I have been thinking about this for a while now. What do each of you let you players do to generate characters?
What system do you use?
What restrictions do you place on players?
Do you find your system works?
What have you found are the Pro's and Con's of the system you use?
-Roth
I'll go first...
We generate characters by rolling 4d6 and droping the lowest number. You do this six times, then can plug the numbers into any stat, in any order. At the beginning of this campaign I allowed players to change the numbers around a smidge by subtracting 2 points from one stat to add one point to another.
Restrictions - Almost none as long as the character comes from the Greyhawk setting (not Ebberon or FR specific) and is created from a book published before the PHB2 came out.
Does it work - I have found the characters to be more than a match for the normal monsters I throw at them from the MM and published adventures. Many of the characters have much better stats than even the Boss monsters in my campaign (which is a puished adventure, not a homebrew).
They seem really powerfull to me, and we are only reaching 10th and 11th level. I find that I have to tweek the encounters. Even then, if the party isn't facing something that is two or three ECL's above their level it's hardly a battle (two rounds at the most).
My two coppers, Roth
There's a lot of threads about point buy vs. rolling in the archives. The majority of the boards feels that point buy produces balanced, fair characters and is, by far, the better system. Some, however, feel that it is too cooky cutter and don't really have a problem with the randomness.
I lik the concept of point-buy, but do feel that the characters produced are too cooky cutter. It seems to me that a fighter who wants to have good Intelligence and Strength, for example, by deffinition must reduce another ability score. With random rolling, you at least have the chance to have a high Intelligence and not have to "steal" from another stat. It just seems so much more organic to me, and I'm not ready to switch to point-buy yet. Not to mention, my old group really rolled well with character creation, and thus hated the "damper" that point buy put on them. Happy players, in the end, win out over play balance when the issue is just a minor one like this.
But most people here will support point buy.
It just seems so much more organic to me, and I'm not ready to switch to point-buy yet. Not to mention, my old group really rolled well with character creation, and thus hated the "damper" that point buy put on them. Happy players, in the end, win out over play balance when the issue is just a minor one like this.
Same hear. Buying pints is just stupid, ORGANIC and you'll probably get weaker characters than if U had rolled the dices.
|
Same hear. Buying pints is just stupid, ORGANIC and you'll probably get weaker characters than if U had rolled the dices.
It just seems so much more organic to me, and I'm not ready to switch to point-buy yet. Not to mention, my old group really rolled well with character creation, and thus hated the "damper" that point buy put on them. Happy players, in the end, win out over play balance when the issue is just a minor one like this.
I'm not sure how buying points = stupid. I also don't see how weaker characters is a bad thing -- if anything it produces smarter players.
We used to do the 4d6, reroll ones and drop the lowest generation. Around the time that 3.0 came around, we converted characters and found that there was a HUGE discrepancy between the power levels of the various characters. We then went to a point-buy and found that (as was mentioned here) the suggested point buy amounts were VERY inadequate to the power levels we were used to. We compromised at 36 points at the time. We have brought it down a bit -- if we have 5 or more characters, we do 32 and if we have 4 or fewer we do 34 points.
Also, more points tend to make characters that are less "organic". (And more than that, feats and class/prestige class combinations make characters that are less "organic".)
Director of Game Development
|
Our group always used the roll 4d6 drop the lowest and assign freely method for ages, and that is the system in which the player s in my current campaign generated their stats. I also have two sheets of paper, sheet A and sheet B, with 100 arrays of these stats and allow them to either roll their own or roll a percentile to select one from my two sheets. We always had at least one or two players whose lowest stat was a 14 or something like that. I noticed that the discrepancy between the high stat rollers and the low stat rollers was pretty great. The PCs almost always thrashed higher CR critters and after looking at alot of point-buy PCs I can see why the DM always ran the game as if the characters were a few levels higher.
Now I am starting as a player in a campaign with the other part of our old group and the DM is using point-buy. The longest amount of time I spent on character creation was coming up with the stats. I was shocked. I do however like how point-buy really levels the playing field within the ranks of the players. I'm curious to see what other things I notice once this game actually gets started. I'm already a fan and will require use of point-buy in my next campaign.
|
I really dislike point buy. I have used a bunch of methods and there are 2 or 3 that I tend to like using.
