I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
One thing I've noticed on this message board a lot is the general assumption of point buy. Now, for me, the way my group has always played, even in 4E, which is almost completely set up for point buying, is to do some sort of stat rolling. Is point-buy just assumed for a standardized method's sake, or is this the way that people play in their games?
I think that most of the time point buy is just used for examples because it gives you dependable numbers.
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach. I like the idea that I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice-gods, and that would affect the way I play my character. Otherwise, it seems it's just a lesson in optimization, how to budget your abilities to get the most bang for your buck.
No player is happy about rolling under average. It's not fun.
|
I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
Your array gives an edge to MADs (eg Monk) and shafts SADs (Wiz, Sorc).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oooh, now I know what it's like to have a long post eaten...
Anyway,
I think determining the long-term 'party worth' of a PC in the first 10 minutes is inferior. The power levels should be comparable, IMO, or at least based on player skills more than one spurt of chance. (I HATE rolling h.p.)
While fun, I've found rolling characters to cause such strong deviations in PC power that fun gets imbalanced too.
It's almost 'bad' to roll 'well enough' when somebody who rolled 'bad' then rerolls an awesome PC.
I like rolling in concept, but I've seen too much player anguish, both before and after rolling.
If a character is developed with a solid RPing concept, the cookie-cutter nature of Point Buy will be overshadowed.
Also, PF's PB system seems to have less cookie-cutting than 3.x (don't know why), and I've found many people with abnormal PB PCs, so while I'm against cookie-cutting in concept, I don't see that much of it.
Plus PB is needed on the boards for baselines in discussions, and in organized play to counter cheating.
So if I had to choose, it'd definitely be Point-Buy to Rolling.
But there's a third way too: Shuffling
The basic method is to take 24 cards, Ace-6, from a standard deck. Shuffle into six piles of four, drop lowest, and place where desired.
It's random, but not too random.
It too has some flaws, so I use a more complex method which has grown on my players. Not that it doesn't have flaws, but it's fun, organic, and stays balanced.
Separate the red and black cards.
Shuffle the black into 6 piles of two, Strength through Charisma.
Repeat with red.
Choose one color to stay where it is. The other pairs may be moved to different stats.
(Essentially, one row represents your natural gifts, the other represents where you put your efforts.)
Sample deal:
Str Dex Con Int Wis Cha
2,3 5,6 2,5 1,4 3,6 1,4 RED
2,3 1,4 2,6 4,5 3,6 1,5 BLACK
As you can see, Clerics and Archers have it well, but since that 6,5 can move if you choose Red to move, only Str (w/ '3' as highest) is hurting. And if a player comes in with a concept I let them reshuffle (but then they have to keep the second shuffle).
Pre-racial bonus maximums:
Str 14 (move Reds, put 5,6 on Black's '2,3' Str, drop '2')
Dex 17 (move Blacks)
Con 17 (move Reds)
Int 16 (move Reds, but dropping '4') or 15 (drop '3')
Wis 17 (move Reds)
Cha 16 (move Reds)
So all but Str can be 18+ w/ race, quite playable.
And Conan could always reshuffle.
Even a MAD character like a melee Paladin could be (pre bonus):
Str 14 Dex 11 Con 12 Int 13 Wis 12 Cha 14
or Monk
Str 12 Dex 17 Con 14 Int 9 Wis 14 Cha 9
(traditional Monk)
or
Str 14 Dex 13 Con 12 Int 13 Wis 14 Cha 10
(my own preference for Str shining through, would go Dwarf)
I've had dozens of PCs made under this system, and with no SAD character screwed in their main stat. (Crossing fingers that continues)
I'd suggest shuffling up a few PCs before judging. I find the randomness aids concept generation, rather than hinders. Most of my players were stunned or confused, but came to prefer it. They even look forward to shuffling, with little fear beforehand and little regret afterward.
As for arrays, I can't see how they wouldn't favor one type of build over another unless multiple arrays were available to choose from.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was at my friendly local gaming shop recently thinking about picking up New RPG System. I flipped through the character creation an realized there was no point buy option. I set the book down and walked away slowly.
