Don't be a jerk.Amazing, actually, how fun it can be when you're not on a message board being needlessly derisive.
If I were being a jerk, I would denounce others' posts based on supposition and conjecture without a single moment spent researching the topic at hand.
Thank you for your concern.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you another pointless flamewar. Abandon thread while you still can.
|
I could not parse anything else in your post,Lemme break it down for you:
1. Started with a story about an experience (implied to be a rare/new experience) trying out point buy. It was a near-TPK and was not fun.
2. This was used as support for the idea that point-buy is not fun.
3. In between the story and its application, there was the advice that if you roll low stats you should get new dice.
4. She then stated that she consistently rolls high stats, and then mentioned that characters should not all be equal.
Interpretation:
Based on an isolated experience in which point buy restricted her to lower stats than she normally rolls - and in which there was almost a TPK - IceniQueen has decided that point buy restricts fun. It's more fun for her to have high stats so she can avoid dying.Shorter version: She has to roll wicked high stats to stay alive, and point buy keeps her from doing that.
BRILLANT DEDUCTION Watson... or is that Dr Spock?
Your 100% totally Wrong.
I have had plenty of characters die in a game either from luck of the dice, or my own stupid actions.
But to have TPK? is that fun? How long would you play "The Game" if every game you had TPK? The answer is Not long.
As someone who has been playing probably when you where still in grade school (1979) I've been around the block and played many RPG's the ones that where fun... I kept playing. The ones that stunk and I did not have fun in... got scraped.
Let me ask... IF this where a PC/Console game... how long would you play if you could NEVER win? Not Long.
Yes this is a game, No it is not RL, but I also do not live in a comic book make believe fantasy world world and I do believe in SOME realism but I also believe the the party adventures are hero's just like in a Conan Book or LotR.
Fact is How long would ole Aragorn last as a 15PT buy? or Gandalf? or Conan? Or even Frodo Baggins? Not long at all. And while Frodo certainly was a wimp, I am sure IF Tolkien had wrote his books around D&D even Frodo would have not been done on 15 PT Buy.
So before You JUMP to a conclusion and THINK you have me figured out... try again, because you do not know me nor do you have 1 molecule correctness about what you blabbered about.
There are those that love PT Buy because they whine when Johnny had a better character when they had to roll dice. There are those DM's that do PT Buy because they cannot roll with changes and cannot figure out what to do beyond what the printed page says. The fact is the game MUST be fun. If your players are NOT having fun, then you will not last as a DM or your group will fall apart.
As a DM for over 30+ years, I have learned to roll with the party and to adjust the challenge to make it fun for them. And I can say from all that experience the groups I have played in did not have as much fun doing PT buy as we did with the randomness of dice rolling. And I have played with many groups
Now if the game is society or Con play... PT Buy is the way to go or to have the DM running make all characters which no one wants.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@Pixel Cube - I think TOZ and Noah were actually bantering in a friendly, tongue-in-cheek way with each other.
Has anyone tried non-d6-based stat generation methods? Like maybe 1d12+6 with no re-rolls? That'll give you stats from 7-18, with equal odds for any given score.
EDIT: Ninja'd. Also, what interesting stats I generated!
There are those that love PT Buy because they whine when Johnny had a better character when they had to roll dice. There are those DM's that do PT Buy because they cannot roll with changes and cannot figure out what to do beyond what the printed page says. The fact is the game MUST be fun. If your players are NOT having fun, then you will not last as a DM or your group will fall apart.
Speaking of brilliant deductions, there's this.
Now, I use point buy and I never cared for what the others played and if they were more powerful than me.I use point buy when I gm and I rarely use pre-printed materials, liking to come up my my own settings, adventures and houserules.
But I agree on you on the Fun part. Fun is essentially what the game is about. It's just that I don't see at all why point buy would make a game more or less fun. A TPK is certainly not fun, but saying that a TPK was directly caused by point buy is asinine.
@Pixel Cube - I think TOZ and Noah were actually bantering in a friendly, tongue-in-cheek way with each other.
I was, actually.
I don't flame, but I don't tolerate total dismissal of my experiences, either. Like IceniQueen, I have over 30 years experience DM'ing, and I know what works and what's broken.
Bottom line is, no one likes point buy in our campaign, many posters were having trouble with inequity, and I presented an alternative that may be what they were looking for.