-the 4d6-drop the lowest method is my fav.
-I sometimes like a 3d6+2 method (gives an average of 12.5, but highs are higher and lows are lower)
-another that I liked is a weird one...assign numbers to the stats, 1 through 6, all stats start at 7, then roll 32d6. The number on each die corresponds to a stat and adds 1pt to that stat. Sometimes I lower it to 28d6 and give players 4 points to use to adjust stats. If you get more than an 18 in any stat, you reroll for any overages, if a rerolled die gives you more than an 18 in any stat then the gods have blessed you and you can keep it. I believe someone from these boards originally posted this method and I liked it and adapted it a bit to my taste. I like this method alot also.
To the OP, I have trouble believing that your 10th level party is overpowered because of their stats. By 10th level the difference between a 28 and 32 pt buy or lucky rolls is only a +1 or 2 in spell dcs, to hits, damage, armor, or saves. I think you should look at your characters' wealth and equipment. They may have better equipment than they should.
The difference between a 16 in a primary ability and an 18 is not a huge deal at 10th level and wouldn't make a party need to have 3-4 EL encounters in order to be challenged. Something is wonky and I suspect it is the equipment they have(the usual suspect in power-creep).
Not saying you did anything wrong. Just an observation to try to help.
FH
I used to use the 4d6, drop the low roll method, but I found that this can create some great disparity in characters that makes balance an issue. The last time I used the 4d6 method one player rolled two 18's, two 17's, one 16, and one 15. Another character's highest ability score was a 14.
This is a bit unfair and can cause some characters to feel resentful. But even if the players were cool with it, It caused me no end of headaches. It is difficult to plan encounters that will challenge the uber-character without killing off the rest of the group. On the other hand if you go with encounters appropriate to the rest of the group Uber-boy carves through it like a hot knife through butter, which makes everyone else feel useless and redundant.
I now use the 32 point buy, and everyone is much happier for it. I don't really care how powerful the group is because I can create fun encounters for any power level, I only care that all the characters are equally powerful.
I'm definitely in the point buy camp and for the same reason most cite. I started using 4d6 drop the lowest and ended up with a phenomenal disparity in power levels between players. Worse yet my poor newbie could not roll a half descent character to save her life. So - besides being regulated to the rear because she just has less experience she was regulated to the rear because compared to some of the phenomenally lucky veterans (one of whom had a +11 character) her character just sucked.
Point buy really does not create very organic characters - that much is true. With point buy its always really clear what the dump stats for a character are but, to paraphrase Churchill - Point buy is a terrible system, its just better then all the other alternatives.
I did give my players a really good point buy (36 points) to mollify them - That was defiantly a mistake as far as I am concerned. Next campaign I run will use a strict 25 point buy and they can struggle to create their uber game breaking characters under those conditions.
I'm on the fence. I've used the 4d6 method because my players prefer the chance of having a powerful character over choosing to make an average one. However, this method did produce the problems everyone else has sited: one character hiding in the back and even forfeiting turns because of his frailty while the others charged ahead.
But my players vehemently disliked the idea of point buy, which I wanted to try. Instead, we had everyone roll the 4d6 method and then voted on which numbers they wanted to keep; then everyone got the same scores to divide as they saw fit.
However, that again produced a problem: either my encounters are two easy because we have two very powerful tank characters or they are very difficult because I'm trying to challenge them and I overshoot the mark. When I get to DM another campaign, I will push for point buy as an experiment.
Having been on the bottom of the totem pole with a poorly rolled character joining a team of superhuman juggernauts. I can say that I didn't mind it very much. Sure they got the most glory but my character still had its uses and it was still fun to play.
Then again, there is good old 3d6-no-assignment...at least one DM I know uses this though he (and his players) have complained that published adventures for ed. 3.5 are just murder.
