|
I just recently started playing in a game, a friend of mine is DMing for myself and 3 others. I made my character a few weeks ago using his preferred method, rolling 3 sets of stats using 3d6 x6, placed as you want, and picking the best.
I thought I did pretty well, as before racial modifiers I had 17 16 14 13 10 10. All things considered, it was a very playable block. I show up at the table, though, to find that (before modifiers) the other players had 'rolled' (in front of the DM, he insisted) at least two 18s EACH.
The fighter of the group has two 18s and a 17, even. I did a little bit of math and found this to be statistically almost impossible, and asked him about it after the first session.
He insisted that they had used the same method, and in fact that he was surprised that my stats turned were so 'crappy' and apologized for my 'bad luck'. I presented him with the math and he was unmoved.
What would you do in a situation such as this, where the DM just seems to be either straight up lying and letting players use unrealistic stats, or doesn't understand how stat rolls work. Either way, the result is a moderately good character adventuring with demi-gods who seem to think that they are average and I'm gimped.
You might want to consider asking your DM if you can use the stats from one of the other characters.
In my current group, after everyone has rolled stats, everyone is allowed to choose the set that they want to use, regardless of who actually rolled it (for some reason, everyone seems to take the same set :))
I just recently started playing in a game, a friend of mine is DMing for myself and 3 others. I made my character a few weeks ago using his preferred method, rolling 3 sets of stats using 3d6 x6, placed as you want, and picking the best.
I thought I did pretty well, as before racial modifiers I had 17 16 14 13 10 10. All things considered, it was a very playable block. I show up at the table, though, to find that (before modifiers) the other players had 'rolled' (in front of the DM, he insisted) at least two 18s EACH.
The fighter of the group has two 18s and a 17, even. I did a little bit of math and found this to be statistically almost impossible, and asked him about it after the first session.
He insisted that they had used the same method, and in fact that he was surprised that my stats turned were so 'crappy' and apologized for my 'bad luck'. I presented him with the math and he was unmoved.
What would you do in a situation such as this, where the DM just seems to be either straight up lying and letting players use unrealistic stats, or doesn't understand how stat rolls work. Either way, the result is a moderately good character adventuring with demi-gods who seem to think that they are average and I'm gimped.
I have never been lucky enough to roll stats like that, but others have, and that is why I hate rolling for stats. If someone gets all 3 18's its not really fair to the others, but since the DM called for rolled stats its also not fair to take the stats away.
Some DM's also let you reroll if you stats are not up to par, but if he has a minimum and maximum he will allow then why not just use point buy.If I thought the DM was lying and playing favorites I would leave the group, but then again if I did not trust the DM I would never have joined the group. As for as letting players live with stats, good or bad, I always thought that was the point of rolling the dice. As I stated before I don't like it, but I would not complain about it after the stats were rolled. I would have done all my complaining up front.
|
|
I had no complaints with rolling stats, far from it.
To me, some of the most fun in the game is had by playing a character with real and significant flaws that affect him not just mechanically, but also their personality.
I went in knowing that if I rolled a set with one or two bad stats, where I would put them to give my character a quirky weakness that I could play off of for roleplaying.
My problem is that A) with such good stats, many encounters are unlikely to be very challenging unless they're adjusted to compensate for the high stats, which leads me to B) that if the DM adjusts encounters to be a challenge, I'll be very ineffective against the enemies we face.
It just seems like with such insanely good stats, there's almost no point to the game because the other three characters will just steamroll everything thrown at us, and then I'll tag along for comic relief (I'm a gnome, and the only vertically challenged character in the group).
|
First off using math to prove that their sets couldn't have been rolled is total crap. The Dice gods are just kind to some people at character creation and then punish them at the table during game play. I have a friend who would consistantly get 18/00 str whenever he played a fighter in 2e and I always watched him do it. I have frequently accused my best friend's dice of using performance enhancing plastic when he makes his characters. It just happens.
And as a DM who almost always uses Dice Rolling I can understand what you say about the stats seeming to make everything easier... it balances out at the table. There are plenty of ways to challenge PC's that doesn't involve stats or skills.
To be honest though the Heroic Method has become my favorite for Pathfinder!
--Vroctoberfest!
Statistically impossible? Nope.
Statistically improbable? Very much so. But that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
Just curious though: any chance there was a miscommunication and those players were really rolling 3 times for one score, then three times for the next score, then three times for the third, and so on, until they generated six ability scores, each of which was the best of three rolls, then they placed them where they wanted?