If anyone feels flamed, my apologies, but I tell it like it is.
|
Fact is How long would ole Aragorn last as a 15PT buy? or Gandalf? or Conan? Or even Frodo Baggins? Not long at all. And while Frodo certainly was a wimp, I am sure IF Tolkien had wrote his books around D&D even Frodo would have not been done on 15 PT Buy.
Fictional characters are inappropriate examples of criticizing game balance, since they are protected by the Power of the Plot and are not intended to work with a specific system. Even characters from D&D novels were sometimes over the top.
I just recently went through an older style game with my normal group. The game assumes 3d6 rolled in order. Everyone came to the table with interesting concepts about what type of characters they wanted to bring into the world I had described, and they ended up flabbergasted by the results of character creation. Stats were all over the place, ideas were changed on the fly to meet new (lower) expectations, and rolling for HP at level 1 ended up with interesting results as well.
- Wider variance in the initial stats turns the "character creation" process into the "character generation" process.
- Player deaths at early levels is meant to encourage "survival of the fittest" among the characters. Essentially, you are supposed to die if you got a bad set of rolls. Dying is the only way to allow yourself to roll a new character.
- It only ended up being fun for the survivors and the more experienced players. The people new to the game simply gave up.
Third Edition character "generation" and later models would put a lower limit on the random attributes of characters to mitigate the chance of "generating" a character that was "unplayable." I think point buy systems are really the first time you could honestly have a character "creation" process built into the game instead of G.M. Fiat-ed.
Character "creation" leads to a stable set of characters that players can invest emotions from level one. Character "generation" creates a, "I'm going to see if Estar here lives to level 4 before giving him a background. I don't want to waste too many good ideas on a goblin's pincushion."
G.M. Fiat can lead to dice "generated" characters essentially becoming player "created" characters. The social contract of my group allows for this type of G.M. power. In a more formalized contract, say at a convention, a point buy system allows the G.M. to be taken out of the character creation process with less of an ill effect.
@Pixel Cube - I think TOZ and Noah were actually bantering in a friendly, tongue-in-cheek way with each other.I was actually.
I don't flame, but I don't tolerate total dismissal of my experiences, either. Like IceniQueen, I have over 30 years experience DM'ing, and I know what works and what's broken.
Bottom line is, no one likes point buy in our campaign, many posters were having trouble with inequity, and I presented an alternative that may be what they were looking for.
If anyone feels flamed, my apologies, but I tell it like it is.
Next time let's all remember: tongue-in-cheekness, sarcasm and irony are completely lost in a internet discussion. Mine was lost on you apparently, since you replied to me like I personally insulted your method of GMing, which is entirely up to you and your players to judge, not to me.
You said problem solved, and I pointed out "of course it's problem solved, when you give the players the equivalent of a 30+ point buy (as others pointed out) nobody is going to argue". This is not dismissal of your experiences (I have plenty to cite for what it's worth), its pointing out the flaws of the system you proposed.
But like you said, your group is fine with it, so it's really a problem solved for your group, it's just that I wouldn't use it at all.
I will always love rolling my stats. The rule when I am behind the screen is 6+ 2d6, and things are going well so far. Been playing since 93-94. Point buy has lead to nothing but arguments and misery in games I have been in.
I will always love rolling my stats. The rule when I am behind the screen is 6+ 2d6, and things are going well so far. Been playing since 93-94. Point buy has lead to nothing but arguments and misery in games I have been in.
Swap "point buy" with "rolling stats" and you have exactly my same gaming history.
Are you my evil double from another dimension?
@Pixel Cube - I think TOZ and Noah were actually bantering in a friendly, tongue-in-cheek way with each other.I was actually.
I don't flame, but I don't tolerate total dismissal of my experiences, either. Like IceniQueen, I have over 30 years experience DM'ing, and I know what works and what's broken.
Bottom line is, no one likes point buy in our campaign, many posters were having trouble with inequity, and I presented an alternative that may be what they were looking for.
If anyone feels flamed, my apologies, but I tell it like it is.
Next time let's all remember: tongue-in-cheekness, sarcasm and irony are completely lost in a internet discussion. Mine was lost on you apparently, since you replied to me like I personally insulted your method of GMing, which is entirely up to you and your players to judge, not to me.
You said problem solved, and I pointed out "of course it's problem solved, when you give the players the equivalent of a 30+ point buy (as others pointed out) nobody is going to argue". This is not dismissal of your experiences (I have plenty to cite for what it's worth), its pointing out the flaws of the system you proposed.