I played around a bit calculating the probabilities with different sets of dice...for those who have problems with varying power levels, adding to the amount of dice evens it out. How about 4d4+2? Spread is 6-18, expected value 12 and those extreme values are rare...or to boost up general level while still keeping those 18s exceptional, try 5d4+2, drop the lowest (cannot remember the expected value though I did calculate it).
However, in some campaigns, especially if DM makes fitting adventures, having large power differences can work and sometimes even bring interesting intra-party politics. Typical D&D is not geared towards that but in for example White Wolf games it can and often is rather fun (like in one game where another guy played this old tough vampire and I was a newbie mage...who nevertheless had powers completely different of what the vampire could do...)
Way to go, guys! Here I state that everyone here prefers point-buy, because in past discussions, that's the way it goes, and yet you all are either split down the middle or slightly favoring rolling. Nice back up, everyone! (Kidding :P)
I take umbrage that point buy is considered "stupid". I think there are more effective arguments to make about point buy. I think point buy works for several reasons primarily:
a) all the characters are at an even level of power, meaning no party with a PC who has all 18's (statistically improbable, but bear with me) adventuring with a PC who has a few 15's and mostly 12's and 13's.
b) If you have a player who cheats on die rolls (and haven't kicked him out of your group) this prevents cheating for the most part.
c)It helps make the DM's job easier when statting out monsters and NPC's to balance the encounter.
There are a few other reasons why it works better with my group, and while I can't say some players didn't use to prefer the rolling, I also know that now everyone in my group prefers it, after three years and twice that many campaigns.
|
|
I certainly won't call one system or the other "stupid", both are equally legitimate means for creating characters.
I prefer more well-rounded characters in my games, with good stats. I allow the players to roll 4d6 per stat, rerolling 1's, and keeping the best 3. They can then roll that up 7 times, keeping the 6 best, and assign to stats as they choose.
That tends to make for pretty powerful characters, since the average roll is around 14. But you don't see too many 18's either, which is what some people will do with point buy. So what you tend to end up with in my system is guys with 16's or so in their highest stats, 14's in the middle ones, and 12 or so in the least important stats. That is obviously more powerful than the average human, but hey- they're adventurers, they SHOULD be. Besides, it's not like I go easy on them with challenges.
That's what works for us. My players like it, I like it, everybody's happy.
At home we do 4d6, reroll ones and drop the lowest. It works out pretty well-- our group doesn't have a huge spread in abilities. One player was disappointed in his PC's stats, but the character didn't last long and his replacement was better enough to satisfy him.
For RPGA the characters are point buy, which works well as a level(er) playing field and uniformity across games.
After a few levels, abilities seem to be less divisive. At first level, +3 to hit and damage is huge, since even a fighter only gets +1. At 10th level, the +3 still has an effect, but is swamped by the leveling process.
My favorite method is rolling scores in order with 4d6 (drop the lowest die), then reroll your choice of one score and swap your choice of two scores. This gives slightly better stats than the standard method, and usually eliminates having a super-sucky dump stat, but means you sometimes get fighters with high intelligence or wizards with high strength, so the good scores don't equate to optimal characters. I.e. "more organic." I also usually set parameters below which you can ditch your scores and roll the whole set over again--any score below seven or total bonuses less than +3.
I'm not opposed to point buy, and it makes sense for all the reasons offered above, but "rolling up a character" is one of the great pleasures of the game, and if you're not "rolling" character generation somehow feels different--it's like genetically engineering a baby instead of making one the old fashioned way! I remember in high school I must have had a collection of fifty or sixty characters that I just rolled up, frequently without the excuse of a campaign to play them in.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
My group and I like to mix it up sometimes. In most cases, we use 32 point buy because of our experiences with vastly different power levels between PCs using the old 4d6 drop low method. Sometimes, however, we will use a 72 point-buy system. Unlike regular point-buy, however, all stats start at 0 and each point is 1-for-1. For high-powered games (or games with less than 4 players), we increase this to 76 points (or even 80 sometimes).