Maybe that's the method the DM wanted you to use too? If so, it makes the statical improbability a little less improbable.
If not, well, then either play your character and enjoy having to work a bit to keep up, or get some leniency from the DM, or find a group where you don't believe the other players/DM are in cahoots to marginalize your character.
What would you do in a situation such as this, where the DM just seems to be either straight up lying and letting players use unrealistic stats, or doesn't understand how stat rolls work. Either way, the result is a moderately good character adventuring with demi-gods who seem to think that they are average and I'm gimped.
The others have offered some good advice for this situation.
I remember playing D&D 26 years ago, when rolling 3d6 was the only option. I have rolled many many sets of 3d6 in my life time. What I can tell you is that 17 16 14 13 10 10 is a dang fine set of stats for 3d6.
The stats the others have rolled, albeit statistically possible, are most likely not their actual rolls -- they are even exceptionally good rolls for rolling 4d6, which is probably what they did.
We now get into a game of philosophies as there are those out there who love their random abilities scores, and those that hate them. I'm firmly in the latter group. There is a reason a point buy system exists though, and why so many use it! In the beginning of D&D there was also no class balance. Players wanted some sense of balance in the system, and they got it the classes and the ability score point buy system.
In a system that doesn't respect balance (such as random ability score rolls), then there is going to be in-balance. If you choose to play with such rules, then you have to be willing to accept in-balance even if you are on the loosing end of it. Your DM is a liar as are your fellow players. You know this. I know this. Calling them liars is not going to enhance your roleplaying experience with them though. I would either just forget about it, never bring it up and enjoy the game (which you can with your stats), or loose the group.
Since it sounds like you have already brought this up to them, I would suggest looking for a new group. Even if they were extremely lucky and honestly rolled the stats, you have now called them liars and they will never look upon you favorably again.
As a player I love rolling stats...just because it's fun. As a GM I hate it - but my players always overrule me and decide to roll.
Getting a couple of 18s with 3d6 (especially given three tries) certainly isn't impossible. I've seen it done a few times and am pretty sure it has happened to me (back a LONG time ago when we did it that way).
When we roll stats I usually have everyone do it in front of me so that no one has any questions...even when *I* trust everyone. Since that didn't happen here I guess there's no way to go back and fix it. Hopefully no one got their feelings hurt and you'll be able to move on with the game. I seriously doubt you'll notice the difference - you *did* get a pretty awesome set of stats for 3d6, so you're not that bad off. I'm surprised to see a set without at least one single-digit.
On to Pathfinder, I'm really liking the 2d6+6 method. It gives a nice, healthy range (8-18) without giving any really dirt-poor scores or ensuring really high ones.
M
|
|
Found out from the DM since this post that the rules for rolling were slightly different from what I thought/heard/was expecting. In his own words:
You roll 3d6 6 times, and place them how you like. You can roll 3 sets of stats and pick one of them, but if you don't like any of those sets you can keep rolling until you get a block you like.
This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
On to Pathfinder, I'm really liking the 2d6+6 method. It gives a nice, healthy range (8-18) without giving any really dirt-poor scores or ensuring really high ones.
The average roll is 13, though... rather high for my taste. Compare to ~11.5 with 4d6-drop. The elite array averages 12. The chance of an 18 on 2d6+6 is also nearly doubled over 4d6-drop.
2d8+2 averages 11 and the chance of rolling an 18 is only a hair below 4d6-drop. That might be fun to try as a third option for my games, being the "random but assigned as you choose" option to complement organic (random with almost no choice on assignment) and elite array (not random at all).
|
This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
That is bizarre, and seemed fairly common in the days of randomly rolled stats. All it does is reward the inhumanly patient, willing to roll and roll and roll until they get the uber stats they want.
And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
|
|
This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?That is bizarre, and seemed fairly common in the days of randomly rolled stats. All it does is reward the inhumanly patient, willing to roll and roll and roll until they get the uber stats they want.
And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
Hmmm, reminds me that in one of the computer D&D games, (Temple of Elemental Evil, maybe?) if you 'rolled' the stats something like 100 times the computer would give you all 18s along with some snarky question like, 'You happy now?'... I believe if you rolled again it gave you all 3s. o.0
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
Well, the DM gets a group of powerhouses. The players get a trade-off of real time spent rolling, and rolling, and rolling ... to get a set of attributes that eventually meets their expectations.
