So I'm trying to figure out my stat generation system that I will be using for people this weekend, and as I was tooling around with dice I got a truly terrible set of stats. This made me jump over to my handy Pathfinder book to see what they had set up for rules on legal rerolls. I was a bit shocked to see that there didn't seem to be any covered that I noticed. Did I miss them or were such rules not included as they are much more individual group dependent?
Barator
So I'm trying to figure out my stat generation system that I will be using for people this weekend, and as I was tooling around with dice I got a truly terrible set of stats. This made me jump over to my handy Pathfinder book to see what they had set up for rules on legal rerolls. I was a bit shocked to see that there didn't seem to be any covered that I noticed. Did I miss them or were such rules not included as they are much more individual group dependent?
Barator
I think the Paizo people like to leave stuff like that up to the individual GMs. I've had several threads on here with people and it turns out each GM uses a custom version just about every time. So with that being the case, putting in a bunch of rules the GM is going to ignore anyway probably seemed like a waste of paper. :)
Go with whatever you, as the GM, find fair. I usually have people roll 3 sets (4d6, drop lowest, 4 sixes = 20) and pick the one they want, that avoids the issue of a single bad set ruining a character.
I completely agree with you on the fact that different GMs go with many different things, and that it probably would be a waste of paper. I just wanted to go look and was surprised to not find it.
I have been tooling with what we normally do and that is 4d6 reroll all ones. It generates pretty high stats for the players, who generally like to see their dice get rerolled, and makes them happy. I have had some folks concerned about "what if I crap out" and setting up a fall back position. I was considering offering a point buy BEFORE any rolls were made, so if you were worried about your stats you could simply use points and set your numbers where you like.
Not sure what I'm doing yet, but was just having fun rolling 15 sets of stats and checking averages.
Barator
Rules for starting stats are on page 15. My group uses a Standard variant system were re-roll 1's, but we are supposed to be a Heoric group
So I'm trying to figure out my stat generation system that I will be using for people this weekend, and as I was tooling around with dice I got a truly terrible set of stats. This made me jump over to my handy Pathfinder book to see what they had set up for rules on legal rerolls. I was a bit shocked to see that there didn't seem to be any covered that I noticed. Did I miss them or were such rules not included as they are much more individual group dependent?
Barator
We have switched entirely to the point-by system. It is fair to all players and will permit any one to make any character they use.
Just as it prevents a player from having all bad stats it also prevents the player from having all good stats. It sure is fun nut to have a score below 15, but havin some weaknesses to go with your stragths makes for more fun roleplaying and ensures there will be a niche for every character in the party.
The big advantage of the point buy system is that all players start with an even footing. No one player has a disadvantage because of one afternoon's poor rolls.
I used a hybrid dice system when starting my ROTRL campaign. I had every player roll 4d6 six times then we picked the best of the stat arrays and all the players got to use those scores.
The array for my game came out significantly higher than any point buy system but all the players were happy. Between the high scores and the large numbers of players it has been neccisary to significantly increase the encounter difficulties but it has worked out well so far.
Our array 17, 16, 15, 14, 14, 10
|
I have been tooling with what we normally do and that is 4d6 reroll all ones. It generates pretty high stats for the players, who generally like to see their dice get rerolled, and makes them happy. I have had some folks concerned about "what if I crap out" and setting up a fall back position. I was considering offering a point buy BEFORE any rolls were made, so if you were worried about your stats you could simply use points and set your numbers where you like.
Barator
I do 4d6 reroll any 1s, drop the lowest. if any character has two stats at 8 or less they get 1d4 points to add to those low stats.
In general, this system ends up a little better average than point buy, and I have only had to use the 1d4 rule once out of 25+ characters made this way.
There was a thread here
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/general/statRollingDisconnect
about generating stats. There were some great home-made ideas.
I paste here one of my own. This method begins with two point-buy arrays of stats. The first sets the minimum of each score. The second sets the "target" or "average" score that should be generated. Then you have to roll to find the final score, which will be between the minimum score and 18, being the target score the most probable .
