|
I have my players roll 4d6 drop lowest, six times. I then have them do it again and pick which of the two sets they'd like to play.
It's been my experience that rolling stats is actually more balanced in the long run between optimizer and non-optimizer players as well as between single- and multiple-attribute dependent classes than point buy.
+1, I've been using this method since I started to play (A)D&D early 2nd edition.
Papa's House Rules
Rule 5 of 11
5. Pathfinder RPG 20 point buy (only 1 score below 10 after racial adjustments, minium 8).
-- david
Papa.DRB
That is my side of this religious war (lol).
It's all good, so long as everyone has fun.
Actually my favorite character creation rules were the old Traveller/Megatraveller rules, when you could spend all night developing a character, only to have him die before you got to the actual game! Now those characters had backstory!
Within the D&D/Pathfinder realm, when I DM we:
1. Roll 4d6 six times, rerolling ones and assigning to each attribute in order.
2. Allow one swap of any two scores.
3. Allow one time, one point increase in any one score at the cost of two points from any other score.
4. Allow one time character suicide if someone really doesn't like what they end up with. You're stuck with your second roll, however (although I have been known to allow some really unlucky rollers to go back to their first try).
In general, this produces pretty heroic and diverse characters, and allows a fair amount of customization for those who come in with a specific concept in mind (and yes, I adjust adventure difficulty to take into account high stats). Personally, when I play I rarely come to a character creation session with a firm idea of what I want to play. I usually either go with whatever the dice gods give me or try to create whatever the party needs.
Yes this system does sometimes produce characters who have better beginning stats than others. Bottom line for me is that, in my experience, the attribute stats are only a small component of what makes a great character. Far more important is the way the character is played and the decisions they make both in play and in later character development.
I'm starting to become partial to 3d6+5 drop lowest. When I started I did only 20-pt buy and burned myself out after so many nearly-identical arrays. 4d6 drop lowest is fun but very swingy. 3d6 drop lowest and adding a static number seems to generate decent scores, although I alter the static number to suit the character I'm making (as GM it gives more control so the villains aren't too weak).
Point Buy.
Dice hate me.
In college, we did 4d6 drop lowest, the character is still-born if it doesn't have at least 1 16 or 2 15s. This was for 2nd edition D&D. My record for most still-born characters in a row was over a dozen.
In a different campaign, the GM insisted that they had a fool-proof way of generating attributes and there was no re-rolling. She had us roll in a 6x6 metrix and pick our set from any straight line. After watching me roll, they changed their mind and allowed me to re-roll. Halfway through that, they took the dice away from me and she rolled them instead. I used the numbers she rolled because they were better.
I have a long history of poor dice luck. Allowing that to consistently put my characters at a disadvantage for the lifetime of the character got old really quick.
As a DM I find players power levels do not matter until they compare themselves to the other players.
I like players having some low stats. It encourages role playing and story building.
I like players having high stats so they can get the abilities they want with ability score requirements.
If the dice rolling allows one player be to substantially better than the others, and that player is able to build the most power character. Well the other characters have mush less fun. If the dice do not get the score to get the ability you want until very high level for the themed character you want to play. Well the dice cheated you out of fun.
The basic point buy lets you sell down to only 7. That bothers me as that 4 stated character can not exist if someone wanted to play it. Also point buy does not inspire as much creativity since you are not surprised by the rolls and need to think of a story to explain his stats.
So honestly it depends on the players you have and what they want in the game. When I am with new people I always do point but to create that equality to let them know I am about being fair.
If you had advanced players in a game where there is no winning the dice rolling completely random is the way to go. The spontaneous nature forces players into the game.
A single free 18 in one stat of their choice, then point buy 20.
Everyone gets a nice stat to work off and can thn round themselves out without worrying too much about being effective, while still having to make choices.
4d6, drop lowest, assigned in order. All players generate 3 sets like this, and chooses one, placing the others in the middle. Then going around the table players can swap theirs for one in the pool. The rest of the pool characters can be used for NPC's, etc.
We use harrow cards. Draw nine cards and add the stats corresponding to the cards on a one to one basis to an array of 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 in any order. No stat can go above 18. For a more heroic campaign we use an array of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
Added bonus, you can read the cards to create a background or plot hooks for your character.
I prefer to keep it simple:
1. Write down any six positive integers in any order. Those are your ability scores.
So everyone starts with all 18s?
I mean... I'm all for point-buy, as it's a far better system, IMO... But there has to be a limitation.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I prefer to keep it simple:
1. Write down any six positive integers in any order. Those are your ability scores.
So everyone starts with all 18s?