Let's say you wanted every attribute to be 14 or above. There are 216 ways to roll a set of 3 dice, and 35 of them produce a result of 14 or better. So, your probability of rolling 14+ on all six dice is (35 / 216) ^ 6, or about 0.0000181003, which happens about 1 time in 55,248. If it takes you ten seconds to roll and process 6 die-rolls, and you were able to roll dice for 8 hours a day, you could expect to get such a character after an average of 19 days.
For 19 days of work, I'd expect to have a pretty decent character.
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
Me neither. I'll take heroic. The heroes of the tale should be awesome, and you can be pretty mean to them too. ;)
|
Found out from the DM since this post that the rules for rolling were slightly different from what I thought/heard/was expecting. In his own words:
You roll 3d6 6 times, and place them how you like. You can roll 3 sets of stats and pick one of them, but if you don't like any of those sets you can keep rolling until you get a block you like.This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
That is bizarre. What's the point of rolling three sets of stats at a time?
Sounds like a "take 18" rule. :)
In our campaign that we'll be starting in a couple weeks, we're doing 4d6-drop, but reroll anything 8 or under.
|
|
And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
I actually do miss them. I'm playing with a group now in some 1st ed games, and we had a blast rolling stats, 3d6 in order. I ended up with a Halfling Thief, which I only got to play once before the DM had to step out for some family health issues. The DM who stepped in was more lenient, much to my dismay. 4d6 drop, assign as desired. Nothing wrong with that method, it's actually my preferred rolling system, but i do sometimes enjoy the challenge of playing what the dice dictate.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
Their stat rolls may seem unlikely but are possible. I personally know someone who rarely rolls a stat below a 14.
I have a couple of those guys at my table...Then there is my wife who's dice run the statistically at the other side of the improbable spectrum. Using 4d6 drop the lowest she rolled a character with a 12 high, one 10 and four 9 and below. The only thing that kept her from getting three's was our DM at the time let us re-roll 1's.
It's the frequent disparity at our table that convinced me to go to point buy several years ago.
Found out from the DM since this post that the rules for rolling were slightly different from what I thought/heard/was expecting. In his own words:
You roll 3d6 6 times, and place them how you like. You can roll 3 sets of stats and pick one of them, but if you don't like any of those sets you can keep rolling until you get a block you like.This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
I agree this is pretty odd. I also find it strange that when you brought it up and the other player claimed you were unlucky with your stats, they didnt ask you "Why didnt you roll them again?"
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Not to derail the thread too far, but my current campaign started with an elaborate system including the "3 Dragon Ante" cards (see Craig Shackelton's article in Dragon). It produced some seriously unbalanced characters.
So, now I've switched over to Asha Greyjoy's grid system. We've been very pleased with it.
Found out from the DM since this post that the rules for rolling were slightly different from what I thought/heard/was expecting. In his own words:
You roll 3d6 6 times, and place them how you like. You can roll 3 sets of stats and pick one of them, but if you don't like any of those sets you can keep rolling until you get a block you like.This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
Okay, that at least makes a bit more sense as to how they could have achieved them. Of course I would be far too tempted to try to make the GM realize how ridiculous they are being by sitting in front of them and rolling continuously, rejecting every set, until the GM finally breaks down after about 1 hour :)
This is why many GM's who use this system usually implement an auto-acceptable margin. This margin may be the total of all the dice, the total of your top 3 rolls, an average of your rolls or an average of your top 3 rolls. As soon as you make a roll that meets or exceeds this defined margin, then the roll is deemed acceptable.
Personally, I think there's enough darn random rolls required through out the game, I don't think they are needed for ability scores. If you want the thrill of trying roll good when the pressure is on, and the feeling of excitement from making a great roll -- go to Vegas or your nearest casino.
I had no complaints with rolling stats, far from it.
To me, some of the most fun in the game is had by playing a character with real and significant flaws that affect him not just mechanically, but also their personality.
I went in knowing that if I rolled a set with one or two bad stats, where I would put them to give my character a quirky weakness that I could play off of for roleplaying.
My problem is that A) with such good stats, many encounters are unlikely to be very challenging unless they're adjusted to compensate for the high stats, which leads me to B) that if the DM adjusts encounters to be a challenge, I'll be very ineffective against the enemies we face.
It just seems like with such insanely good stats, there's almost no point to the game because the other three characters will just steamroll everything thrown at us, and then I'll tag along for comic relief (I'm a gnome, and the only vertically challenged character in the group).