Step 1) Generate a Point-buy array (10 points). You chose here the minimum score of each ability. Min. score is 6.
Step 2) Generate a Point-buy array (25 points). You chose here the "target" score of each ability. Min score is 10; also target score has to be at least equal than minimum score.
3) For every ability, and depending of the minimum score, roll:
Min.Score____Dice
17-18________1d2-1d2
16___________1d3-1d3
15___________1d4-1d4
14___________1d5-1d5
13___________1d6-1d6
11-12________1d8-1d8
06-10________1d10-1d10
4) Add the dice result to the target score of each ability to find the final score.
5) If the final score is lower than the minimum score or greater than 18, repeat the roll (step 3).
Example: We want to generate a fighter
Step 1) Point-buy 10 (minimum scores)
Str 15 __ 7 points
Dex 14 __ 5 points
Con 15 __ 7 points
Int 8 ___ -2 points
Wis 9 ___ -1 points
Cha 6 ___ -6 points
Step 2) Point-buy 25 (target scores)
Str 16 __ 10 points
Dex 15 __ 7 points
Con 15 __ 7 points
Int 10 __ 0 points
Wis 11 __ 1 points
Cha 10 __ 0 points
We roll:
Steps 3/4/5)
Str --> 1d4-1d4 --> 2-1 = +1 --> 16+1 = 17
Dex --> 1d5-1d5 --> 1-5 = -4 --> 15-4 = 11
As 11 is lower than 14 (min score) we roll again
Dex --> 1d5-1d5 --> 1-2 = -1 --> 15-1 = 14
Con --> 1d4-1d4 --> 4-1 = +3 --> 15+3 = 18
Int --> 1d10-1d10 --> 6-6 = 0 --> 10+0 = 10
Wis --> 1d10-1d10 --> 2-4 = -2 --> 11-2 = 9
Cha --> 1d10-1d10 --> 8-4 = +4 --> 10+4 = 14
So I'm trying to figure out my stat generation system that I will be using for people this weekend, and as I was tooling around with dice I got a truly terrible set of stats. This made me jump over to my handy Pathfinder book to see what they had set up for rules on legal rerolls. I was a bit shocked to see that there didn't seem to be any covered that I noticed. Did I miss them or were such rules not included as they are much more individual group dependent?
Barator
Well, you roll. You let the dice fall. If the result sucks, you have a sucky result. :P
ours is the standard 4D6, re-roll any 1's as many times as they come up and drop the lowest.
My DM also gave another method of rolling all 24 dice at the same time and taking out the 6 lowest but NO re rolls.
Using the 4D6 method I have 18-17-16-15-13-11 array of stats. I got the 17 because the DM wanted to be prissy about my dice rolling method because one of the dice I was reolling "accidentally" hit a 2 and turned it into a 5.
I call it the bouncy method( it takes practice to make it look natual) it has given me quit a few nice stated charecters. Well he said it was cheap and was cheating and made me lose my new 16 so I rerolled and came up with a natural 17. The dice gods love me.
We have tried the point but system but they dont like me using that because I can break it too easy. Once we started playing and I took some prestige classes like Master of many forms and war shaper my stats were in the upper 20's most of the time because I felt the charecter was too weak as a mage if he didnt have a 18+ con and str. to match. I didnt carre about wis,or dex and charisma is still a dump stat.
Try the 4D6 method reroll 1's as many times as needed and you'll have a blast with your charecters.
Having grown utterly sick of min/maxing, I've finally settled on the following:
First you use the system which 3.5 called "organic." Roll 4d6, drop lowest, no you don't get to reroll 1's, assign in order. (First roll is Strength, second is Dex, etc.) After all 6 attributes are generated, pick any one to reroll; you don't have to take the new result. Finally, trade the positions of any two numbers.
Do this once, with me watching. If you don't like the results, you can instead use 15,14,13,12,10,8 assigned however you wish.
Having grown utterly sick of min/maxing, I've finally settled on the following:
First you use the system which 3.5 called "organic." Roll 4d6, drop lowest, no you don't get to reroll 1's, assign in order. (First roll is Strength, second is Dex, etc.) After all 6 attributes are generated, pick any one to reroll; you don't have to take the new result. Finally, trade the positions of any two numbers.
