 18s in all his stats and starts with double 20th level Wealth.
Steve wants to play Batman if he had been given Captain America's Super Soldier Serum? He gets 18s in all his stats and the Advanced Template on top of that.
Sally wants to play Toni Stark? She gets to start a 24 INT and a suit of special gold alloy armor that increases her strength by 20, has DR/- 40, and an at Will Fly effect and a 10d6 ranged touch laser.
Anything less is restricting their play style.
Reductio ad absurdum, logical fallacy. 10 yard penalty, loss of down.
like some draconian Casino master?
Hel-LO, next character for me to roll up!
Reductio ad absurdum, logical fallacy. 10 yard penalty, loss of down.Why bother to roll at all? It's it's about letting people play how they want, why are you forcing them to roll to try to get the stats they want like some draconian Casino master?
Just let them write whatever stats they want on their character sheet.
Joe wants to play Batman? He gets 18s in all his stats and starts with double 20th level Wealth.
Steve wants to play Batman if he had been given Captain America's Super Soldier Serum? He gets 18s in all his stats and the Advanced Template on top of that.
Sally wants to play Toni Stark? She gets to start a 24 INT and a suit of special gold alloy armor that increases her strength by 20, has DR/- 40, and an at Will Fly effect and a 10d6 ranged touch laser.
Anything less is restricting their play style.
Sorry, I find your rules of discourse too restricting, I award myself 3d10 bonus yards and a falafel.
A 40 point buy stat array is ridiculous. The NPCs and monsters are designed around a 3-15 point buy
Mine aren't, just sayin'.
You seem to be making the assumption that the players get awesome stats in all of these guy's games while the NPCs and monsters stay wimpy.
I can't speak for everyone else, but that's not the way I do it. I just prefer to have PCs that can do everything they need to do and still have stats left over to still be able to do some other off-color stuff. But at the very least most monsters get to nab the Advanced template when I run a high stat game.
The real problem with point buy is that it is un-American and Communist! Communist, I tell you! Did they teach you this "all characters have to be equal" at the same time they taught you to sing "The Internationale"? Where's Joe McCarthy when you need him? We need to get these dangerous foreign ideas out of a red-blooded American hobby like RPGs before they infect our kids and lead to all kinds of shocking behavior.
I'm starting my list of posters on this board that are just a little too pinko for my liking!
He is saying at his game, you have to PB or don't play. At my game you can create YOUR character however you like, it's YOURS. So which style is open to all players. I don't understand how ppl talk about fairness, but worry about other people so much. Why is it right to tell other ppl how to play, but not right to let ppl play how they want?
I'm an architect, I'm opening my own firm in the next 5 years, if I succeed I will do much better than most ppl, but if I fail I'll lose, my savings, if I get sued and go bankrupt I'll loose my house, my retirement, just about everything, but it's not fair that if I succeed I would have more than others? People wonder what's wrong with our generation, it's that we can't even play a fake game w/o concerning ourselves with what other ppl have and what they're allowed to do.
This isn't really about what is fair. It's about a game designed to support a 15-25 pt buy. If you roll stat above or below what that pb can purchase then you force the GM to adjust the game to suit those stats. That is more work for the GM. Then if you end up with mix of high and low it make the job even worse the GM. You want to challege the party but you don't want to kill the low stat characters. If the GM isn't up the job of dealing with random stats it make for a poor game experience.
We do mostly rolling and I'm the GM. I prefer point buy but my players hate it. I'm not sure what the player like about rolling. As GM I let the roll and balance stats to keep them in the same ball park to make my life easier. This tends to lead to higher stats and I just slide the scale up to keep the challenge in place. So things are balanced and they really are no more powerful. Only thing I can think of is it allow for some different builds.
Basically I just adjust stats from +2 to +12 depending on how high the player stats are. So the heroic array becomes 17, 16, 15, 14, 12, and 10 if the stats get really high. For above average stats I might just boost the 15 to 17. This also applies monster too. It seem to work well enough. I've had some games where the equivalent pt buy is closer to 60 (multiple 18s) using 2D6+6 re-roll 1s for the rolling method. The players suggested it and I went with it for that game and we got the character to level 14. The players liked it because they could build things they couldn't with lower point buy. Stuff like TWF Inquistors with high strength.