When we do use rolls, we typically do 4d6 drop low, reroll 1s. Occassionally we will use a 1d10+8 per stat method, though, to utterly prevent abyssmally low stats. For slightly more power in the same range, we do 1d8+10 per stat.
I think we've used almost any character generation method you can think of at least once by this point. Until recently, the 1-for-1 72 point-buy build was the most common. In the last 6 months, though, the standard 32 point-buy has become commonplace at our table. Now that my wife is learning the game and wants to try her hand at running something, she's decided to go with the 4d6 drop low, reroll 1s method because she wants more diversity.
So many options... why not try them ALL?
|
|
Recently, my fiancee and I have been testing a semi-randomized point buy system, in which the players are given a base pool of 28 points, and roll 2d4 to augment the pool (30-36 pb as a result).
As my previous method {4d6, seven times, drop the lowest score per roll and from the total; stats must add up to at least 30 pb} was creating an unfortunate range of "haves" (40+ pb for lucky rolls) and "have-nots" (30 pb due to poor rolls), I've found this system maintains an organic feel while avoiding a tremendous power gap between PCs.
|
|
I remember in high school I must have had a collection of fifty or sixty characters that I just rolled up, frequently without the excuse of a campaign to play them in.
I still do that occasionally if games get canceled and I start jonesing for some D&D. Good way to get your head into the game without being able to play.
FH
We use point buys (almost always 28), though it took a while for my players to buy into the idea.
Rolling dice leads to a lot of variability in overall power level. Keep in mind that D&D will grant a race with unbalanced stat modifiers a +1 ECL -- give a half-orc +2 Str without the -2 Int and you've given it the equivalent of an extra level.
This means that a couple of lucky players will have the equivalent of a level or more advantage over others -- and some will lag behind significantly.
We've also found that characters are so defined by skill and feat selections that a 'cookie cutter' feel doesn't actually occur.
My two cents :)
Jack
Oh ... and if a Player rolls a disappointing PC either with low stats or boring ones (all 12-13) then we drop the entire set and start from scratch.
Point-buys vs rolling aside, I agree with an implication here -- boring stats are worse than bad stats (IMO).
Jack
|
Depending on which member of the group is DMing and on the campaign itself(for shackled city we used buffed up stats because it was a tough campaign) we tend to bounce between a few different options.
Straight point buy, keeps things fair and is good for getting into things since players end up knowing the stats they can make with those after a few times.
Above average point buy, same as above but start all the stats at 10 instead of 8. Builds players like they had 36 points to spend and reduces min-maxing a bit(no more half-orc barbarians with 6Cha and int), but the characters are going to be tough.
4d6 drop the lowest with a balance. Basically we let the players roll their stats and place them as normal, then they add up their modifiers and that number has to fall into a range. Normally like 9-11. For example, a player with an 18(+4), a 16(+3), a 14(+2), two 12(+1 x2), and a 10(+0), would have a total modifier of +11 and would fit in the range. It lets players be a little more organic then simply point buy(and has they cross their fingers for odd numbers for those leveled attribute points), but it also keeps them fairly close to each other in power. If someone rolls too high or two low you can normally have them roll again, or if they are only like one modifier away just have them add two or bump two off of a stat.
Found the file where I did some calculations...
With 4d6, drop the lowest, expected value is 12,25 and most probable value is 13 (13,3%). Rolling 18 has chance of 1,6% and rolling 3 0,08%.
2d6+6 has a bit narrower spread, 8-18. Expected and most probable value is 13 (16,7%), rolling 8 or 18 has chance of 2,8%. So while all stats are reasonably high, chance to roll really great or really bad characters are higher.
4d4+2 has spread 6-18. Expected and most probable value is 12 (17,2%), rolling 6 or 18 has chance of 0,4%. Extreme stats are rare, so characters are like from a bit tighter point buy system.
5d4+2, drop the lowest, has also spread 6-18. Expected value is 13,2, and most probable value is 14 (17,5%). Rolling 6 has chance of 0,1% and rolling 18 1,5%, about the same as with 4d6, drop the lowest. So characters are generally tougher (expected value is one higher than with 4d6, drop the lowest), but rolling 18 is still quite rare.