Do this once, with me watching. If you don't like the results, you can instead use 15,14,13,12,10,8 assigned however you wish.
Nice.
Edit: I should add, my group uses the 3.5 standard rule that if the total of the ability modifiers are less than +2, a full reroll is allowed.
Go with whatever you, as the GM, find fair. I usually have people roll 3 sets (4d6, drop lowest, 4 sixes = 20) and pick the one they want, that avoids the issue of a single bad set ruining a character.
10/10
Masterful - the amount of rage you conjured with this one statement is phenomenal! Low stats that *ruin* a character!
Why the majority of your games must be spent in combat? Otherwise how could a representation of someone who is below average in some areas be 'ruined'?
Oh, to hearken back to the earlier days when stats were representative of the true capabilities of a human being instead of a list of modifiers for a miniature war game!
I am dutifully warned to avoid your table good sir! Enjoy your amenities and entertainments!
ours is the standard 4D6, re-roll any 1's as many times as they come up and drop the lowest.
My DM also gave another method of rolling all 24 dice at the same time and taking out the 6 lowest but NO re rolls.Using the 4D6 method I have 18-17-16-15-13-11 array of stats. I got the 17 because the DM wanted to be prissy about my dice rolling method because one of the dice I was reolling "accidentally" hit a 2 and turned it into a 5.
I call it the bouncy method( it takes practice to make it look natual) it has given me quit a few nice stated charecters. Well he said it was cheap and was cheating and made me lose my new 16 so I rerolled and came up with a natural 17. The dice gods love me.We have tried the point but system but they dont like me using that because I can break it too easy. Once we started playing and I took some prestige classes like Master of many forms and war shaper my stats were in the upper 20's most of the time because I felt the charecter was too weak as a mage if he didnt have a 18+ con and str. to match. I didnt carre about wis,or dex and charisma is still a dump stat.
Try the 4D6 method reroll 1's as many times as needed and you'll have a blast with your charecters.
/facepalm
You (and this attitude) would not be allowed at my table. (Which by the way, requires 3d6 in order six times, no adjustments or rerolling anything.)
10/10Masterful - the amount of rage you conjured with this one statement is phenomenal! Low stats that *ruin* a character!
Why the majority of your games must be spent in combat? Otherwise how could a representation of someone who is below average in some areas be 'ruined'?
Oh, to hearken back to the earlier days when stats were representative of the true capabilities of a human being instead of a list of modifiers for a miniature war game!
I am dutifully warned to avoid your table good sir! Enjoy your amenities and entertainments!
10/10
Wow, in one post, you have managed to make me glad I have never had you in my game.
I am absolutely flabbergasted at the amount of venom and general immaturity you have managed to pack into one post. I had not considered it humanly possible. Are you an alien?
Oh to hearken back to the earlier days when people showed common courtesy instead of utter disregard for other people instead of treating everyone else like cardboard cutouts put there strictly for the purpose of giving them things to hit with a flamethrower.
I am dutifully warned to avoid your posts like the plague, as you obviously have nothing mature or useful to add to any conversation.
10/10
Wow, in one post, you have managed to make me glad I have never had you in my game.
I am absolutely flabbergasted at the amount of venom and general immaturity you have managed to pack into one post. I had not considered it humanly possible. Are you an alien?
Oh to hearken back to the earlier days when people showed common courtesy instead of utter disregard for other people instead of treating everyone else like cardboard cutouts put there strictly for the purpose of giving them things to hit with a flamethrower.
I am dutifully warned to avoid your posts like the plague, as you obviously have nothing mature or useful to add to any conversation.
Is there some explanation in the above that explains how low stats ruin a character? Cause I'm not seeing it.
If I'm playing at a table with a person who's unwilling to play a character who has low stats *because* they have low stats, then socially I read that as either someone who is a poor sport, is immature, or views the game as a competition instead of a team effort.
Nothing you've written convinces me otherwise, in fact. . .