The build and abilities of the player to run the character are more important than the stats themselves. I remember when I first started playing. One of the players chose the aristocrat NPC class and was more useful than everyone.
Off topic: By the way, what is everyone playing?
Found out from the DM since this post that the rules for rolling were slightly different from what I thought/heard/was expecting. In his own words:
You roll 3d6 6 times, and place them how you like. You can roll 3 sets of stats and pick one of them, but if you don't like any of those sets you can keep rolling until you get a block you like.This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
Someone probably already said this, but he may as well just let you choose stats.
He sounds like me when I first DM'd. I learned my lesson from giving to much to players.
Found out from the DM since this post that the rules for rolling were slightly different from what I thought/heard/was expecting. In his own words:
You roll 3d6 6 times, and place them how you like. You can roll 3 sets of stats and pick one of them, but if you don't like any of those sets you can keep rolling until you get a block you like.This just seems bizarre. What's the point of rolling if you get to roll indefinitely until you get one you like?
Aha!
I suspected as much (the misundersanding part, anyway, though I didn't suspect the depth of the silliness).
Me, given that option, I would get tired of rolling after 30 or 40 sets and then I would automate it. Something simple, like Excel, where I could set up 20 or so columns, each containing a set of 6 stats, with a total at the bottom and a count of the number of 18s. I would set it to flag red if the count of 18s was > 3 and the total was over 100. Then I would hit the key to regenerate the data over and over until I spotted the red flag. That would be the "block I like".
OK, that was the powergaming Tarrasque. Me the roleplayer, I wouldn't stoop to that.
But, after all, why not? If we can keep rolling until the end of time, why not roll until the stats are truly epic?
I remember a few RPG video games that had a reroll feature during character creation. I didn't exactly want to powergame it, but I also didn't want some lame wimpy heroes, so I took liberal use of those rerolls. I think just about anybody would - as is evedinced by your fellow gamers.
Good old Baldur's Gate.
If you didn't have 18s in your physical stats, an 18 in your primary casting stat, and a decent score in the other two, you rerolled.
Of course, it didn't help that you could redistribute the points 1-for-1 in any way you wanted, and all that the "rolling" did was determine how many points you had to distribute. (Oh, and your epic strength, if you were a warrior-type character).
|
That is bizarre, and seemed fairly common in the days of randomly rolled stats. All it does is reward the inhumanly patient, willing to roll and roll and roll until they get the uber stats they want.
And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
I'm having flashbacks to the old Gold Box games and the original BG and BGII.
Hit Roll...
Nope...
Hit Roll...
Nope...
Hit Roll...
Nope...
An hour later...
Hit Roll...
Nope...
First off using math to prove that their sets couldn't have been rolled is total crap. The Dice gods are just kind to some people at character creation and then punish them at the table during game play. I have a friend who would consistantly get 18/00 str whenever he played a fighter in 2e and I always watched him do it. I have frequently accused my best friend's dice of using performance enhancing plastic when he makes his characters. It just happens.
And as a DM who almost always uses Dice Rolling I can understand what you say about the stats seeming to make everything easier... it balances out at the table. There are plenty of ways to challenge PC's that doesn't involve stats or skills.
To be honest though the Heroic Method has become my favorite for Pathfinder!
--Vroctoberfest!
consistently got 18/00 strength? was he rolling 3d6 then 1d100? that is a 1 in 21,600 chance. To get it more than once in your life is pretty unusual to say the least- to get in consistently does indeed seem dodgy.
I have been playing for about 30 years and have seen one legit 18/00 (using 4d6). But it was great because it was so rare- one of a kind etc. He played that character in a campaign that lasted over 10 years.
On to Pathfinder, I'm really liking the 2d6+6 method. It gives a nice, healthy range (8-18) without giving any really dirt-poor scores or ensuring really high ones.The average roll is 13, though... rather high for my taste. Compare to ~11.5 with 4d6-drop. The elite array averages 12. The chance of an 18 on 2d6+6 is also nearly doubled over 4d6-drop.
FYI, by my stats 4d6-drop averages 12.2. If you include entire set rerolls for having < +2 total modifiers (rule in the 3.5 DMG), 12.5 average.
So it's not *that* much of a difference - but certainly it's better. I use it as one of the options in my game (I think Jason actually took my whole set of options for the RPG :) ), but I require it to be in order. So better stats, in order.