But like you said, your group is fine with it, so it's really a problem solved for your group, it's just that I wouldn't use it at all.
Fair enough. This board needs some emoticons!
One thing I'd very much like to point out is point buy generally yields a stat average that hovers around 12, as does 4d6, drop the lowest.
When a large part of the fun is rolling stats, as is the case for many long-time players, I see no reason to force them into the point buy system.
|
The instant a DM says we're rolling stats, I pack up. If Gygax had used a point buy system from the get go, rolling your stats wouldn't be even something worth considering. It'd be as alien as rolling your level, which is exactly where I place this rule in my mind. The average roll for 3d6 is 9-12. Yippie. Average characters. That's why I play, to be average. Better yet, let's roll 4d6 7 times, and drop the lowest. Wait, when you said you only roll because it drives away Munchkins, you were kidding, right? Because I'm now rockin' stats that I could NEVER get with point buy.
Also, I've never seen a player not cheat those rolled stats at least once in their gaming career. And I'm not even talking about bluffing the rolls. I'm talking about how, after a year of playing the character, the player's Dex went from 12 to 14, and I can't be sure how he got that number,because there isn't any math I can use to recalculate his score, while he's protesting and saying he got that when he rolled. I could be wrong. Now I look like a shmuck, and he gets to have his cheated stats. Unless, of course, I AM wrong, in which case, I AM a shmuck.
Rolling stats is ancient and archaic, and when it finally dies its inevitable death, I will dance naked around its burning effigy in the full moon's light, with red war paint upon my chest in the shape of a chart with the numbers 7-18 on one side and -4 to 17 on the other side. And I will chant: "DOWN WITH THE DICTATOR! DOWN DOWN I SAY! EVIL AND ITS WICKED WAYS SHALL RULE OUR HEARTS AND MIND NO MORE! OH GLORIOUS DAY! NEVER A "4" AND "YOU'RE STUCK WITH IT" SHALL I HEAR AGAIN!"
And then I shall howl.
I will always love rolling my stats. The rule when I am behind the screen is 6+ 2d6, and things are going well so far.
That's a 25.67 point buy, for those following along at home.
That's an average of roughly a 38 point buy!You say that like it's a bad thing :P I've done that generation style, and it's pretty fun.
I don't think there's anything wrong with it, per se, but I think when people say "my players prefer rolling to point buy", it's worth pointing out if you really mean something like "my players prefer a 38 point buy to a 15 point buy".
It is entirely possible. Particularly if you are white, as I any black. I sincerely hope we do not meet, we may cancel each other out.
I will always love rolling my stats. The rule when I am behind the screen is 6+ 2d6, and things are going well so far. Been playing since 93-94. Point buy has lead to nothing but arguments and misery in games I have been in.Swap "point buy" with "rolling stats" and you have exactly my same gaming history.
Are you my evil double from another dimension?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Somewhat simplistic. The eagles were able to fly to Mount Doom only because the power of Sauron and all of Mordor had been broken. Anytime before that they'd have become eagle briskets within one wingbeat.
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"
I guess someone needs to be introduced to HowItShouldHaveEnded.com.
They have videos showing alternate endings to various movies (the LotR one basically being the above scenario). Some of them are freaking hilarious. I promise you'll love it. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The instant a DM says we're rolling stats, I pack up...the only problem i have with pointbuys is that powergaming is harder to resist. big stupid dirty (7cha 7int) fighter becomes a better fighter than the knight who wants to be both good looking and strong.
But if he rolls high enough stats to have the same physical scores as the "big stupid dirty" fighter while also having higher INT and CHA, then suddenly he's not powergaming anymore? I.e., it's only powergaming if you actually have to pay for it?
In my experience, the players had their characters piggy back off each other, in essence making negative /complimentary versions of each other. The guy with low cha never spoke to ANYONE unless it was to refer people to the character with high charisma. The character with low intelligence never once attempted to use a skill, they would just call for the character with high skill points or intelligence. When the party had split up, it was the point buy characters players who would start to complain, saying it was unfair that the DM was splitting the party (the amount of times the phrase never split the party came up was obscene) and would come up with the most obnoxious reasons for why they could not leave a each others (or another party members) side. And this is only the most recent example. There are others, but I won't go on.
Point buy has lead to nothing but arguments and misery in games I have been in.How do you get into arguments just by using point buy? Somebody couldn't do math or something?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
In my experience, the players had their characters piggy back off each other, in essence making negative /complimentary versions of each other. The guy with low cha never spoke to ANYONE unless it was to refer people to the character with high charisma. The character with low intelligence never once attempted to use a skill, they would just call for the character with high skill points or intelligence.