5d6, drop two lowest (I know at least one group which uses this), has expected value of 13,4 and most probable roll is 14 (14,8%). Rolling a 3 has chance of 0,01% and rolling 18 3,5%. So a method for uber-character-players who still shy from epic stats for 1st-level characters.
So, how many geek points did I earn from this post?
OMHO, Stat rolling vs point buying is superior cause it gives the chances of having a spectacular character...
Superior if you're the one who rolled the good stats. Not so superior if you have to play alongside someone who has the equivalent of two or three levels more than you.
That's why I'm such a proponent of point buys -- the playing field is always level (if it isn't, it's because of a deliberate, informed decision by a player). If we're looking for higher stats (which 4d6/drop one, ignore 1s, replace lowest with 18 will most certainly provide), increase the number of available points.
Minmaxing aside, i find it difficult to buld characters i like with point buys... It may work for some but the more specialized classes such as paladin and ranger which are driven by 3 or more high stats, its almost useless.
I have the same problem with those specialized classes. In fact, I struggle with just building a strong cleric, since Str, Wis, & Cha are all quite important (a lot of stats to put scarce points into); all things aside, we do want to have a heroic character. On the other hand, that's the intent of the rules -- not much challenge to having lots of special powers AND awesome stats (that movie just came out -- Superman).
That said, don't take my opinion too seriously. We use a 28-point buy because our group likes the characters it produces (including the fact that we don't get Conan/Aragorn-level stats). If you don't like a system's characters, you should by all means use another -- fun characters IS the point :)
Regards,
Jack
Our group also does the 4d6 reroll 1's take best 3 scores. i really am against a point system for this game; if you want to play points; play Hero games, that works well.
|
|
I remember the old days where it was 3d6 in order. Then it was 3d6 in order you can switch any 2. Then it became 3d6 in order, switch any 2, you can deduct point from 1 skill to build up another at a 2 to 1 ratio. Then 3d6 place em where ya want etc...
It was very exciting when you got the proper combination to qualify for the "specialty classes", and some classes had ungodly prerequisite ability scores.
You didn't always get to play as your favorite character with stats exactly how you wanted. You played what your stats were best suited for usually.
I think that the extreme flexibility of point buy and roll and place em where you like have allowed some people to stay shoehorned into their favorite classes. It used to be "roll your stats and then decide what to be" and now it is "I will be a ________ and assign my stats accordingly". Not that it is a bad thing, but I do miss the anxious anticipation of rolling and wondering what I am gonna be as the dice fall.
*edit* and sure some people were more powerful than others but that was a bit of the roleplaying challenge of the character.
FH
|
|
I am considering this method for the next game I run.
Everyone roles 4d6 dropping the lowest number 6 times. All these numbers go into a group stat pool.
There are then 6 rounds wherein everyone rolls a d6 to determine order and in that order pick the highest and then the next highest numbers.
Everyone would start with similarly powered characters but they would not be so "cookie cutter"
Any thoughts?
Tam
|
I remember the old days where it was 3d6 in order. Then it was 3d6 in order you can switch any 2. Then it became 3d6 in order, switch any 2, you can deduct point from 1 skill to build up another at a 2 to 1 ratio. Then 3d6 place em where ya want etc...
It was very exciting when you got the proper combination to qualify for the "specialty classes", and some classes had ungodly prerequisite ability scores.
You didn't always get to play as your favorite character with stats exactly how you wanted. You played what your stats were best suited for usually.
I think that the extreme flexibility of point buy and roll and place em where you like have allowed some people to stay shoehorned into their favorite classes. It used to be "roll your stats and then decide what to be" and now it is "I will be a ________ and assign my stats accordingly". Not that it is a bad thing, but I do miss the anxious anticipation of rolling and wondering what I am gonna be as the dice fall.
*edit* and sure some people were more powerful than others but that was a bit of the roleplaying challenge of the character.
FH
I'm pretty agreeable when it comes to stat generation. Whatever the DM and group decide I can work with...