A 40 point buy stat array is ridiculous. The NPCs and monsters are designed around a 3-15 point buyMine aren't, just sayin'.
You seem to be making the assumption that the players get awesome stats in all of these guy's games while the NPCs and monsters stay wimpy.
I can't speak for everyone else, but that's not the way I do it. I just prefer to have PCs that can do everything they need to do and still have stats left over to still be able to do some other off-color stuff. But at the very least most monsters get to nab the Advanced template when I run a high stat game.
The advanced template is so hit and miss that I feel its not worth the +1 CR. I see it more of xp earnings inflation. There are some exceptions to this of course (mostly by bumping up already high DCs on save or die/suck abilities).
He is saying at his game, you have to PB or don't play. At my game you can create YOUR character however you like, it's YOURS. So which style is open to all players. I don't understand how ppl talk about fairness, but worry about other people so much. Why is it right to tell other ppl how to play, but not right to let ppl play how they want?
I'm an architect, I'm opening my own firm in the next 5 years, if I succeed I will do much better than most ppl, but if I fail I'll lose, my savings, if I get sued and go bankrupt I'll loose my house, my retirement, just about everything, but it's not fair that if I succeed I would have more than others? People wonder what's wrong with our generation, it's that we can't even play a fake game w/o concerning ourselves with what other ppl have and what they're allowed to do.
For what it's worth, I tend to agree with most of your argument. My company has actually engaged in workshops and training sessions for its management to address the issues that are arising with the introduction of "Generation Y" into the work force. And there is some truth to the point you are making. There is a pervasive mentality of "Everybody gets a trophy just for showing up!"
That said... And at the risk of completely contradicting my implied point... The game is about a group of heroes. They're never going to be equal, no matter what point-system you use, either because the classes are not 100% balanced, or because the players have different levels of system-mastery, or simply luck of the draw with item-drops, etc., etc., etc. But, everyone should feel like part of the heroism, in the game. Let me just stress the in the game part of that statement.
I am perfectly willing to play bad stats. I would not be happy to play the "also-ran" character, though.
I agree with this, but don't think it has to do with stat generation. The rogue, wizard, or clerics moments to shine shouldn't be affected by how weak or strong the fighter is. It's up to the players RP ability to add flavor to their actions, and a good DM giving everyone challenges designed for them. I think courtesy between the players is about not stepping on the toes of another role, ie. if there is a rogue in the group don't cast knock.
But if I roll well enough to give my Wizard a 12 CHA to fashion him like a magician, I don't see how I'm hurting other players, or making the Wizard harder to challenge. Anybody built like a face is going to be better in that role, and my CHA is just to give me the flavor and freedom to play him how I pictured. And if there is no face, I just helped the party out.
I also don't agree with the CR argument. So my Wizard now has a total of +10 instead of +8, if they are coming from secondary stats that don't affect his class abilities, he is no less challenged, or no more likely to defeat them.
There is nothing wrong with your argument here. The one point I will make is that you are addressing everything in a single encounter style. Yes, a slight increase or decrease in stat bonuses is not a dramatic alteration in how you engage a single encounter. But, it is a trap to think of the totality of the game as a string of single encounters.
Would it break the game to give a character the ability to do X once in a single encounter? No, and it almost doesn't matter what reasonable thing you sub for X.
Would it break the game if he could do X once per day? Maybe.
Once per hour? Once per encounter? At will? Continuously? Yeah, this gets bad.
But if I roll well enough to give my Wizard a 12 CHA to fashion him like a magician, I don't see how I'm hurting other players, or making the Wizard harder to challenge. Anybody built like a face is going to be better in that role, and my CHA is just to give me the flavor and freedom to play him how I pictured. And if there is no face, I just helped the party out.
You can easily do that with point buy too. The only way that wouldn't work with point buy is if you literally want your character to be the very best in that role in addition to your regular role.
One possibility I considered:
roll 3d6, in order. Any roll below 7 becomes a 7. These are the minimum stats for your character. You can, if your point value is less than 25, spend points to get the value up to 25.