God forbid you put in 3 minutes to figure out an appropriate point buy system for the game.
The campaign I'm currently in, the GM didn't say how to generate ability scores. I assumed 4d6-drop-lowest, which is what I use when I GM. I have no idea what method the other players in this game used to generate their ability scores.
My current GM ran a horror one-shot for Halloween and had us generate characters specifically for it because his plan was to have it be very difficult/probably end badly. He had to cut that short though (because his sister got a DUI and he had to go get her out of jail) so all our characters survived. He's returning to the regular campaign next session, but I've got his permission to continue that alternate campaign if/when he's unavailable for a session of the regular game. Since the players already generated characters, I don't know what method they used.
|
Your array gives an edge to MADs (eg Monk) and shafts SADs (Wiz, Sorc).I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
Shaft casters (that everyone says are the best) to help martial (that everyone gripes are pathetic) ? What is wrong with this picture? why would the reverse be good?
|
|
Shaft casters (that everyone says are the best) to help martial (that everyone gripes are pathetic) ? What is wrong with this picture? why would the reverse be good?Your array gives an edge to MADs (eg Monk) and shafts SADs (Wiz, Sorc).I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
Manipulating ability score allocation is NOT a good fix for any class balance issue. It's a good way of telling the player "you know, class A and B benefit from this array far more than class C winkwinknudgenudge".
|
|
I would argue that it's not exactly kind to Monks either. Not a single 16 in sight. What would you do with that array for a Monk anyway? 17 (racial) Strength/Wis, 15 strength/wis, 14 con, 13 dex/int, 12 dex/int, cha?Your array gives an edge to MADs (eg Monk) and shafts SADs (Wiz, Sorc).I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
Wizard with this array: "*shrug*, no 18 in casting stat, oh well"
Monk with this array: "JOY!"See the difference?
|
|
Manipulating ability score allocation is NOT a good fix for any class balance issue. It's a good way of telling the player "you know, class A and B benefit from this array far more than class C winkwinknudgenudge".Shaft casters (that everyone says are the best) to help martial (that everyone gripes are pathetic) ? What is wrong with this picture? why would the reverse be good?Your array gives an edge to MADs (eg Monk) and shafts SADs (Wiz, Sorc).I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
As opposed to single stat only characters are the only effective choice with a low point buy wink wink?
|
|
As opposed to single stat only characters are the only effective choice with a low point buy wink wink?Manipulating ability score allocation is NOT a good fix for any class balance issue. It's a good way of telling the player "you know, class A and B benefit from this array far more than class C winkwinknudgenudge".Shaft casters (that everyone says are the best) to help martial (that everyone gripes are pathetic) ? What is wrong with this picture? why would the reverse be good?Your array gives an edge to MADs (eg Monk) and shafts SADs (Wiz, Sorc).I have looked at previous discussions about stat generation and it always seems to come down to a choice between rolling or point buy. Is there a reason that no one likes to use arrays?
In a game I'm getting ready to start, I'm planning on giving the players a 15, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10 array before racial modifiers. My hope is to get them to make characters that are good at what they do, but that are also pretty versatile.
Has anyone else used a method like this before? If so, does it create problems for any particular type of character or player?
I don't use point buy *shrugs* :)
The card method I have suggested before uses twelve cards. To be brief: 4-9 twice. Randomly make pairs. Assign them to stats. Everyone gets the same (linear) total but different arrays.
I know players who prefer rolling stats and I also know those who prefer the point-buy system. The former group often said that point-buy is "boring" and they don't really even care about optimization for the most part (one of these guys multi-classed a Wizard/Rogue/Fighter just because he COULD, and his character IS AN ELF). When my DM in another game said we had to use point-buy, I didn't complain even though I would have liked rolling my stats. My character is a Wizard, and my friend played a Paladin. She wasn't worried about MAD, and she was more on the roleplay side of gaming anyway.