Is there some explanation in the above that explains how low stats ruin a character? Cause I'm not seeing it.If I'm playing at a table with a person who's unwilling to play a character who has low stats *because* they have low stats, then socially I read that as either someone who is a poor sport, is immature, or views the game as a competition instead of a team effort.
Nothing you've written convinces me otherwise, in fact. . .
I have no need to explain anything to you, you obviously know everything already.
For me to explain anything to you would be a waste of time, you have already decided that anyone who doesn't do the game your way is not worth common courtesy, your original post was pure flamebaiting drivel.
I have no reason to provide you with additional flame bait. When you have learned how to post in a civilized manner, perhaps I'll spend time discussing game concepts and how I run my games and how you run your games.
Until you can show the most basic of common courtesy in a post however, I see no reason to waste my time on you.
I have no need to explain anything to you, you obviously know everything already.
For me to explain anything to you would be a waste of time, you have already decided that anyone who doesn't do the game your way is not worth common courtesy, your original post was pure flamebaiting drivel.
I have no reason to provide you with additional flame bait. When you have learned how to post in a civilized manner, perhaps I'll spend time discussing game concepts and how I run my games and how you run your games.
Until you can show the most basic of common courtesy in a post however, I see no reason to waste my time on you.
I don't know anything other than you're either unwilling or unable to explain how low stats ruin a character.
Based on several of the replies and the complex ways that people avoid these low stats, and the post of one person who tries to hit dice he's already rolled with other dice to get the numbers he wants seems to indicate that you're not the only one afraid of characters being 'ruined'.
I would be interested in anyone explaining how their game of Dungeons & Dragons is ruined if they don't have some arbitrary level of good stats.
-Campbell
P.S. if my post was, as you say, "pure flamebating drivel" then why did you reply? Aren't you supposed to ignore flamebate? Truthfully you're first reply to the original poster struck me the same way - as something said inflammatory designed to engender a response. Your. . . sensitivity. . . over the issue has not convinced me otherwise.
(And what MDT is talking about, is that if most of the PC's have dramatically better stats, and your playing a low level game where class abilities and magic items haven't had the opportunity to trivialize the stat differences, that one PC very likely will die to encounters that challenge the other PC's. Now, play style can mitigate this some, but for one that shoehorns what types of character personalities you can play, and for two not all players have that level of tactical skill to 'play it safe' and make combat work with sub-par stats)
Not sure it's worth the effort KR.
However, you are correct, that is what I was referring to. I've had games before where someone had a very good concept, the one that comes to mind especially well was a concept of a low level noble in exile, he was a trained knight, but he was more of a scholar, wanted every Knowledge skill he could get. I thought it was a great concept.
He rolled 4d6, drop lowest, and rolled like, 12, 12, 11, 10, 8, 7. Now, I could force him to try to do his concept with that stat set, or, instead, I let him roll two more and take the one he wanted. He ended up with something like 16, 16, 14, 12, 11, 8. He put one of the 16's in Int (as a Knight) and the 8 in Wis (to show how naive and easily fooled he was). I loved it, he loved. And it let him have enough skill points to do his character concept. Had I forced him to accept the first set of stats (which would have been even lower had it been straight 3d6, in order) he'd never have been able to do the concept, and would have died in the first combat.
Eh, I have a knack for sticking my head where it doesn't belong and getting in too deep. It happens bud, no big. Hope I was helpful, but only time will tell.
(And what MDT is talking about, is that if most of the PC's have dramatically better stats, and your playing a low level game where class abilities and magic items haven't had the opportunity to trivialize the stat differences, that one PC very likely will die to encounters that challenge the other PC's. Now, play style can mitigate this some, but for one that shoehorns what types of character personalities you can play, and for two not all players have that level of tactical skill to 'play it safe' and make combat work with sub-par stats)Not sure it's worth the effort KR.
Didn't mean that as a slam against you. Hope it wasn't taken that way.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Might I suggest that the reason point-buy methods are so popular is that they keep party members on an even keel. When I'm GMing, I don't particularly care if the party attributes average to 11, 12.5, or 15; I can design appropriate challenges for the party under any of those circumstances. What I'd like to avoid is having three characters in the same party, one of whose attributes average to 11, one to 12.5, and the last to 15. That's going to be an imbalance that I'll need to address somewhere.