For example, I just rolled:
str 14, dex 11, con 3 (becomes 7), int 12 wis 10, cha 13
which is 7 points. I now get 18 more points to increase the values of my stats.
Alternatively, you can just use 20 point buy, building however you want.
Sort of a best of both worlds concept.
No, it isn't. I would always roll dice under your concept, since at worst I could get a 25 point buy character (I am assuming that you meant the second option be to build a 25 point buy character -- otherwise my point would be even stronger.) But at least your system has the virtue of not distorting the dice rolls -- nothing gets rerolled.
The major problem with point buy is that it has plenty of checks on scores that are too low (as nearly every DM who has players roll stats has a formal or informal acceptable minimum standard for ability scores and lets a player reroll if the stats are too crappy) but none on stats that are too high -- in fact, the player being able to say "You saw me roll them" and the DM seeing no evidence of cheating makes it very difficult for the DM to tone the stats down. With certain substandard rolls or combinations of rolls eliminated, the average of the accepted rolls can become much higher than a statistical analysis of the initial dice rolls would suggest.
The whole point of random dice rolls for ability scores is to generate a random member of the population of potential adventurers -- but the major problem is that adventurers are not random members of the population. For example, it is assumed that the character in question lives long enough to grow up and learn the basics of a character class -- which could require extreme luck for somebody who got a constitution score of 3. Alternatively, a character with mediocre stats might decide that the best plan in life is to work on daddy's farm and stay far away from dangerous adventures -- which is a more rational choice than the frequent character suicides I have read about from players rolling below average stats. So even if the rolls represent the potential that a random member of a given race is born with, some selection pressure has already weeded out the worst stats in the time that it would take a character to grow up.
And the whole thing gets blown out of the water if a player can arrange stats as he wishes. Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of playing with what fate gave you? Did any real person ever have a completely free choice as a child as to whether he would be in the top 2% of the population as either a scholar or a weightlifter? On the other hand, if a new player to a campaign is trying to oblige a party that says they need a cleric, should he be stuck with an average or even below average wisdom? If the only decent stat that the player rolled was strength, would the resulting character join a party that already has enough big dumb fighters?
As a DM who prefers point buy, I can tell you what I told a player who preferred rolling dice in my game -- "Yes, you can roll your stats or determine them any way you like. Just make sure that they add up to a 20 point buy when you are done." Another DM that I know worked with the same player by letting him roll his stats, worked out the equivalent point buy, and then had the rest of us build our characters to that point buy. But what would he have done if he had had two players who insisted on rolling their stats and taking whatever they got?
There really is not a lot of room for compromise on the method for generating ability scores. A DM who favors point buy has no reason to give on that issue, while a DM who favors random rolls would have a tough time working out a reasonable point buy equivalent to his system of rolling (I have yet to meet a DM who was successful at doing that). As a player, I would obviously listen to the choices that the DM offers and take the superior option (factoring in the considerations above that could distort the odds).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There really is not a lot of room for compromise on the method for generating ability scores. A DM who favors point buy has no reason to give on that issue, while a DM who favors random rolls would have a tough time working out a reasonable point buy equivalent to his system of rolling (I have yet to meet a DM who was successful at doing that). As a player, I would obviously listen to the choices that the DM offers and take the superior option (factoring in the considerations above that could distort the odds).
The only reason that there can't be compromise, is if the people on either side don't believe there can be compromise.
I see groups who roll. And groups who roll with rules in place to mitigate total disaster.
I see groups who point-buy. And groups who point-buy with rules in place to prevent total munchkin-ing.
I even see groups who allow the option of rolling or taking the point-buy if your rolls are too low.
The purpose of any of this, is to arrive at the "Fun" part of the evening, where we play the game and enjoy it.
There is a DM that has a youtube channel I watch. I disagree with what he says about dice rolling, but he sounds like an awesome DM and actually house rules a PB system where you roll 7d4 to see how many points you get. Now that I would be happy to go along with. How do the PBers feel about that?
It is rather pointless to do that. There is a random 21 point spread in the point buy value (guaranteed to displease anyone who favors point buy for eliminating that sort of randomness) that is then distributed according to point buy rules (guaranteed to displease fans of random rolls). It is literally the worst of borh worlds as an approach to generating stats.
