|
It's often said that wisdom is found in the good book. For me that statement is true, and the book is the 1e AD&D DMG by the father of all we play today Gygax.
I don't like the point buy system, to me it makes the game to inorganic, another step away from the Gygaxian Naturalism that I hold dear to my role-playing endeavors.
So what about using the guidelines for NPC generation and dice rolling.
My plan:
3d6 x 6 for each stat in order choose the best, then racial modifiers, and then (from the DMG);
Cleric +2 WIS
Fighter/Ranger/Paladin +2 STR, +1 CON (Ranger gets minimum 12 WIS, and the Paladin a minimum 17 CHA - the stat rolled is lower)
Wizard +2 INT, +1 DEX
Rogue +2 DEX, +1 CON
Other classes will need a little work to slot in, but I guess +2 CHA for the Sorcerer? Or perhaps only the four core classes about get this bonus?
Work in progress,
S.
It's often said that wisdom is found in the good book. For me that statement is true, and the book is the 1e AD&D DMG by the father of all we play today Gygax.
I don't like the point buy system, to me it makes the game to inorganic, another step away from the Gygaxian Naturalism that I hold dear to my role-playing endeavors.
So what about using the guidelines for NPC generation and dice rolling.
My plan:
3d6 x 6 for each stat in order choose the best, then racial modifiers, and then (from the DMG);
Cleric +2 WIS
Fighter/Ranger/Paladin +2 STR, +1 CON (Ranger gets minimum 12 WIS, and the Paladin a minimum 17 CHA - the stat rolled is lower)
Wizard +2 INT, +1 DEX
Rogue +2 DEX, +1 CONOther classes will need a little work to slot in, but I guess +2 CHA for the Sorcerer? Or perhaps only the four core classes about get this bonus?
Work in progress,
S.
If you are asking for advice there are threads on the issue, and as for taking stats in the order rolled, that means the stats choose the class, along with many other points I am too lazy to bring up.
Edit: I am saying you don't have to go through the debating that will occur if you just want some points on the issue. Tone of voice is hard to convey online. I was not trying to be rude.
|
|
Edit: I am saying you don't have to go through the debating that will occur if you just want some points on the issue. Tone of voice is hard to convey online. I was not trying to be rude.
I took no implied rudeness. Your other posts show rudeness isn't really your style.
I was looking for comments regarding the other classes not covered and how perhaps I would handle bonuses to stats.
Sorry what wasn't clear was I was referring to Method III, that is;
STR 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
INT 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
WIS 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
DEX 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
CON 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
CHA 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
not use one roll of 3d6 in order for each stats as I wrongly implied. Sorry I wasn't clearer on that fact.
Not looking for a huge pros vs cons discussion, looking to develop this as the method I will use. If you disagree completely this approach please move on from this thread, negative comments will be less than helpful. If you have something to add or suggest modifications to help polish the method I look forward to your post.
S.
For NPC's it seems fine.. but.
To me, there was really one supreme "advantage" to rolling over point buy, and really the one reason that I still prefer it. its true that PB gives you control.. and its really that control that I think has done some harm to the game.
In the past if you rolled a 3, 4, 6 or whatever.. then you were stuck with it. You got a pat on the back OOC from a comrade and you.. went with it. You played the wizard with the 6 wisdom or the fighter with the 6 dexterity despite the hindrance and you did the best you could with what you had.
The "low score" was almost a badge of honor. "wow you played with that? thats rough!".
with PB though a "low score" isn't a badge of anything except a desire to increase some other score. It isn't "tough luck" or a raw deal, it isn't "well I got it so I'm stuck with it". its a specific decision to hose your character in some aspect (usually charisma, but not always) for the purpose of deriving some mechanical benefit in some other area.
That is the one thing that I miss from Rolling stats, and the thing that I think has actually done a detriment to the game. People only ever have low stats now in order to artificially boost some other mechanical aspect rather than as a true measure of the character. "Well, I got a 5 so I played a 5" is now "well yeah 5 sucks, but dang that sure let me boost my strength!".
Now I do not mean this as a "rolling is better than PB" post as both really do have a good place in the game.. but that having been said- the only "bad" thing I see about your proposed system is that it completely destroys any chance to actually get a low score. You talk about naturalism but give each character 6 sets of rolls. That practically guarantees that you will end up without a crappy score- or at least that if you do, you'll most likely end up with some other high ones to balance it out. Why are you rolling? it seems like you want "high scores" but just want to avoid point buy. You are actually going to end up with either very high scores.. which to me at least, voids the reason to roll them up in the first place.
Just my thoughts.