(And it doesn't matter if the attributes were all rolled on the same basis. You're not playing the potential PC, before attributes are rolled. You're playing the PC with attributes as the rolls determined.)
Put another way, nexusphere, a party full of low attributes isn't as big a problem as a party where only one PC is notably weaker than the others.
Of the solutions:
1) Roll attributes, but reroll any character whose average falls below a certain threshold. (This keeps a PC from completely pooping out, but it doesn't really address a disparity if someone else rolls spectacularly well.)
2) Point-buy. (This keeps everybody even, but there's not so much challenge or opportunity to role-play a character with qualities you weren't quite expecting. Everything is exactly as you would like it.)
3) Compensatory advantages. Everybody rolls up stats. Everybody adds up their Attribute bonuses. For every 2 points in bonuses your PC falls behind the most superior PC, your character receives an extra trait. So some party members have great stats, and others have little benefits and abilities to help them out in certain situations.
Of the solutions:1) Roll attributes, but reroll any character whose average falls below a certain threshold. (This keeps a PC from completely pooping out, but it doesn't really address a disparity if someone else rolls spectacularly well.)
2) Point-buy. (This keeps everybody even, but there's not so much challenge or opportunity to role-play a character with qualities you weren't quite expecting. Everything is exactly as you would like it.)
3) Compensatory advantages. Everybody rolls up stats. Everybody adds up their Attribute bonuses. For every 2 points in bonuses your PC falls behind the most superior PC, your character receives an extra trait. So some party members have great stats, and others have little benefits and abilities to help them out in certain situations.
I'm perfectly fine with point buy as well, honestly. I do have a small preference for the roll just because you end up with slightly more organic characters (instead of everyone having the same basic stat array).
I do like the #3 above, that's not something I'd thought of before, I may look into it. When you say traits, do you mean Pathfinder traits, or are you referring to things like feats?
One thing I have noticed over the years is that if the players are having fun, the game is good. And if some or all are not, then it's bad. I know that seems like an obvious statement, but what I really am trying to get at is that it doesn't matter really what stats and equipment the players have. I can balance out the game regardless, and if they have fun, then that's the important thing.
Go with whatever you, as the GM, find fair. I usually have people roll 3 sets (4d6, drop lowest, 4 sixes = 20) and pick the one they want, that avoids the issue of a single bad set ruining a character.10/10
Masterful - the amount of rage you conjured with this one statement is phenomenal! Low stats that *ruin* a character!
Well, you know us tarrasques... Can't keep our armored noses out of a good flame war.
But I'll try to stick to the points. I shall leave the flaming to dragons, or elementals, or what have you.
Yes, a particularly low array of ability scores can ruin a character. Or more specifically, it can ruin a character concept.
When I DM, I want my players to enjoy their characters. I tell them to plan out, in advance, what race and class they want, maybe even think about eventual PrCs if they're so inclined, and also think about their backstory and their personality and motivations.
If the character concept is to be a hardy rogue who loves combat and shines when the pressure is on, ably disabling all manner of devious traps and pitfalls with a smirk and a flourish, then so be it. That's what he wants to play and I want him to play it.
Then when they get to the game on day 1, out come the dice, and he rolls a 13, 12, 10, 8, 7, 5. Hmmm, well, he won't be hardy. He'll barely be able to fight at all - far from loving combat he will have to fear it. He won't be good at disabling devices, smirk or no smirk. And if he even tries to force that array into one mold, fighting or sneaky rogue stuff, the other mold will be virtually unplayable.
Now, sure, I could say, oh well, that's how the dice fell, so deal. And he either becomes the worst rogue ever, or decides instead to become a below-average sorcerer instead. Either way, he'll hate this character.
Why the majority of your games must be spent in combat? Otherwise how could a representation of someone who is below average in some areas be 'ruined'?