I mean... I'm all for point-buy, as it's a far better system, IMO... But there has to be a limitation.
I've run campaigns where people could literally just pick whatever stats they wanted. Nothing broke.
Despite what certain GMing subcultures I could point to around here would have you believe, players are not a bunch of errant children who can't understand why eating everything in the cookie jar would be bad for them and need their hand slapped away after you turn your back for even a minute. Players who actually want to make a good-at-everything character are extremely rare; as a population, they just want to be good at their thing and are fine with being bad at other things.
The idea that a natural part of a GM's job is to rein in the players is a self-perpetuating myth, as the GM (expecting shenanigans) gets too conservative and overreacts to their own fears, which pushes the players to chafe at the restrictions, which convinces the GM they need to squeeze even tighter.
GMing gets a lot more fun if you (generic "you") unclench a bit and learn to enjoy watching the players running around having fun. That's why you're there, after all.
I use a multitude of ways.
I hate point buy, there is much evidence for this, but would never restrict a player from using it if they really wanted to (they never want to in my experience).
I really like [2d6+6] and [3d6 treat lowest roll as 6]. I have each player roll two sets and between them they can trade entire stat sets if someone else's stat array more or less allows for the characters they wanna play. We do it more as a collective creation of the characters we want to include in the story, then the players decide among themselves who pilots what build.
Collective storytelling has replaced the "MY CHARACTER" stigma that most online forums assume the game to be.
...
I really like [2d6+6] and [3d6 treat lowest roll as 6]....
Droll. I like it.
I prefer to keep it simple:
1. Write down any six positive integers in any order. Those are your ability scores.
So everyone starts with all 18s?
I mean... I'm all for point-buy, as it's a far better system, IMO... But there has to be a limitation.
I've run campaigns where people could literally just pick whatever stats they wanted. Nothing broke.
Despite what certain GMing subcultures I could point to around here would have you believe, players are not a bunch of errant children who can't understand why eating everything in the cookie jar would be bad for them and need their hand slapped away after you turn your back for even a minute. Players who actually want to make a good-at-everything character are extremely rare; as a population, they just want to be good at their thing and are fine with being bad at other things.
The idea that a natural part of a GM's job is to rein in the players is a self-perpetuating myth, as the GM (expecting shenanigans) gets too conservative and overreacts to their own fears, which pushes the players to chafe at the restrictions, which convinces the GM they need to squeeze even tighter.
GMing gets a lot more fun if you (generic "you") unclench a bit and learn to enjoy watching the players running around having fun. That's why you're there, after all.
Oh, don't get me wrong... I'm a very permissive GM. When in doubt, I tend to err on the side of indulgence.
Personally, I lean towards always saying "Yes" unless I really have to say no. If anything, I say most GMs (or at least, most GMs who post around here) worry too much about perceived "cheese" and end up lacking empathy for the players. One eye-rolling case I remember were people saying how game-breaking and unfair would it be to allow a Catfolk character to take Breadth of Experience. Someone actually went as far as to say that the feat is so good, that if it were not restricted to a few races every character would take it.. Apparently, minor bonuses to Knowledge and Profession checks are really freaking powerful!
But I digress...
In any case, I don't mind powerful characters and high point-buy, I just think it takes away from character building to simply have all 18 in all attributes, no matter what class you have. I really like the idea that characters' attributes naturally lead them into certain "careers" where said attributes would be more useful.
I think the point is that people don't actually choose 18 in all attributes. Once you let them do whatever they want, it's easier to realize that more powerful isn't always more fun.
You might have a game where they do go all 18s or close to it. Maybe even a couple, if your players are stubborn, but they'll figure it out. :)
You say "they'll figure it out" as if there was anything bad about having an "All 18" character, and as if assigning lower attributes somehow made the people better players/role-players. I don't think that's even remotely true.
IME, they'll choose "All 18" or something close to that (maybe add a 10 on an useless attribute)... Because why not? And then proceed to play the same characters they had in mind anyway.
It's what I'd do... And what I think literally all of my players* would do . And not one of us would feel even slightly bad or embarrassed for it.
We use pretty high point-buy in some of my games (it's really easy to get two 18s without dumping a single attribute)... And while most of players really enjoy the role-playing aspect of the game, they are smart enough to know they can still roleplay Conan, no matter if the sheet says "Int 10" or "Int 18", so why not add the 18?