-S
Edit: I am saying you don't have to go through the debating that will occur if you just want some points on the issue. Tone of voice is hard to convey online. I was not trying to be rude.STR 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
INT 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
WIS 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
DEX 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
CON 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
CHA 3d6 x 6 (choose best)
I completely misunderstood. One of my DM's did a similar thing once. We had the equivalent of over 40 point buy on average if you went by the 3.5 point buy. I think the guy with the best rolls had 18,18,18,17,16,14.
It you want really powerful characters that will work. If you want more normal characters then the 6+2d6 is pretty good.
Super Stats(multiple 18's and 17's) are not guaranteed of course, but they are very likely.
|
|
Why are you rolling? it seems like you want "high scores" but just want to avoid point buy.
The method is a standard method from the 1e DMG, what I have added is the stat bonuses. High but variable is my view, and what I am after. The 1e PHB states PC's should have 2 scores of 15+, so I'm looking for that outcome back not control the actual scores.
Perhaps drop the class modifier and just stick with the original rolling method?
The group will only be 3 players, so I'm trying to give them a little leg up.
Thanks for the comments,
S.
3d6 x 6 for every stat?
That will be a lot (A LOT) of rolling and there is some potencial for high stats overall.
I recommend using many sets of different colour and size of dice and a bucket to roll the character at once ;)
Or what about 4d6 best 3 place where you like, then race/class bonuses? Less silly sounding?
I just leveled the monsters down or reduced the number of monsters. The reason is that action economy(number of actions available) can't really be substituted for with raw power.
I am assuming you want the players to be stronger than normal, but rolling does not guarantee that. I am also assuming you are anti-point buy if you have not mentioned it.
I think you should come up with the worse scores you want the players to have(before racial modifiers), and we can try to go from there.
I am also assuming you are anti-point buy if you have not mentioned it.Yep, not a big point buy fan. The characters feel less, born and more 'made' to me. So I am looking for a rolling method that allows the players to feel they have a 'viable class'.
S.
Are you running a premade or a homebrew? If it is a homebrew you can work the adventure around the weaknesses of the group. That way they can have 3 normal characters.
With PB not being an option my I can can suggest 2d6+6. Reroll seven times and take the best six. Reroll the one once.
reroll-->
Oh well.
15,17,11,13,15,15
That is the issue with rolling stats. I think I did pretty well, but I could have done worse. You have to take the good with the bad.
You could also just assign them a stat array such as 16,14,12,12,10,9<--Random numbers I made up, not intended for actual use.
That gets rid of point buy, and makes sure you don't have a super character playing with the Mcgimpy.
I've tried point-buy in the past, but as the OP said I ended up dissatisfied with it.
In my recent campaign, I've experimented with a "grid" generation system. What this means, basically, is rolling 4d6, reroll 1's, drop the lowest, and arranged in rows and columns of 6 until you've made a total of 36 rolls. The player can then pick any row, any column, or one of the six-roll diagonals (though without wrapping around the end). On average, this typically allows the player at least one 18.
It tends towards generating some notably high scores on average. I've actually been considering adjusting it downwards slightly, for future campaigns -- 4d6, drop the lowest but don't reroll 1's, or something similar. That way the players might just have to learn to live with a 5 in an ability score. *grin*
Some of my old groups used to use a points plus system. adapting it to the current PF systems would probably be something like 1d4+18 points (assuming a 20 point buy as average) allowing for some variation between characters without any major disparity between players
.
Prefer the 2d6+6 method six times, then assign them to the ability scores. Above average ability scores, but still a factor of randomness.
|
|
In my newest game I instituted the following method of ability score generation:
Roll 2d6+6 six times to get a fixed array (that is, your first roll is your STR, second is your DEX, etc).
Generate three such arrays, discarding and rerolling any that have a total modifier bonus of +3 or lower, or if the highest score is a 13 or less.
Choose one of the three arrays for your character.
Having created three PCs this way so far, it seems to work pretty well. On average you'll end up with one shoddy array, one average to mediocre array, and one array that's pretty good. A player should have at least two character ideas in mind when they try this method - if you have your heart set on a wizard, and the highest INT that you roll is a 11, well, you're kind of screwed.