Wow, this thread is heated.
I'm gonna stick with stat array is my favorite kind of game. Letting players have equal ground, and giving them decent stats is not game breaking.
Personally, I give out the stats that I do (which equals a high, what 39 point buy?) because that is what was given to me in more than one game. It does depend on style though.
I hate rolling, especially because it leads to a complete lack of balance between the players. Next thing you know, the wizard is a better party face than the paladin just because he rolled better.
I also dislike point buy, simply because it doesn't treat all classes fairly. The wizard is fine, sure, but the cleric can't do anything it seems.
Making a stat array based off a point buy system completely defeats the purpose of not doing a point buy system in the first place, and since you are talking about logical fallacy itt, why evaluate the stat array system with the point buy system's value that I am trying to do away with?
Every argument I see here in favor of point buy is in regards to balance, as in you are worried that players will be too powerful. Stat arrays are designed (or at least should be) to prevent them from being too powerful and still let them have one or two good stats that they can build a character with, without having to worry about how much they have to spend on a higher CON.
PBS leads to a lot of cookie cutter builds, I'm sorry, but it just does. Why does the term Big Dumb Fighter even exist at all? Because most of the time, fighter classes dump their INT.
Ideal stat arrays:
SAD class
18 14 14 12 10 8
TAD class
17 17 14 10 10 8
MAD class
16 15 15 13 12 10
How do those arrays look?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Question: How does 4d6 Drop Lowest and 4d6 Reroll Ones Drop Lowest compare to Point Buy?
I know! I'll make a spreadsheet!
(Edit: Removed link to spreadsheet. Daily Script Quota limits on Google Docs? Whazzat? Oh...)
Answers:
Across one hundred trials, 4d6 Drop Lowest varies between a -4 Point Buy and a 50 Point buy, averages an approximate 20 Point Buy with a median of an approximate 18 Point Buy. Standard deviation is 10.87.
Across one hundred trials, 4d6 Reroll Ones Drop Lowest varies between a 1 Point Buy and a 70 (!) Point Buy, averages an approximate 31 Point Buy with a median of a 29 Point Buy. Standard deviation is 11.46.
4d6 Drop Lowest results in gimps and superheroes. 4d6 Reroll Ones Drop Lowest results in a vast increase in PC power. Variance is not much different than 4d6 Drop Lowest and you can still end up with poorly statted PCs in a party of demigods.
My conclusion: Go with a 20 Point Buy if you like the "heroicness" of rolled stats but you want to control variance—that's really the advantage of a Point Buy system. It also lets your players craft characters without you having to witness rolls.
Edit: Hey, Scott Romanowski and I had the same idea!
Fixed arrays are a good approach if your players tend to come up with extreme builds, and they certainly require less work on the part of the players. I could certainly work with any of the arrays that you offered above (although I would probably avoid your SAD class array because it has a lower point buy value than the other 2).
Of course, if you are trying to avoid having "cookie cutter" character, then by definition anyone who wants to build a 29 point character without using one of your arrays would have a character who is nothing like the others in your group. But if you think that otherwise all of your players would go for something like 18 16 16 10 7 7, then offering a limited choice of arrays makes sense.
Of course, if players in your game are routinely wanting to build characters with such extreme stats, you may want to analyze your game to see what you are doing to encourage such an approach. Maybe your game is more combat heavy and light on social interactions than you want to admit? If so, you should not be surprised when players who are familiar with your DMing style routinely dump charisma when buidling their characters.
|
PBS leads to a lot of cookie cutter builds, I'm sorry, but it just does. Why does the term Big Dumb Fighter even exist at all? Because most of the time, fighter classes dump their INT.
Point buy doesn't lead to it. It facilitates it. The difference being that it is the players that make the cookie cutter builds, not the stat gen method. You can make a cookie cutter build with rolled stats. The numbers won't be exactly the same, but they will follow the same pattern.
What is wrong with builds? If I like builds please don't bash them. I can roleplay however and whatever I like same as any of you. What this thread lacks and will lack until shut down, is definitive proof either way that one method is superior to another. I've created characters hundreds of ways,some I liked some I did not but guess what...none of them were wrong.