I know players who prefer rolling stats and I also know those who prefer the point-buy system. The former group often said that point-buy is "boring" and they don't really even care about optimization for the most part (one of these guys multi-classed a Wizard/Rogue/Fighter just because he COULD, and his character IS AN ELF). When my DM in another game said we had to use point-buy, I didn't complain even though I would have liked rolling my stats. My character is a Wizard, and my friend played a Paladin. She wasn't worried about MAD, and she was more on the roleplay side of gaming anyway.
You could've rolled your stats. As long as the total was equal to or less than the DM's point-buy, play it.
One thing I really don't like about rolling stats:
I usually end up with something like 16,15,13,13,11,11 or so... equivalent of 25 point buy right? Not bad?
But notice somthing? Most of them are odd numbers, assuming the 16 goes into my primary stat, that's basicly identical to 16,14,12,12,10,10. Or in other words 19 point-buy. Far less awesome suddenly. It just feels like so many wasted points that's all.
yes I know there are some things that require a 13 in str or int or something, and you could raise it with the 4th level increase but lets face it that one would go into our primary stat most likely.
I usually end up with something like 16,15,13,13,11,11 or so... equivalent of 25 point buy right? Not bad?
But notice somthing? Most of them are odd numbers, assuming the 16 goes into my primary stat, that's basicly identical to 16,14,12,12,10,10. Or in other words 19 point-buy. Far less awesome suddenly. It just feels like so many wasted points that's all.yes I know there are some things that require a 13 in str or int or something, and you could raise it with the 4th level increase but lets face it that one would go into our primary stat most likely.
You've just expressed one of the main reasons I prefer rolling stats. You'd have taken a really good array for a MAD character, particularly with little stat bumps at 4th and 8th levels, and cranked it into a more heavily maxed array for a SAD character.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I insist on organic rolling: 3d6 for each stat, in order: Strength, Dex, etc.
And the first class level must be commoner.
Okay, now THAT sounds like fun!
In general I like point buy because it fosters creativity - I can make whoever I want: my intelligent fighter, my "action man" rogue, my swashbuckling druid...
On the other hand, I like the feel of dice leaving my hand, and I could accept stat rolling purely based on the sensation of rolling handfuls of d6s.
Yes, really.
Answer to that: No.
We almost always play with standard point buy, which is rather low compared to what most people use for PB. Characters usually have one 15 or at the very most 16, with two 14s as the highest stats being quite common. That's what the game was designed for, and it works just fine.
My problem with "learn to make the most with the stats you are given" is that it's another thing that nudges the game into the roll-play corner. The numbers are the challenge and you use numbers to overcome it.
It also makes you end up with a compromise character that is simply the best you can make with it, while instead it would be no problem at all for everyone to make the characters they want.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
15 14 13 12 10 8. You can't play a focussed wizard with that. As a wizard, it makes sense to have a really decent int score, since so much of the class's abilities depend on it.I'm assuming the arrays do not include racial modifiers. If you're putting your +2 in Int, I would say that a 17 Int is a perfectly functional starting score for a 1st level wizard.
Agreed. If your main stat can be 18 by level 4, I don't see a problem.
As regards the OP--it's not that there's no love for stat rolling (a lot of people do love it), but you're not going to see it on the boards in build discussions because people want a standardized way to assess what a given class can do with an easily determined method of figuring out their stats.
So point buy is going to be discussed in most theorycraft threads.
Everything else is up to personal interpretation and preference, and every gamer feels differently about it. What it comes down to is what your GM asks for. Some will want 15 point buy, some let you roll 6d6 and keep the best 3.
Throughout the course of a campaign your likely to roll a d20 enough to average out to a good 10.5 with some long sting of numbers past the 5.
Even in the course of a single game you will have rolled the d20 for attacks more times then you roll 3d6 for stats.
It is quite possible that you roll three times as many d20s as 3d6s you rolled for stats.
Your stat rolls and your HP rolls shouldn't be the most important rolls in the game.
You can always use strategy or wits to help your d20 rolls.
You can try to flank.
You can be aid another.
You can gather information about the challenge.
Sure you can effect your stats later with magic and gaining levels but you only get to roll your stats the one time.
If you get below average 50%
And another player gets above average 50%
Your not going to be happy with your character.