This method can make for some interesting choices. One of my players hates stupid characters, so always puts at least an 11 or 12 into his INT even if he's playing a halforc barbarian. However, this time around, he rolled a set of stats that would be perfect for a scout/rogue type character (which he likes), but the INT was a 9. The good numbers around the 9 convinced him to try playing a type of character that he otherwise wouldn't. The same goes for the player's wife - she landed an array with a 18 WIS and a 17 CHA, and decided she wanted to get good use out of those numbers by playing a caster, something she never does.
|
|
Example:
Abilities - STR, DEX, CON, INT, WIS, CHA
Array #1:
10, 14, 13, 15, 11, 15
Array #2:
11, 18, 13, 9, 15, 11
Array #3:
8, 14, 9, 11, 14, 15
So, in this example, #3 is obviously the runt of the litter, just barely missing the margin to reroll (also, the only things it does well, the other arrays do better). #1 and #2 are both pretty decent arrays. #2 is attractive because of the 18 DEX, allowing for a nice archer or rogue build (or possibly a cleric). #1 is more rounded, and is your best bet if you'd like a wizard, sorcerer, or bard. Unfortunately, these three didn't yield a decent fighter or barbarian array - the highest STR is 11 and the highest CON is 13. These can be boosted with racial adjustments, but you're still S.O.L. if you wanted a decent melee build, which is exactly why I suggest not making up your mind until you see what the dice give you.
If you disagree completely this approach please move on from this thread, negative comments will be less than helpful.
What if that's what people think? You did ask for comments.
Personally, I don't like these pretend luck methods. Either go ahead and have truly "organic" characters, or admit that you don't want luck in your character generation and use purchase.
All this "Roll umpteen times so the chances for overpowered stats are greatly increased while underpowered stats are greatly decreased" is neither here nor there.
I go with purchase (usually 25 point epic purchase, since I have no problems with powerful characters). It may not be "organic" (whatever that means), but it does allow people to play the character they like and still make sure the playing field is level. If I want to play a character with a weakness, I create him with a weakness.
If the players really wanted to dare the Lady during character creation by using some rolling method, I'd do something like this:
Roll six times. Use 4d6 drop lowest. Maybe 2d6+6, or even 3d6+6 drop lowest (so it's the best two out of three dice plus 6).
These six numbers are your campaign attributes. You can arrange and rearrange them as you want for each character you might create in that campaign, but you don't get to roll again, ever. Not if your character dies. Not if you manage to roll crap. Not if you hold your breath.
And not if someone else has rolled so much better than you. Even if that someone happens to be the group's power gamer and you fear your character will be insignificant compared to his. Not if the stats you got don't work with the character concept you have hoped to play.
The issue with these methods is this: The GM might want to have more "organic" characters, but do the players want this? Are they okay with a system that partially dictates what their character will be like? Are they okay with the possibility of not being able to play what they hoped to play? Are they okay with the possibility that their character will simply suck, that others roll that much better than themselves?
And if it's the player asking for this: Does he really want a more "organic" feel to their characters? If so, they should have no problem with luck being really involved, without all these safeguards.
But I have seen this several times: Players often don't want "organic" characters. They couldn't care less. What they want is really powerful characters, stuff that would not be possible even with epic purchase. So they ask for a dice rolling method. But not one geared towards "organic" characters. Instead, they ask for one where the chances of getting characters with really powerful attributes is a lot better than with the best purchase methods, but the chances of ending up with something bad (or even something that is noticeably worse than those purchase methods) is nearly zero, what with several rolls, and re-rolling rules, and the chance to... have their character meet with an unfortunate accident so they can roll again for the next one.
Now, for the method outlined above (3d6 x6 for each attribute, in order, plus class bonuses), I just went and rolled, and came up with this:
Str 15
Dex 12
Con 14
Int 17
Wis 14
Cha 17
Very "organic", and I use the "munchkin's wet dream" meaning of the word.
These stats equal a 50 point buy (3.5) or 45 point purchase (pathfinder). Add in those class mods (let's say I want to be a wizard), and I get
Str 15
Dex 13
Con 14
Int 19
Wis 14
Cha 17
Yes, these are the results of the rolling method, not with racial modifiers. They equal DOES NOT COMPUTE in both systems, since nobody is supposed to be able to start with 19 in a stat. Let's say it costs the same as an 18 (maybe because that's the upper limit you can have), and we still have 54 point buy/ 50 purchase.
Yes, you heard that right: These stats are good enough for TWO epic pathfinder characters.
And the funny thing is? I originally wanted to play a rogue, but playing a rogue with a mere 14 in dex (maybe 16 after racial bonus) sounded wrong. The guy would be a laughingstock.
So I use the purchase method. I usually grant 25 points - overpowered, I'm sure, but in fact that wizard would have been a lot less god-like.
The thing about characters feeling like they were made is this: They were, in fact, made. That's because some roleplayers sat down and made them.