I almost agree with you! It always depends on the player, but it appears players who like that gravitate towards PB. Builds are more common among PB while characters are more popular among rolling.PBS leads to a lot of cookie cutter builds, I'm sorry, but it just does. Why does the term Big Dumb Fighter even exist at all? Because most of the time, fighter classes dump their INT.Point buy doesn't lead to it. It facilitates it. The difference being that it is the players that make the cookie cutter builds, not the stat gen method. You can make a cookie cutter build with rolled stats. The numbers won't be exactly the same, but they will follow the same pattern.
I think part of the reason for that is that with point buy you can construct your character in advance, while with random rolling you must delay many important decisions until after you have rolled your stats -- and since presumably you are rolling stats in front of the DM at the beginning of a game session, you are in a hurry to get the character put together so that you can start playing. So, what you would call a "character" could be to other people a "rushed job" that the player may be wanting to clean up between the first and second game sessions. I have seen far more problems with characters hurriedly thrown together with random rolls than with any point buy system.
I think the best feature of point buy is that the DM does not need to watch a player put his character together -- he just has to do a quick review of the final outcome for rules and campaign legality. That is the main reason that every organized play group has eliminated random rolls for ability scores and hit points from their rules. Playing time is precious -- why waste it with witnessing unneeded dice rolls?
|
|
I almost agree with you! It always depends on the player, but it appears players who like that gravitate towards PB. Builds are more common among PB while characters are more popular among rolling.
In your experience, which is anecdotal and proves nothing. One of the most build focused players I have ever met rolled for his stats and then placed them where his build needed them. Point buy only makes it easier to get the number you want in the ability you want. You still have to be the type of player that wants or accepts cookie cutter characters.
|
|
If you are using PB, can I make my rolled character in your game?
Yes.
Which shoots your 'you are telling players they can't do what is fun to them' theory right out of the water.
Edit: Or am I exerting my will on you if I say 'you can roll 3d6 and arrange as you like if you don't want the point buy'?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is wrong with builds? If I like builds please don't bash them. I can roleplay however and whatever I like same as any of you. What this thread lacks and will lack until shut down, is definitive proof either way that one method is superior to another. I've created characters hundreds of ways,some I liked some I did not but guess what...none of them were wrong.Nothing is wrong with that if that what you like to play. You can play the character you want, made the way you want in my game. If you are using PB, can I make my rolled character in your game? That's the issue, one way is telling players you can't do what's fun to you, that's the only problem with it.
I don't know why that is hard to grasp. It's the simplest courtesy in the world, don't exert your will on other ppl!
I just want a character with 18s in all stats and triple WBL, that cool in your game?
I just want a character with 18s in all stats and triple WBL, that cool in your game?What is wrong with builds? If I like builds please don't bash them. I can roleplay however and whatever I like same as any of you. What this thread lacks and will lack until shut down, is definitive proof either way that one method is superior to another. I've created characters hundreds of ways,some I liked some I did not but guess what...none of them were wrong.Nothing is wrong with that if that what you like to play. You can play the character you want, made the way you want in my game. If you are using PB, can I make my rolled character in your game? That's the issue, one way is telling players you can't do what's fun to you, that's the only problem with it.
I don't know why that is hard to grasp. It's the simplest courtesy in the world, don't exert your will on other ppl!
I remember 1 player who wanted to rejoin our group after we converted to PF that asked if they could play a race from the bestiary 2 right after I said core races only. On top of that he wanted to gestalt it despite the already largish party (we had 6 and he would have made 7) and complained that we were "only" using a 20 point buy rather than rolling or using a higher buy. I asked him why can't he just play a normal single class character and core race... His response was "too boring" This coming from a guy who NEVER played a single class core race race character during all of 3.x... I for one would find that level of constant "special snowflakes" characters tiresome and boring (he once played a character all the way to 12 that was almost useless just because his build would come together right where I said the campaign would end so he could get all the glory of killing the BBEG). I'm glad I don't have to deal with that munchin anymore. Its unfortunate that he latched onto one of my best players own group (the GM hates "that guys" concepts as much as I do, but he doesn't have quite as many players so doesn't have the luxury of telling him to hit the road).