FYI, by my stats 4d6-drop averages 12.2.
Hum... I wonder which of us is wrong. ;) I took a shortcut because I didn't feel like handling a four dimensional problem, so probably me.
I found the average roll of 2d6-drop to be 4.47222(...) and added 7 for the average of the other two rolls, on the assumption that for this purpose it's meaningless which of the four dice is the lowest. Too sloppy?
I require it to be in order. So better stats, in order.
Now that, I'm totally down with. Still prefer the possibility of things below 8, though. I was thinking about 2 + 3d8-drop for the same purpose.
4d6-drop has only 1296 possibilities. Fairly straightforward to brute-force with a spreadsheet.
Yep, just finished doing that. And 12.24 it is indeed.
The point about an 18 being ~70% more likely with 2d6+6 still stands, though. :)
|
|
This discussion about random stats makes me nauseated. Excuse me while I take my move action...
but I require it to be in order. So better stats, in order.
I'd rather have mid-range stats and get to choose what to play. The absolute power level of the stats is not important, it's the DM's job to keep the encounters appropriate. However, wanting to play a wizard and being getting stuck with fighter stats, or vice versa, is just inexcusable. You might as well hand out random pregenerated characters.
It is for that very reason I use a point buy system rather than random dice rolling. No one can be accussed of "cheating" and you get the stats you want everytime. Unless you are a munchkin powergamer.
As an aside, in one campaign I was playing in one player rolled the best set of stats I have ever seen on 3d6 with nothing below 15 and two 18s. Turned into one mean Paladin.
Point buy. And either half-round-up or max for HP rolls.
Randomness belongs inside the game.
Besides, one thing I've learned is that no matter what the die-rolling system for the game is, everybody cheats. Sometimes the GM encourages it, sometimes he shakes his head at the player's "amazing luck", and sometimes he even calls shenanigans on blatant flouting of the laws of probability... but everybody cheats.
Better just to lay the expectations out beforehand.
|
In the current game I'm playing in we got bored and figured out what the point buy was worth for starting stats (this was about 6 months after the fact) I found out my character "spent" 11 points. Everyone else "spent" into the 20's and even one person "spent" over 40. Sadly everyone's rolls were witnessed by everyone.
I tend to overpower my players with monster tactics sometimes so I let them use a 4d6 re-roll "1's" once method for stat generation.
This does not stop one of my players from rolling some of the most abysmal stats pretty much every time he plays. It's got to the point that I'll sometimes roll stats for him and he'll take them sight unseen.
I actually do miss them. I'm playing with a group now in some 1st ed games, and we had a blast rolling stats, 3d6 in order. I ended up with a Halfling Thief, which I only got to play once before the DM had to step out for some family health issues. The DM who stepped in was more lenient, much to my dismay. 4d6 drop, assign as desired. Nothing wrong with that method, it's actually my preferred rolling system, but i do sometimes enjoy the challenge of playing what the dice dictate.And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
I could not agree me. I prefer 4d6 drop low assign as you like. But sometimes 3d6 play were they drop rocks. Nothing like that in 1st ed. You roll your stats, and then look to see what you qualify for. More then a few have here or lower can only be a...
Miss those days too. We may do some retro 1ed games again we are all missing that system.
That is bizarre, and seemed fairly common in the days of randomly rolled stats. All it does is reward the inhumanly patient, willing to roll and roll and roll until they get the uber stats they want.
And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
I'm having flashbacks to the old Gold Box games and the original BG and BGII.
Hit Roll...
Nope...
Hit Roll...
Nope...
Hit Roll...
Nope...
An hour later...
Hit Roll...
Nope...
I completed both games with the first stats rolled. Just to see if I could. Was fun. I also did it with maximized stats, was also fun.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
In another thread, we're discussing what aspects of the D&D paradigm (or, perhaps better, what aspects of the fictional world you think D&D tries to present) have changed over the editions. From my perspective, one of the biggest changes has been "What is a 1st or 2nd-Level character supposed to be?"
In original D&D and 1st Edition AD&D, the 1st-Level Fighters are normal people, the iconic "turnip farmers" who'd just come back from three months of being militia conscripts (ergo the Level Title "Veteran") and who are all excited to go out and see the world. You could say something similar about 1st Level Thieves, Clerics, and Rangers. And even beginning spellcasters: they are normal kids who've learned to throw a single spell.