Does that lead to characters that are invariably good at the things they're supposed to be good at? Oh yes. And that's good. We're talking about heroes - those guys are usually good at what they do. And they're humans, or at least humanoids, and humanoids tend to gravitate towards jobs they're good at.
The reason behind all those smart but weak wizards is not just because players decided to make them so. The reason behind this is that there were a lot of smart weaklings who thought "If I became a wizard, I bet I could be successful, getting some use out of my big brain, and my weak muscles would not hold me back in the least! To hell with that warrior brute career. It might sound fun when I watch them in the gladiator pits, but I doubt I could even lift those big hammers and axes and swords!"
And many of those who didn't abandon adventuring careers they sucked at never returned from their first dungeon (the dreaded Cellar of the Slightly-Lager-Than-Normal Rats!).
Very "organic", and I use the "munchkin's wet dream" meaning of the word.
We've actually been using a similar but even better rolling system in the campaign I've been playing in (5d6 drop two, rolled five or six times (I forget...) for each stat and pick the best). I like it a lot and don't think it has turned out as a munchkin's wet dream.* It has led to more of a heroic feel when the fighter isn't a slobbering man-child who happens to have 18 Str and like killing things, he has good Charisma and Int and such and can contribute out of combat.
*there are a lot of other house rules as well which also significantly alter balance
I go with purchase (usually 25 point epic purchase, since I have no problems with powerful characters). It may not be "organic" (whatever that means), but it does allow people to play the character they like and still make sure the playing field is level. If I want to play a character with a weakness, I create him with a weakness.
If the players really wanted to dare the Lady during character creation by using some rolling method, I'd do something like this:
Roll six times. Use 4d6 drop lowest. Maybe 2d6+6, or even 3d6+6 drop lowest (so it's the best two out of three dice plus 6).
Interesting. I may well adapt that method for my next campaign; I've noticed that the grid method I described earlier does tend to generate some overpowered characters. (Enough so that I usually design encounters as though they were for APL+1.)
Then again, my players also seem to gripe when I do anything remotely effective against them, like the time I hit the arcane caster with a feeblemind halfway through the Champions Games in Age of Worms, so possibly the problem is that I just need to fairly kill off characters more often and have them get used to character mortality. ; )
|
|
If you disagree completely this approach please move on from this thread, negative comments will be less than helpful.What if that's what people think? You did ask for comments.
An attempt to head off any PB vs Rolling arguments. What I meant was if all you have to add is, Rolling sucks and PB is for the cool kids, then it wasn't going to help me refine a method that has an organic feel but doesn't have a standard 3d6 average 9-12 bell curve. The multiple rolls allow low extremes to fall of the radar, yet unless you roll many, many times an 18 should be still uncommon with 3d6, but 13+ being usual.
Thanks to the posters, I'm thinking that perhaps 6+2d6 place where you like and then add race/class bonuses should give reasonably 'heroic' characters.
Still open to suggestions,
S.
|
Our group plays with the 4d6 drop the lowest and place where you like. The one tweak we have is to reroll all ones. This can lead to pretty good stats, with the possibility of some low ones in there still. This is my preferred method. I have started characters with two 18s using this method, but I have also had a character with a 7, 8 and 9 in his starting array (sorry, went with the stereotype and played a big dumb fighter, who is very gullible and trusting, has lead to some hilarious moments).
My 2c
(5d6 drop two, rolled five or six times (I forget...) for each stat and pick the best)
I have a suggestion: Go ahead and use 18d1. Or 80 points Beyond-Godlike Purchase. Same end result, but at least the players don't have to roll for six hours straight when they create a character. Or award the advanced template to everybody and use Epic Purchase (and forbid everyone from buying back points by lowering stats below 10)
Do you pay them for the time they piss away rolling dice, writing down a number and repeating ultra nauseum?
I can understand why some people have an aesthetic problem with fighters that aren't good in the stuff they don't need to be good at, but what's the point of a system where nobody has flaws? At all? All characters are awesome in everything. That's just as boring.
No, seriously: Since this was way too much rolling dice for me, I hacked everything into excel, let him do all the randomising, compile the rolls, give you the array in one place, complete with a summarised purchase point cost.
It seems that you're positively cursed with bad luck if you get any stat below 14, or a total value of less than 60. One array had two 17! The rest, of course, were 18s. That's 94 points, almost enough for 5 Pathfinder Society characters.
Of course, this is ideal for triple-class-gestalt characters... :P
You could play a decent monk/bard with such a rolling method, and we all know that "being able to play a decent monk/bard" is THE surefire way to detect overpowered character generation systems. It's like a miner's canary. ;)
One thing maybe worth checking out is, give players points and let them buy any number of stats 12 or higher and then roll the rest. Lets everyone get the stats they absolutely "need" and gives some of the organic to the rest of the stats.