Averages
10.500 classic
12.250 Standard
13.000 Heroic
Point buy solved this problem for me and my players. I don't have to hear them wine when they roll bad and I don't have to worry about players being jealous of another players awesome stats.
Another problem with rolled states is that even good people are tempted to cheat(Especially if there first rolls weren't so good.) and I don't want to have to loom over them during character creation because usually I'm helping another (perhaps new) player.
For me it's just about having an even footing.
I used stat rolling up to about a year ago, but I feel like point buy is better because everyone in the party has the same numbers to work with.
If you add enough caveats and rerolls to dice stating, it's not even really 'rolling' for stats at that point anyway, it's just gaming the system to get above average stats you couldn't get with a normal point buy. Just increase the point buy in that case.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I don't want to have to loom over them during character creation because usually I'm helping another (perhaps new) player.
This is a good point - a GM should always be present for stat rolling, which means the GM has to either call a session just for creation or meet with each player (or roll for them and send them their stats).
With point buy, you can just email your players and say "XX points, these sources legal, see you at the first session" and get on with the game.
Of course, if the rolling of stats together is a well-liked social activity in itself (i.e., independently of what characters are actually produced), then I guess that's a different matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On a previous thread on this topic, I posted the following rant:
Seriously, what's the point?
Why do we demand to run perfect, Mary Sue PCs? Why are we afraid to run characters with actual low (5 or 6) attributes? Why would Mok simply pick up his stuff and leave the table if asked to create a character he didn't have absolute control over?
What kind of stories are we trying to tell?
Elric had a lousy constitution. Kull was not the brightest bulb on the tree. Frodo's physical strength was no match for any of his foemen. Conan was short-tempered and rash. Those faults and failings made them fun to read about. Give Frodo a Strength of 15 and a Dexterity of 20, and Weapon Focus in shortsword, and see whether that makes his saga any more compelling.
Players think that if their character start with terrific stats, the game will be easier for them. That's ridiculous. As a GM, I know that a party of 2nd-level characters with median stats of 17, and nothing below a 13, are able to face far tougher challenges than a party whose primary stats are 14, and who have some attributes in the 7-9 range. So I respond by pitching tougher challenges at them; the game isn't any easier for the super-human characters, the opposition is just proportionate to their superior selves.
Good GMs don't shove 1st-Level characters into an adventure designed for a 5th-level party, nor vice versa. Look at a module like "Hungry are the Dead"; every encounter in the entire adventure is a battle against undead, and there's no dire time limit. A party with a high-Charisma cleric will have a much easier time than a party made up of, say, enchanters and rogues. The GM, and hence the world, adjusts to provide suitable challenges for the PCs.
The net effect is that super-statted characters handle any given challenge earlier in their career, about 1 or 2 levels before characters with (4d6, drop the low die, arrange in order) stats. So, they step out of the low-fantasy problems ("I need to climb the rope! What are we going to do about food? Look out: it's a hobgoblin!") right away.
Why not just start the campaign at 3rd level?
---
One method I hadn't heard of, but think might work: roll 21 dice, and assign 18 of them to stats as you please. So, if you roll:
For example, 21d6 give you (6, 3, 1, 3, 3, 1, 3, 1, 3, 5, 4, 2, 4, 3, 5, 4, 4, 5, 2, 5, 3). You might pitch the three 1's, and end up with
STR {3, 3, 3} = 9
DEX (3, 3, 2} = 8
CON {4, 4, 4} = 12
INT (3, 3, 2} = 8
WIS {6, 5, 5} = 16
CHA {5, 5, 4} = 14
a perfectly good cleric. This provides the dice some random influence (only one '6' means that the maximum stat is 16), but gives the player a lot of freedom as well.
Give Frodo a Strength of 15 and a Dexterity of 20, and Weapon Focus in shortsword, and see whether that makes his saga any more compelling.
Well, give Gandolf an int over 7 and the entire story becomes one chapter.
"Hey.. you.. giant eagle. Fly this hobbit over the volcano and drop the ring in or the entire shire is dining on KFC for a month"
|
Why do we demand to run perfect, Mary Sue PCs? Why are we afraid to run characters with actual low (5 or 6) attributes?