But I personally have a distaste for methods that don't let me choose the type of character I want to play. It's a matter of peronal preference, I know, but I don't want a random generation to determine what my highest and lowest ability scores will be for a character I will be playing for (presumably) an extended period of time.
My DM used to do 4d6 drop lowest 6 times and a free 18 to replace your lowest roll, arange to taste. He let us reroll 1s as well. Needless to say, we had some pretty spectacular character stats at times, but what is a PC if not special...
BTW, I'm a big-time math weenie, so I like crunching numbers. Your system is roughly equivalent to a 37-point buy.
I remember the old days where it was 3d6 in order. Then it was 3d6 in order you can switch any 2...
This was about a 14-point system, on the average.
Which is pretty crappy -- not surprising people started using and demanding alternatives :)
I like Point buy. It keeps all the PCs on an equal start. I usually go with 30-32 points.
ASEO out
I typically use 4d6/drop the lowest roll, with each player rolling four characters (or more, if it still is crap). They can freely arrange the stats. And one special rule: If they roll four 1s, the score is a 19.
That makes for some tough characters, but keeps them somewhat random (or "organic", as some put it here). In the long run, I think that the high stats generated that way may be too high. For my next campaign, I will try point-buy for a change (probably 32 points).
I´m playing in an AD&D2 "superhero" campaign, where we have seven stats with a 105-point buy (points one to one), and if your primary attribute is not 18, then you´ve got something wrong. It is fitting to this campaign, however. Between the five PCs about level 10 each, we just finished a nightwalker (from the Mystara MC, the campaign is set there) in under two rounds of combat last time I participated.
Stefan
|
|
I am considering this method for the next game I run.
Everyone roles 4d6 dropping the lowest number 6 times. All these numbers go into a group stat pool.
There are then 6 rounds wherein everyone rolls a d6 to determine order and in that order pick the highest and then the next highest numbers.
Everyone would start with similarly powered characters but they would not be so "cookie cutter"
Any thoughts?
Tam
I just tried out this method as a test with 6 pretend players. This is what I ended up with (average rolls were 12.694).
player 1: 17,15,14,13,12,11 total +9 bonus
player 2: 16,14,14,13,12,10 total +9 bonus
player 3: 16,14,14,13,11,9 total +8 bonus
player 4: 15,14,13,13,11,9 total +5 bonus
player 5: 15,14,13,13,11,8 total +5 bonus
player 6: 15,14,13,12,11,5 total +3 bonus
Unacceptable for player 5 and 6
Then I tried picking highest on first round of picks, then lowest on second, highest, lowest, highest, lowest. This is what I got:
player 1: 17,15,14,12,11,5 total +5 bonus
player 2: 16,14,14,13,11,8 total +7 bonus
player 3: 16,14,14,13,11,9 total +7 bonus
player 4: 15,14,13,13,11,9 total +5 bonus
player 5: 15,14,13,13,12,10 total +7 bonus
player 6: 15,14,13,13,12,11 total +7 bonus
not too bad. Points....player 1 is like a min-maxers dream so it kinda offsets the negative aspects. Some players are slightly better than others but there is a good range.
I would do it this way.
just my 2
FH
|
|
I remember the old days where it was 3d6 in order.I remember those days as well. It's a great mechanic for rolling a nearly limitless stream of farmers and other peasants, but not good to PCs :-)
Rez
The average was lower back then (9 I think)not a 12+ like now. Part of roleplaying back then was overcoming a flaw or low score. Now everyone has 10s and greater except min-maxers and they barely go below an 8 or 9. Roleplaying a 6 dexterity was pretty comical sometimes and I miss the imperfections of early times. You could be a great pc with a high stat of 14.
FH
|
|
I remember the old days where it was 3d6 in order. Then it was 3d6 in order you can switch any 2. Then it became 3d6 in order, switch any 2, you can deduct point from 1 skill to build up another at a 2 to 1 ratio. Then 3d6 place em where ya want etc...