*
No one's going to get stuck with the bad rolls.Rather the point.
Set up a donation pool. "Allow" players to donate to you, the GM, in the weeks leading up to the campaign. The amount of money a person donates dictates how much point buy their character starts with (possibly $1 = 1 point, but if your group is wealthy, I suggest skewing the ratio).
Pocket the profits, enjoy.
(*I do not, in any way, actually endorse or encourage this method. Please don't do this.)
25 point buy. Gives you good player characters just shy of too much cheese.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I just think it takes away from character building to simply have all 18 in all attributes, no matter what class you have.
How do you know anyone would even want an all-18s character? In every campaign I've run with free-form stat selection, not a single person has ever picked all 18s, or even remotely close to it. In fact, the only time I ever asked anyone to alter their stat selections was because I wasn't willing to bend over backwards to keep their commoner-esque stat array alive. :/
Or if someone does pick 18 for every stat...
I really like the idea that characters' attributes naturally lead them into certain "careers" where said attributes would be more useful.
...so what? A character with all 18s doesn't conflict with this idea at all. Being marvelously talented will have just as much influence on the direction of your life as being talented in one or two areas. I once rolled a very impressive stat array (not quite all 18s, but still above the curve). And I developed the character in exactly the way you describe: the character's attributes naturally led him into his career.
Nothing about having lots of high stats limits narrative-oriented, personality-driven character development. The only thing that does is lack of player imagination.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...they are smart enough to know they can still roleplay Conan, no matter if the sheet says "Int 10" or "Int 18",
I would assert that if your sheet lists one score and your at-the-table portrayal indicates a wildly different score, then you're not actually "roleplaying".
|
Well - since this thread is fully resurrected now -
I like stat arrays. I like to avoid the randomness of rolling, and I like how it gives less advantage to the SAD classes relative to point-buy.
Second liking stat arrays. As a GM I tend to give 3 arrays, with the more generalized ones being worth more "point buy". Something like:
16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 817, 14, 12, 10, 10, 8
18, 12, 12, 10, 8, 8
Maybe you misread some part of my post, Jiggy. I specifically said having all 18s wouldn't harm anyone's roleplay.
I mean, if I can play the same character with "All 18s" or with lower attribute scores... Why not go for the "All 18s"? It doesn't stop me from building or roleplaying the character I want, so why the hell not?
My only point is that it removes a important piece of decision-making from the game.
...they are smart enough to know they can still roleplay Conan, no matter if the sheet says "Int 10" or "Int 18",I would assert that if your sheet lists one score and your at-the-table portrayal indicates a wildly different score, then you're not actually "roleplaying".
That's debatable... After all, there's nothing saying how your Int score affects your character personality and decisions. That's up to the player.
Droll. I like it....
I really like [2d6+6] and [3d6 treat lowest roll as 6]....
Note that they're not the same. 3d6 treat lowest roll as 6 is actually better.
You're right. I didn't think it through.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer as a GM to use stat arrays. I give what I consider to be a generous, yet middling stat array to reduce levels of optimization and encourage well rounded and MAD classes over SAD classes.
16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11 array modified by race as normal. It means your highest ability is capped at 18, and allows classes which really require several stats to perform their role to have a chance to do so.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Maybe you misread some part of my post, Jiggy. I specifically said having all 18s wouldn't harm anyone's roleplay.
I don't recall suggesting otherwise. Perhaps you misread some part of my post?
I mean, if I can play the same character with "All 18s" or with lower attribute scores... Why not go for the "All 18s"? It doesn't stop me from building or roleplaying the character I want, so why the hell not?
[Answered a couple segments down.]
My only point is that it removes a important piece of decision-making from the game.
No, it doesn't. I explained how the process you described (letting the character's stats naturally "lead" them to a career) works just as well for all 18s as it does for a more typical array (I even included an example). Somehow this gave you the impression that I thought you said all 18s hindered roleplay...?
After all, there's nothing saying how your Int score affects your character personality and decisions. That's up to the player.
Yes, the player gets to decide how a different INT score affects their personality and decisions. But that's very different from deciding whether a different INT score affects their personality and decisions. The way you were talking about your "I can still roleplay the same concept so why not take the 18" dilemma, your post reads like there would be no difference at all. At that point, you can't really call it "roleplaying" anymore. Not everybody has to portray high or low INT scores in the same way, but anybody who doesn't portray any difference at all is not roleplaying.
Which is probably why I've never seen anybody pick excessive stat arrays even when they could.