Each subsequent edition, up through 3.5 and Pathfinder, has pushed those 1st-Level PCs further and further along the power curve. When 3rd Edition PCs begin their careers, they are stronger than Gygax's 2nd-Level PCs, and the increases to 3.5, and then to Pathfinder start everybody about a level above 3rd Edition.
Attribute "bloat" is one aspect of that. PCs aren't just normal people. They're a cut above. The introduction of 3rd Edition gave us a point buy that can produce a human PC with stats like {14, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12}, as well as making a distinction between Fighters and simple NPC "Warriors". And then Pathfinder characters add a +2 somewhere in there!
I don't mean to come of as curmudgeonly here. Obviously, it's easier to fantasize about your PC when she's just overall an exceptional specimen. Most people don't find it "fun" to play characters with low stats, and current adventure writers balance encounters with the expectation that PCs will have a +3 Attribute bonus in their strong suits.
Well, I guess I am coming off as curmudgeonly. I guess I don't see that great a distinction between "give your PC the stats you'd like him to have" and "High Fantasy" point buy in Pathfinder.
[2d6+6 rolling] but I require it to be in order. So better stats, in order.I'd rather have mid-range stats and get to choose what to play. The absolute power level of the stats is not important, it's the DM's job to keep the encounters appropriate. However, wanting to play a wizard and being getting stuck with fighter stats, or vice versa, is just inexcusable. You might as well hand out random pregenerated characters.
Which is why this is just one of the 5 methods I allow: point-buy, 4d6-drop, dice-buy (dice-pool in the book), craps/heroic (2d6+6, in order), and high organic (3d6, reroll 1's, in order, with one reroll).
All have roughly the same average, adjusted a bit for the convenience factors.
I've played 5d6 drop lowest two reroll 1's and 2's
That was my original method for 1st edition :) - reliably produced characters that actually had stat modifiers! (switched to 6d6-drop3 eventually)
In another thread, we're discussing what aspects of the D&D paradigm (or, perhaps better, what aspects of the fictional world you think D&D tries to present) have changed over the editions. From my perspective, one of the biggest changes has been "What is a 1st or 2nd-Level character supposed to be?"
In original D&D and 1st Edition AD&D, the 1st-Level Fighters are normal people, the iconic "turnip farmers" who'd just come back from three months of being militia conscripts (ergo the Level Title "Veteran") and who are all excited to go out and see the world. You could say something similar about 1st Level Thieves, Clerics, and Rangers. And even beginning spellcasters: they are normal kids who've learned to throw a single spell.
Each subsequent edition, up through 3.5 and Pathfinder, has pushed those 1st-Level PCs further and further along the power curve. When 3rd Edition PCs begin their careers, they are stronger than Gygax's 2nd-Level PCs, and the increases to 3.5, and then to Pathfinder start everybody about a level above 3rd Edition.
Attribute "bloat" is one aspect of that. PCs aren't just normal people. They're a cut above. The introduction of 3rd Edition gave us a point buy that can produce a human PC with stats like {14, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12}, as well as making a distinction between Fighters and simple NPC "Warriors". And then Pathfinder characters add a +2 somewhere in there!
I don't mean to come of as curmudgeonly here. Obviously, it's easier to fantasize about your PC when she's just overall an exceptional specimen. Most people don't find it "fun" to play characters with low stats, and current adventure writers balance encounters with the expectation that PCs will have a +3 Attribute bonus in their strong suits.
Well, I guess I am coming off as curmudgeonly. I guess I don't see that great a distinction between "give your PC the stats you'd like him to have" and "High Fantasy" point buy in Pathfinder.
Not that I disagree with most of what you are saying but I would say one thing more.
3.X not only do you start are stronger, but you rise in level and power even faster. In just a few adventures you can be level 10, in a few more level 20 looking for some county to own with you massive power. In a steadly running game in less then half a year in my game we will have finished a single AP and be hulking level 15-16 level brutes. In AD&D such was simply not the case. You started out prehaps weaker but that was as close to the power level of 3.5 as you ever got as you fall even further behind as time goes buy.
I hate to bring up the too often said complaint about everything now a days needs to be easier and faster, but 3.5 sure seems that way when compared to 1ed and pathfinder even more so then 3.5.
But one last little thought, as powerful as the epic 25 point buy system is it still aint the superchart from the old first ed Unearthed Arcana, holy snot roll 9 dice for your fighter's strength and pick the best 3.....now that was a truly epic fighter stat wise at least. Basically it isn't like the desire for to play super powerful characters is new, it is that doing so was once not so clearly acceptable to all.