That sounds like what any group of people with healthy, realistic understandings of their own strengths and weaknesses would do (especially in potentially life-threatening situations). Sounds like good roleplaying to me. The guy who's no good at speeches or freezes up around girls or whatever knows to let the pretty-boy do the talking. There are several people in my office who will go get help if the slightest thing goes wrong with their computer rather than fix it themselves.
It sounds like you're upset with people making characters who have depth.
When the party had split up, it was the point buy characters players who would start to complain, saying it was unfair that the DM was splitting the party (the amount of times the phrase never split the party came up was obscene) and would come up with the most obnoxious reasons for why they could not leave a each others (or another party members) side. And this is only the most recent example. There are others, but I won't go on.
So a group of people who have saved each other's lives is reluctant to split up? Yeah, totally unrealistic. ;)
But if he rolls high enough stats to have the same physical scores as the "big stupid dirty" fighter while also having higher INT and CHA, then suddenly he's not powergaming anymore? I.e., it's only powergaming if you actually have to pay for it?The instant a DM says we're rolling stats, I pack up...the only problem i have with pointbuys is that powergaming is harder to resist. big stupid dirty (7cha 7int) fighter becomes a better fighter than the knight who wants to be both good looking and strong.
I'd say powergaming is done with intention and occurs to varying degrees. Putting a rolled low stat in a stat you don't need very much is powergaming, lowering a stat you don't need very much until you get a penalty there in order to buy up a higher stat elsewhere is also powergaming, but to a greater degree because it requires more intent.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
But if he rolls high enough stats to have the same physical scores as the "big stupid dirty" fighter while also having higher INT and CHA, then suddenly he's not powergaming anymore? I.e., it's only powergaming if you actually have to pay for it?I'd say powergaming is done with intention and occurs to varying degrees. Putting a rolled low stat in a stat you don't need very much is powergaming, lowering a stat you don't need very much until you get a penalty there in order to buy up a higher stat elsewhere is also powergaming, but to a greater degree because it requires more intent.
Ah, so instead of "having those high stats cost you something is what makes it powergaming", it's actually "either way is powergaming, but having to pay for your stats makes it worse". Okay, glad we got that straight.
Wow.
Some threads really get people worked up.
This one almost grows faster than I can read it.
Are you sure you've done your math right Karl? I seem to recall some people crunching the numbers on the boards, with 4d6 drop the lowest coming out to somewhere around 22 point buy on average.
As I noted above, it's about 19 points without rerolling. If you add in the ability to reroll "hopeless" characters (e.g. total bonuses are less than +2 or something), that will add a few points.
The average score listed is correct, but that doesn't give you the point buy equivalent (which, as I noted, requires a weighted average).
Off topic Jiggy and TOZ's character creation
Are you crazy?Is that a serious question?
Yeah, that's totally a cleric.Or a rogue. :)
Could be either -- I'd say Dwarven cleric, because then your awesome Con goes higher and your Wis goes up to a decent 15. Cha drops but this guy probably wouldn't channel to hurt baddies much. Or human, half-elf, or half-orc with Wis raised to 15. The hard part is that clerics usually are melee support which the Str of 8 wouldn't do well for.
But myself I like TOZ would go rogue. In particular, I think I'd do an Elven Rogue with archery as my combat style, maybe the sniper archetype, and a dip into Shadowdancer for HIPS. Dex goes nice and high, Int goes up so adds to skill points, and the drop in con is okay since it still leaves a Con of 13 which is fine for a rogue.
|
|
the only problem i have with pointbuys is that powergaming is harder to resist. big stupid dirty (7cha 7int) fighter becomes a better fighter than the knight who wants to be both good looking and strong.
Sure, you are a better fighter, but you are still basically inferior to the knight who looks good and has an easier time in social situations.
A 7 Cha/7 Int fighter (something our group would not accept in either case, since we limit the lowest scores to a maximum of 1, and only if the roleplay follows - and even then, our 5 Int/5 Wis barbarian is still the best character I've seen in play !) deals more damage but will have a hard time looking credible, but while downing a barbarian orc will be easier for him, the knight has still more chances to seduce a noble daughter and gain wealth and power.|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
while downing a barbarian orc will be easier for him, the knight has still more chances to seduce a noble daughter and gain wealth and power.