This presupposes that if given the option of point buy, everyone will try to min-max and create "perfect" PCs (whatever that is). This simply isn't true, some people want to play someone like Elric, or Kull or Frodo including their weaknesses, and point buy can allow that as much as rolling.
Okay the PF point buy system doesn't allow for 5 or 6 stats as a baseline, but with racial modifiers it is entirely possible.
In the end I like to point buy because I usually go into character creation with a character concept in mind and rolling stats can be a hinderance to fulfilling that concept, either by giving me too few high stats or too many high stats (with no low scores to play that Elric consitution, Kull intelligence or Frodo stregth.
I do admit random char gen can be interesting if you go in without a concept in mind, but if I am going to do that I would rather more than just abilities were randomised I would like race and class to be randomised too, and maybe the number of skill points etc. Systems like WFRP1 and Traveller has interesting random char gen.
Oh and it is entirely possible to min-max with dice rolling, those people will roll their stats and then decide on the best race and lass to use those stats with.
Its funny I am just starting a 3.5 campaign and offered my players dice roll or point buy generation and they chose dice rolling, but then when I asked them to start thinking about character concepts they felt they needed to roll their stats before they could do that. That is just such an alien mind set to me it is unreal.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I assume in the previous thread there were actual people demanding that, and that you weren't just straw-manning other posters.
Well, somewhere in between, TOZ. Several posters (generally, those in favor of point-buy) had been chiming in, claiming that beginning characters needed certain stat arrays. Some didn't want their characters to have any weak attributes, and others declared they would refuse to play a character if they couldn't make sure a couple of stats were particularly high. (Like KaeYoss' "focussed wizard" needing a stat above 15.)
I'm on record as preferring some randomness in my character generation, probably for nostalgia, but I don't mind point buy, either. What gets on my nerves are people who insist on their character being ideal, whatever that might mean for their purposes. "Having everything I want" stikes me as the kind of goal that role-playing games should never let players attain. You should never be satisfied with your PC.
Why do we demand to run perfect, Mary Sue PCs? Why are we afraid to run characters with actual low (5 or 6) attributes? Why would Mok simply pick up his stuff and leave the table if asked to create a character he didn't have absolute control over?
I don't really think the point of the debate between rolling and point buy has anything to do with playing a perfect character.
Remember that most every hero with a flaw has at least one thing that there really awesome at.
Frodo must have had an awesome will save.
With point buy your often have a few dump stats or... weaknesses.
With rolling it is possible to have no weaknesses.
With rolling it is possible to have no strengths. Although the GM usually lets you reroll.
Making the actual rolling rules: 4d6 drop the lowest unless your roll really bad and wine and the GM might lets you roll again and possibly the rest of the other players in your group because that would only be fair.
That all being said I think rolling is great for (just for fun)one shots.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
You should never be satisfied with your PC.I could nitpick, but I agree. When you're satisfied with your PC, completely, then you have no incentive to play him anymore.
I'd have to disagree on that - I'm pretty satisfied with my highest-level PFS character, but I still like playing him. Playing him is where I get the satisfaction - outside game time, he goes back to just being an idea.
...Unless I misunderstand what you mean by "satisfied"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of players will have an image of what their PCs will look like at level 20. They build it (take feats, skills, add stats) towards that goal. I have nothing against that. Some of my player do it and that's fine with me. Usually though, those who build characters with the future in mind are also the ones who will be bummed if they don't get high enough stats.
I'm not like that though. I'm the other way around. I don't mind having average and low stats. I like to roll and deal with what I have to work with. My PC will slowly evolve from that ordinary joe, to a hero (hopefully). I have no clue what I'll pick (feat wise, stat wise, and even class wise) at my next level... And I'll haven't the faintest idea what my character will look like if I reach level 20. I sometimes pick feats/skills that might help in the future (specially if I encounter a situation that would of been helpful to have during the last level). I might even pick certain feats just cause they look cool at the time that I'm picking. In the end though, I believe my characters have truly an organic feel to them. I'll have strengths and weaknesses.