I remember that as well, but consider the importance of stats at the time. As far as the true game mechanics were concerned, was there really that much difference between a 16 Wisdom and an 8 Wisdom? There really wasn't that much difference between a 16 Strength and an 8 Strength. (I don't have my 2nd edition books in front of me right now and it has been years since I looked at them.)
We found that when we converted our characters from 2nd edition to 3rd edition that there was a huge difference in power levels with the stats. This wasn't noticeable nearly as much in 2nd edition as it is in 3rd edition(s).
I still feel that stats shouldn't/don't define (that much of) a character and that it has much more to do with skills, feats, class(es), prestige classes, race and other abilities. But that is also assuming that the players have a very similar base to establish their stats from.
You didn't always get to play as your favorite character with stats exactly how you wanted. You played what your stats were best suited for usually.
Keep in mind, though, that an entire party of wizards isn't likely to survive to see 2nd level.
I think that the extreme flexibility of point buy and roll and place em where you like have allowed some people to stay shoehorned into their favorite classes. It used to be "roll your stats and then decide what to be" and now it is "I will be a ________ and assign my stats accordingly". Not that it is a bad thing, but I do miss the anxious anticipation of rolling and wondering what I am gonna be as the dice fall.
I agree that it can be fun to play whatever character you roll up, especially if you're undecided, but I'm really opposed to forcing players to take a class they have no interest in. The game is supposed to be fun for all, and there are certain people who always want to play the same type of character - but if that is what they enjoy, why not let them?
|
|
You didn't always get to play as your favorite character with stats exactly how you wanted. You played what your stats were best suited for usually.Keep in mind, though, that an entire party of wizards isn't likely to survive to see 2nd level.
I agree that it can be fun to play whatever character you roll up, especially if you're undecided, but I'm really opposed to forcing players to take a class they have no interest in. The game is supposed to be fun for all, and there are certain people who always want to play the same type of character - but if that is what they enjoy, why not let them?
I think that the extreme flexibility of point buy and roll and place em where you like have allowed some people to stay shoehorned into their favorite classes. It used to be "roll your stats and then decide what to be" and now it is "I will be a ________ and assign my stats accordingly". Not that it is a bad thing, but I do miss the anxious anticipation of rolling and wondering what I am gonna be as the dice fall.
I never once said that we should return to those days, I just like the idea of rolling for stats as opposed to flavorless, thrill-less point buy.
FH
Great Discussion All - Thanks for rehashing this old topic for me. :-)
One of the big thorns in my side about my current players stats is that the monsters from the published adventures and the WoTC books are all "average". An above poster mentioned something about the PC's are not supposed to be average. I agree in principle, they are the "heros" of the story. But then why are the monsters "average"?
It just means I have to change the numbers for the monsters to make them fit the PC's, and then what was the point of plunking down $$$ for a prewritten adventure?
If you can't tell, I'm leaning toward a point-buy system for my next campaign. Just wanted to get everyones opinions, I love this website because of that feature. :-)
My two coppers,
-Roth
As a first time DM, and at the time which I started the campaign, expecting 1st time players into a group with more experienced players (NONE of whom I knew very well...an almost entirely new RPG group for me)- I went with 5d6 drop two.
For everyone, though the more seasoned players insisted on rolling their own, I offered the option of taking the stats I had rolled on my fairly reliable bone die...(mean 5 and 6 rollers, but not any more than would be statistically likely, they just seem to come through in a clinch).
In addition to pretty much guiding every player, though again not so much with the more experienced players, through character creation, this "You can keep yours or take mine" approach avoided abysmal stats, but kept players honest. Most of them were as lucky as or actually more lucky than my die. (big surprise, if you want to really feel lucky, roll the die for yourself...)
Now, this method is supported by my favorite online Character Generator (which I make my players use, but not to generate characters as much as give me electronic copies so that I have back ups and have access to the stats and so forth...)
Point is that I've noticed 2 very distinct things...
Obviously, the stats are generally higher (there was ONE guy who had a low score of 7, but that was replaced by another die roll to be 10 for the fighter's wisdom score.