Not rolling. Other than that point buy and stat arrays are both fine.
No, it doesn't. I explained how the process you described (letting the character's stats naturally "lead" them to a career) works just as well for all 18s as it does for a more typical array (I even included an example). Somehow this gave you the impression that I thought you said all 18s hindered roleplay...?
If the character has equally amazing attributes for at all careers, then the attributes aren't what led him to one career or another... It might have been their tastes, their goals, their personality, their social background, whatever... But it wasn't their attributes. At least, not directly.
After all, there's nothing saying how your Int score affects your character personality and decisions. That's up to the player.Yes, the player gets to decide how a different INT score affects their personality and decisions. But that's very different from deciding whether a different INT score affects their personality and decisions. The way you were talking about your "I can still roleplay the same concept so why not take the 18" dilemma, your post reads like there would be no difference at all. At that point, you can't really call it "roleplaying" anymore. Not everybody has to portray high or low INT scores in the same way, but anybody who doesn't portray any difference at all is not roleplaying.
That depends... If I can decide how each attribute affects my character's personality, I can decide they do so in a manner that ends up with a personality that "happens" to be the one I want to roleplay for that character.
And what If I decide that +1 to Cha-based skills isn't a significant enough difference to merit a change to my character's personality? Do all of your character suffer a noticeable and significant change in personality every time they hit 8th level or buy a Headband of <whatever>?
What if I decide that the extra skill point, despite coming mechanically from Int, is actually just a representation of my Fighter's outdoorsy training, and that's why he gets to assign ranks to Acrobatics, Climb, Ride and Swim?
If I can decide exactly how an attribute score affects my character's personality (and I can), all personality changes and non-changes are just as valid.
Besides... Even if you do ignore your attributes when deciding to roleplay, that doesn't mean you're not roleplaying, only that you're not taking that one aspect of your character's sheet in consideration when deciding how to roleplay... Now, maybe you're a better role-player than me, but IME, when deciding their character's story and personality, most players don't usually take in consideration every single thing written in their sheets, every single feat and every single +1 written down.
It's possible to do something without taking all possible variables into consideration.
I usually just generate stat arrays before the game.
After a person or two shows up I'll start rolling them up, usually 5D6 and drop the 2 lowest. I usually generate 4 arrays and they can arrange the scores how they want, even adjust stats lower if they want.
This does generate very powerful PCs, but with gestalt and some 3PP, I don't really care how powerful they are. I still create the challenges, and they are not disappointed.
The method we currently use, take cards (12 or 18 cards, adding up to whatever power level the DM wants).
1- randomly divide cards between 6 stats, in order
2- add up each stat
3- add 1 to a stat and 4 (max 18)to another stat
3.5(optional) switch any 2 stats
4- adjust for race
The 1 is to make an odd stat even.
The 4 can make a moderate stat good (or a poor stat moderate), if you really want to play a specific class/concept.
It is fair (everyone gets the same overall total) but organic (random distribution).
OR
Online I give stat arrays of about 20 point buy value.
Here are some previous threads to look at;
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2na5r?PCs-using-different-ability-score-generat ion#30
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2nj6v?How-do-you-roll-stats-for-new-characters# 8
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pj2l?Character-Generation-Methods#19
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pr5y?Suggestions-for-alternative-attribute-gen eration#10
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qaqa?roll-or-points-buy-which-is-better#38
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2r46q&page=2?Imbalance-Via-Rolls#73
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ri4f&page=2?Generating-Stats-tricks-and-pr eferences#59
My favorite method is to allow the players to gain character points by bribing the GM.
However, the actual method I use is the 25pt buy.
Mine have not figured out that I accept bribes as well. One day...
I'm also in the 25 point buy camp, though the last few points are usually spent somewhere you don't really care about. My guys (and 1 gal) are good enough that they don't min/max too bad. In fact, my buddy that used to always GM has been creating PCs with a lot of 14s lately.
Oh, and back in the day, I LOVED 3d6, live with it. Not sure what I was thinking!
Point buy for me, I refuse to roll dice for stats. In 20+ years of gaming, I have yet to see a campaign where rolling for stats didn't cause problems. Someone will end up rolling horribly and either spend the whole campaign whining, or will just suicide their character. Also, someone will roll incredibly well and dominate the game. It's all one big charlie foxtrot.
Point buy is more fair, and everyone will end up on reasonably equal footing.
2d6+6 lowest roll is an 8, max roll is 18, and average is 13. This is a window I like.
Or 20 pt buy.