I tend to overpower my players with monster tactics sometimes so I let them use a 4d6 re-roll "1's" once method for stat generation.
This does not stop one of my players from rolling some of the most abysmal stats pretty much every time he plays. It's got to the point that I'll sometimes roll stats for him and he'll take them sight unseen.
You could try having him roll and then subtract the result from 21. I did that for one of my players with chronic low stat roll syndrome and it gave him a more normal character for the group.
I hate, hate, HATE gambling, and that's why I hate rolling stats, HP, etc.
But....in the original poster's case, I would just shrug and play the game. I think the difference between a stat of 16 and a stat of 18 is highly overrated most of the time, so what difference does it make to me?
And then there were the really old days, when you had to roll them in order, and then choose from whatever classes and races you qualified to play...
Gosh, do I not miss those days.
I actually do miss them. I'm playing with a group now in some 1st ed games, and we had a blast rolling stats, 3d6 in order. I ended up with a Halfling Thief, which I only got to play once before the DM had to step out for some family health issues. The DM who stepped in was more lenient, much to my dismay. 4d6 drop, assign as desired. Nothing wrong with that method, it's actually my preferred rolling system, but i do sometimes enjoy the challenge of playing what the dice dictate.
I could not agree me. I prefer 4d6 drop low assign as you like. But sometimes 3d6 play were they drop rocks. Nothing like that in 1st ed. You roll your stats, and then look to see what you qualify for. More then a few have here or lower can only be a...
Miss those days too. We may do some retro 1ed games again we are all missing that system.Another vote for rolling up stats. Reliance on builds and preconcieved notions of what a character "should" be able to do before pencil touches paper creates trouble and usually births another character optimizer. I prefer to have players roll 4d6, drop the lowest die seven times, dropping the lowest roll overall. Randomization is the foundation of this game, and should not be regulated to the corner.
Once, long ago, I was rolling up a 2nd ed. character (4d6 each stat, drop lowest) and rolled straight 16s all the way through. I was stoked. I spent an entire week trying to decide what class to play. I just couldn't make up my mind. Finally, I tossed the stats and rerolled. I ended up with a wizard with an 18 Int, but with a 7 in Str and an 8 in Con. I was content.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I prefer point buy because of disparity. I rolled up Shadrach (my evil alter-ego) 4d6 drop the lowest re-roll 1's. 16, 14, 17, 13, 14, 12. One of our other players roled 10, 15, 10, 12, 10, 14, 10. Both playable characters, but Shad far out did Qi'Tai in general ability.
As to optimization. I ran an Eberron game with point buy and attempts to 'optimize' came out sideways. The Warforged Artificer had the highest Charisma, and the rest of the party had charismas in the 6-10 range. While they were all extremely good in their specialization the party was hampered outside of it.
Cleric: Can I use knowlege (religion)? I've an Intelligence of 10, it's all I could afford to get the 14 strength and 16 wisdom.
Rogue: What? I have to bluff? My Charisma's 6, that's how my dex is 18!
Ranger: I'll use Animal Empathy on the dire ape. It's Charisma based? Awww crap.
Artificer: I've the highest Charisma, I'll be the spokesman. Oh wait, I've no social skills though. I need to lift what? I've only a strength of 10.
Get them in social situations, they were doomed. Did I mention I was running Eberron?
|
|
I've played 5d6 drop lowest two reroll 1's and 2's, 5d6 drop lowest, and for my next game I'm planning 2d8 drop lowest and add 10. I like high scores for survivability.
I tried this in the old die roller just now and the first character it generated was 2 18s and 4 16s!
How about this "super heroic" method: roll 3d6, drop the lowest die and add 6? Better than just regular heroic but not as good as TriOemgaZero super-duper-uber-heroic stats. ;)
Cheers
|
|
How about this "super heroic" method: roll 3d6, drop the lowest die and add 6? Better than just regular heroic but not as good as TriOemgaZero super-duper-uber-heroic stats. ;)
Trust me, I ran through a couple formulas to come to this one. I'm running Shackled City. I want the minimum stat to be 11, and a high average. I might try stealing the 'everyone picks from all rolled arrays' from this thread, or doing it draft style. Basically, I want high stats to start so they survive the low levels and then it evens out in the higher levels.