Maybe I like the idea that the ordinary man can accomplish great things, and not start with the idea that my PC was 'destined' for greatness.
I'm for rolling stats all the way. The averager, the better! LOL!!
Ultradan
...Unless I misunderstand what you mean by "satisfied"?Indeed. If you're still playing him, you're not completely satisfied. You want more.
That doesn't make any sense to me. That's like saying you stop sleeping with your partner once your satisfied with the degree of sex you're having.
Once it's really satisfying, I want more, not to stop (though maybe i'm alone in that opinion)
... Is point-buy just assumed for a standardized method's sake, or is this the way that people play in their games?
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach. I like the idea that I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice-gods, and that would affect the way I play my character...
I much prefer point buy. Both as a player and as a GM. When ever the group has rolled we always seem to have:
a) One person with the 'god' stats, who then seems to dominate everything. He is now the estatic player.b) One person with the 'crippled' stats, who is then unhappy because he can't seem to do anything. He is now the unhappy player.
c) This makes everyone else feel like sidekicks when they wanted to be heros. These are now the bored players.
If you play enough to rip through a short campaign pretty quick and move on to new characters soon, then it might not be a big deal. And could be good and interesting in one-shots. But we play every other week for a few hours (and tend to progress rather slowly). So you could be stuck with your PC for 6 months to a year sometimes. That can get frustrating pretty quickly.
You equate playing a character to sexual intercourse?
I really don't know how to respond to that.
Well, any form of natural rush. Any athlete who plays until retirement, or writer working on his 10th+ novel.
I love playing a character. I don't even start playing a character i'm not satisfied with to begin with.
For me, I would have a hard time playing a character i wasn't satisfied with. For a different example, playing a character i'm not satisfied with would be like doing a job I don't like.
My group loves my 'square' method, which we have used for years.
BlackMoria's Square
Roll 4d6 drop lowest. Get 6 sets of rolls. My players roll one or two sets and contribute the rolls to form six sets of stats.
I array the rolls side by side so the 6 sets of stats form a 'square' with 6 sets of numbers down and six across.
Now everyone can pick one of the 14 possible combinations for their stats (6 down, 6 across and two diagonal).
Beauty of this method is there is enough variability for everyone to select stats to satisfy their character concept.
It is fast because you need only 6 sets of rolls to have a pool of 14 possible stat arrays. It makes replacement characters a breeze because the 'square' remains as a stat pool to draw on. Lose your character and you just pick one of the 14 combinations and you can build your new character.
Everyone can pick the same stats if you they wish. There is no elimination of a stat array just because someone selected it.
My group prefers it to any other method. It had the advantage of rolling for stats for those who really like chucking dice but because you can select from a pool of 14 arrays, you never are stuck with a sub-par character (unless you wish). If the method has a down side, it is that one or more rows/columns will yield an above average stat array but the players see this more as a feature than a fault and as the DM, I have become accustomed to DMing characters with above average stats.
|
So being an old school gamer I grew up with dice rolling. I will say I do not like PT buy and neither do the majority of those in my group.l We do have 1 person that does love and prefer PT Buy.
The PT Buy person ran a one shot Carrion Hill. The game is designed for 15 pt buy. He actually upped it to 20. While the game was fun we had 4 players. A Barbarian, a Magus, a Thief/mage and me a cleric. I decided that because of the details I read on Carrion Hill to take a feat for undead and to damage evil.
This module was clearly designed as a one shot... meaning people would die especially in a 15 PT buy system and most likely in a 20 PT Buy system.
The ONLY thing that saved the party from TPK which is NOT Fun and the game should be about Fun!!! Was the Barbarian kept making his saves and kept attacking and doing damage and the cleric could channel energy to damage the evil creature. Had it not been for these two things the whole party would have died.
now is this fun?
NO!!!
And while I see people saying how low their dice roll, i'd say... Get new Dice and stop using the cheapy dice with the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 printed and start using dice that have dots and are more accurate.
To me PT Buy is NOT fun. But then again I am a lucky roller and 15 or 20 or even 25 pt just would not be fun to me or to the majority of our group.
Life is NOT Equal so why should ALL Characters be equal.