Our group plays with the 4d6 drop the lowest and place where you like. The one tweak we have is to reroll all ones. This can lead to pretty good stats, with the possibility of some low ones in there still. This is my preferred method. I have started characters with two 18s using this method, but I have also had a character with a 7, 8 and 9 in his starting array (sorry, went with the stereotype and played a big dumb fighter, who is very gullible and trusting, has lead to some hilarious moments).
My 2c
My group used to use that method. Someone always wound up with stat blocks that look a lot like the following.
17
17
16
18
17
18
I play with point buy now because it guarantees balance among the characters but I do miss the possiblity of a terrible stat.
I really want to do a game some time where everyone just does it the old D&D way and roll 3d6 once for each stat and then play with it. I think the characters would probably die but I also think it could be a lot of fun trying to play that.
str 9
dex 13
con 11
int 11
wis 10
cha 9
A rogue possibly.
or
str 12
dex 11
con 5
int 9
wis 7
cha 12
A bard or sorceror maybe.
Could make for some very interesting choices and force people to really think about the actions they take.
I guess my main beef with the point-buy is that I can't have a 3 in a stat. There have been times where I just wanted to make a character with a 3int and a high wisdom because I think it would be fun to try to play it. Would make an interesting Druid. That's not an option with point buy though.
|
|
Lots of stuff.
I get what you mean, and in part is why I started this thread. The ideas were doing my head in. I was getting to the stage of "roll 4d6 + 1d4, taking the modulus of that result divided by the rate a goat can eat grass, while facing SSW" uuuurrrggggghh.
Another simpler method can to mind.
Prime Stat: d6 ==> 1-3 = 16, 4-5 = 17, 6 = 18
Secondary Stat: d8 ==> 1-5 = 16, 6-7 = 17, 8 = 18
Other Stat: 4d6, drop lowest
You choose what your Primary and Secondary Stats are.
Well? Comments please.
S.
Lots of stuff.I get what you mean, and in part is why I started this thread. The ideas were doing my head in. I was getting to the stage of "roll 4d6 + 1d4, taking the modulus of that result divided by the rate a goat can eat grass, while facing SSW" uuuurrrggggghh.
Another simpler method can to mind.
Prime Stat: d6 ==> 1-3 = 16, 4-5 = 17, 6 = 18
Secondary Stat: d8 ==> 1-5 = 16, 6-7 = 17, 8 = 18
Other Stat: 4d6, drop lowestYou choose what your Primary and Secondary Stats are.
Well? Comments please.
S.
This will still create powerful characters as you will always have at least two 16s. If I wanted to make a gnome sorcerer it would have at least 18 charisma and 18 con is that really balanced.
Lets see how this sorcerer would turn out
.
edit messed up dice tags.
Lots of stuff.I get what you mean, and in part is why I started this thread. The ideas were doing my head in. I was getting to the stage of "roll 4d6 + 1d4, taking the modulus of that result divided by the rate a goat can eat grass, while facing SSW" uuuurrrggggghh.
Another simpler method can to mind.
Prime Stat: d6 ==> 1-3 = 16, 4-5 = 17, 6 = 18
Secondary Stat: d8 ==> 1-5 = 16, 6-7 = 17, 8 = 18
Other Stat: 4d6, drop lowestYou choose what your Primary and Secondary Stats are.
Well? Comments please.
S.
I'm a fighter...
Prime Stat: Strength
Secondary Stat: Dexterity
CON
WIS
INT
CHA
Ah, 4d6 drop lowest.
STR 17
DEX 16
CON 9
WIS 17
INT 17
CHA 18
I guess I'm putting my racial +2 into Con.
Looks interesting. I think it's cool.
Lots of stuff.I get what you mean, and in part is why I started this thread. The ideas were doing my head in. I was getting to the stage of "roll 4d6 + 1d4, taking the modulus of that result divided by the rate a goat can eat grass, while facing SSW" uuuurrrggggghh.
Another simpler method can to mind.
Prime Stat: d6 ==> 1-3 = 16, 4-5 = 17, 6 = 18
Secondary Stat: d8 ==> 1-5 = 16, 6-7 = 17, 8 = 18
Other Stat: 4d6, drop lowestYou choose what your Primary and Secondary Stats are.
Well? Comments please.
S.
I kind of like it.
It allows your characters to still be good at what they do while at the same time giving the chance of really sucking at other things. IMO a bad stat creates an interesting RP opportunity.I think I might go with the d8 for both the prime and secondary but I think it basically works.