Well, I haven't exactly counted pages, but off the top of my head, I would say that roughly 80% of the material in the book is about combat (or more specifically, dealing with encounters). Preparing for it by having the right gear and spells and magic items, resolving it by rolling dice and executing maneuvers and using that gear and those spells and items, and dealing with the aftermath by getting XP, cash, and treasure rewards, and by healing, resting, and recovering.
Even role-play encounters that call for bluffing, diplomacy, or other skills, items, or spells, constitute encounters and often fall under much the same rules as the combat, and require good character abilities (including ability scores) to resolve satisfactorily.
More of that same 80% is material to tell DMs how to set up those encounters and keep them fair and balanced and interesting.
The other 20% would be the non-combat skills, a few non-combat feats, and a handful of spells and items that have no real value in encounters of any sort.
And judging by every published adventure I have ever seen, I would say that those percentages hold up in the official adventures as well as they hold up in the rulebook.
Heck, I bet the percentage is more like 90/10, really (in both the rules and the adventures), but I was being generous.
So yes, while any player of a tragically handicapped character can sit there and role-play until his tongue falls off, and can have a good time doing it, he's not going to be able to deal with that other 80% of the material very well at all, and it will be highly frustrating for most players.
What's worse, is it's often hard to tell which kind of player he'll turn out to be. He might be able to deal, or might not, but I may not know until weeks or months down the road, when he leaves the game entirely, or does something disruptive that results in a TPK because he's frustrated and bored, or when he just suicides his character (heroically or stupidly) so he can get a new one, breaking the continuity of the story I'm weaving.
Oh, to hearken back to the earlier days when stats were representative of the true capabilities of a human being instead of a list of modifiers for a miniature war game!
I find it hard to measure the true capabilities of a human being who is willing to venture out into the world, often with a bunch of strangers, taking on horrible mosters, lethal traps, deadly magics, demons, devils, villains. Over and over and over and over.
Knowing how deadly the world he lives in really is (let's face it, the D&D worlds - any of them - are scales of magnitude more dangerous than anywhere on earth at any time period), he still heads out there to face literally thousands of life-and-death situations.
Dunno about you, but I find it hard to think that anyone who is barely ordinary would be crazy enough to even consider such a suicidal lifestyle. Unless they really are crazy, in which case, he won't have any companions stupid enough to travel with him for two consecutive days.
I am dutifully warned to avoid your table good sir! Enjoy your amenities and entertainments!
Now you're just being mean.
For this, I shall bite you with my armored teeth...
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I do like the #3 above, that's not something I'd thought of before, I may look into it. When you say traits, do you mean Pathfinder traits, or are you referring to things like feats?
Pathfinder traits. So, if one PC had Attribute bonuses totaling +2, and her colleague had attribute bonuses totaling +12, she'd receive an additional five traits. That's an extreme case.
2) Point-buy. (This keeps everybody even, but there's not so much challenge or opportunity to role-play a character with qualities you weren't quite expecting. Everything is exactly as you would like it.)
This is exactly what I dislike about point buy. It directly encourages a planned build, which I go to great pains to discourage at my table. (A general concept like Blake's "scrappy rogue player" is fine; starting at 1st level with a road map of every mechanical choice you'll be making through 20th is absolutely not.)
For a while I was allowing only the standard array, and the results pleased me greatly. Players spent much less time working numbers on paper before play, which meant they had fewer hard-to-dislodge expectations about where those numbers should lead. It might seem that suboptimal ability scores would drive players to optimize more heavily elsewhere to compensate, but at least in my group this wasn't the case; it was more like the bubble had already been burst, so they started just having fun with character development. (Still did a perfectly fine job in combat, too.)
The switch back to rolling came from a few players just wanting to try out randomness for a change. I picked the "organic roll" because to me it feels like the best compromise of genuine randomness versus the ability to have a concept before you roll. For the players who didn't want to tempt fate the array was still available, originally as a "pick one" option but another thread hereabouts gave me the notion of using it as flub insurance.
The really nice thing about this is that I don't have to use an arbitrary guideline like "reroll if you don't have at least +2 overall," and can instead let the player decide whether 15/14/13/12/10/8 is better than 18/13/11/9/8/5.