The other thing is that the generally good stats helped in the survivability of the characters...yes that means that I was able to throw more at them than regular starting characters should be able to handle, but the 5d6 drop 2 method allows for more effective multiclassing (in my opinion) While getting 2 18s is more likely, it isn't much more likely than with 4d6 drop 2 (which is the method, more or less, that I've come to prefer due to balance issues)
Now, for the obvious problem I've run into with all these 5d6 characters running around...encounter balance.
(and I do have about DOUBLE the average sized party...which worked alright at first when the group was split up, almost great, I really could lace into them, but they could still survive even if it pushed NPCs into death or the PCs to Death's door- which isn't a huge deal in Ghostwalk, so I'd advice using a less powered method unless you really plan on being evil, similar to how I've been.)
In the last battle, which was one of the better battles I've actually staged, it still ended without a single sword or mace or axe being swung, sure an urgosh was used, but for the most part the undead horde was dispatched by the two clerics in the party...which worked well for the group as the low level undead were enhanced with Corpsecrafter feats...
Point is, I find myself in an odd position of trying to be able to TOP that battle, adding more combat without increasing lethality beyond an acceptable level...
I've come to my own potential solutions (divide the party, surprise them with a real baddy, thin the ranks by plot means...)
But yes, in retrospect, while I might now prefer the 4d6 method, for really hammering it to players from the start 5d6 is much more...forgiving, but not necessarily TOO overpowering.
I did find that one time I used 5d6, I made the best 4th level character I've ever had, but then I turned around and made a 4d6 for another campaign, took the GREAT stats that came out (first one was still 12) and it worked great for the high dex, good int and cha, with decent str and wis Bard I had worked out in my mind.
Still, when I kept rolling to see if it was even possible to have had a character more like the alternate version I had rolled with 5d6 (just a slightly higher str score, balanced stats, but still two 18s), it was naturally just not happening in a fashion that at least seemd conducive to how the character should ACTUALLY be played.
Basically, a good character almost needs high and low stats, but greater flexibility comes from having a decent set across the board, <shrugs>
Sorry for the long post, I don't have much experience with point-buy, but I'm generally against it simply on the fact that it just isn't very good for character flexibility. (I don't even think that my 4d6 bard character would have been approachable with point buy and my Rog 1 Rgr 2 Mnk 1 5d6 would have been IMPOSSIBLE (two 18s, decent stats the rest of the way).
4d6 can and will leave a character with one good stat and the rest crud, but generally it makes for at least more interesting characters, not pinnacles of adventurers that 5d6 makes (with which you can still get 5s) or cookie-cutter, but balanced, more than likely single-class characters that point-buy may lend itself toward.
While I might prefer a more variable 4d6 system (or for instance the Organic system as some people call it.) I think that the regular 4d6 drop low is the best for board to board play, and works best for most generated characters.
As far as running a game, I'm still new to character gen effects, but in my experience as a player, 4d6 drop 2 does the best job for interesting stats with some balance, but of COURSE a player might prefer 5d6 best 3 stats...(which also tend to be balanced across the board). I like 5d6 best 3, but if I start another game, I might not be inclined to use that method and will probably favor the "Standard" method of 4d6 drop 2.
It just occured to me after reading that last post...
How many of you who use the point-buy system have lots of multi-class characters in your group? The same question to the 4d6 method folks?
Those extra high stats you get from the 4d6 method would SEEM attractive to DM's and players who like to play multi-class characters? But is that really the case?
In my group (created with the 4d6 method) we have two players who chose to multi-class. Two players out of nine. Interesting.
Just on a side note, one of those players is a rookie, and one a veteran player.
-Roth
|
|
How many of you who use the point-buy system have lots of multi-class characters in your group? The same question to the 4d6 method folks?
We do point-buy and there always seems to be at least one person in the group that chooses to multi-class. My experience has much less to do with the stats generated and much more with getting specific abilities within the class(es).
ie -- our barbarian is really looking forward to getting the damage reduction abilities granted by the barbarian class, our spell casters can't wait to get the next spell level, and our multi-class swashbuckler/rogue really enjoys the benefits of both classes and likes being the 'jack of all trades'.