The best way to discourage CHA-dumping is to inform all your players that the campaign will be filled to the brim with hotties. ;)
I've seen players pout and become miserable if they didn't get to play CONAN. I'm certain that you don't NEED to be great at fighting/casting to have a great Character.
I swear, the next time I'm a player, I'll play a character that has no bonuses. Yeah, +0 bonus or lower! I'm SURE I'll have great fun ROLEPLAYING him. He'll become the hero that no one thought he could!
Ultradan
Does that mean that all deliberate stat distribution is 'power gaming'?The only way to get stats without 'power gaming' to you (Bill) is rolling down the line?
As long as there's an intention to improve something valuable to the character and/or minimize the penalties of something, min-maxing is involved to some degree - perhaps to a smaller degree than with some other players, but to a non-zero degree. Player styles and strategies are almost always a combination of various influences and tendencies.
I understand that some people generally refer to power gaming as the sort of behavior you see at an extreme end of the min-maxing spectrum, but for others, the two terms (min-maxing/powergaming) are synonymous. The terminology isn't exactly precise. I'm using them mainly synonymously here.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
But if he rolls high enough stats to have the same physical scores as the "big stupid dirty" fighter while also having higher INT and CHA, then suddenly he's not powergaming anymore? I.e., it's only powergaming if you actually have to pay for it?right. mainly of course str and con need to be high for any melee build, then dex if you deal with opps. most people then prioritize wis over int and cha. but with a point buy putting anything over a 7 in cha decreases directly your power as a fighter
I'm going to presume for the moment that you missed what I was getting at. Let me illustrate my meaning:
Say a guy rolls the following stats:
STR 18
DEX 13
CON 14
INT 11
WIS 13
CHA 12
He builds his fighter. But then he gets a last-minute call from his GM, saying they're switching to point buy. So he takes the following scores:
STR 18
DEX 13
CON 14
INT 7
WIS 13
CHA 7
You seem to be saying that the first is fine while the second is powergaming (according to Bill Dunn, the chief difference being that the second was done on purpose). Nevermind that the second array is actually worse, it's the "powergaming" array.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
as my buddy likes to say, 'you don't die from a failed diplomacy check," you die from the stab wound. so while you may not be able to seduce lots of women, you sure as hell can kick ass, which is what you are paid to do as an adventurer
What happens when the failed diplomacy check means you don't find the clue you need to get there in time? Or means the strong NPC doesn't agree to help you out and you end up dying? Or means the king doesn't dispatch troops to guard the bridge because he doesn't believe you that there are orcs on the march?
It's not the player's fault if the GM fails to make Diplomacy relevant. And if the GM fails to make Diplomacy relevant, it's not the player's responsibility to pretend otherwise.
Neither point-buy nor rolling have anything to do with "powergaming" or "munchkinism" or any other such folderol. Those things are completely irrelevant to each other. "Powergaming" behaviors are just that, and will be evident regardless of the method used.
Rolling the dice does not make you a "powergamer". Devising a method to roll dice involving dropping ones or rolling 8d6 per stat or some other such thing is what makes you a "powergamer".
Point buy does not make you a "powergamer". 56 point point buy does.
All dice rolling methods can be statistically equated to a point buy method. So what we're really seeing here is that regardless of the methods the group must agree on an acceptable level of statistical power for starting characters.
The only real difference between the two methods is this question:
Do you like to gamble with your stats, or not?
That's it right there, that's the only difference. Any other perceived differences between the methods are red herrings; they are completely irrelevant. Yes, the random methods allow for more diversity, also known as randomness, but that goes right back to the only real difference, which is if one likes to gamble or not.
Casinos love gamblers, but they do not like to gamble. That's why the odds are always stacked in favor of the house. Casinos spend millions to be sure that the odds are always in their favor, and they make money doing it. There is something basic in human nature that gambling appeals to, and there's nothing wrong with that in the context of the game, which is all one big crap shoot anyways (given the number of rolls made over the length of a campaign). Remember, though, that Las Vegas wasn't built on the dreams of winners.
Remember that when you devise a method to roll dice for statistics, what you are saying is that you like to gamble. If you build in methods such as rerolling 1's or adding extra dice to the mix, what you are saying is that you like to gamble but want to limit your losses, also known as guaranteeing a minimum level of baseline stats.
When you prefer point buy you are saying you do not like to gamble. When you set the amount of points, you are saying that you want to guarantee a minimum level of baseline stats.
I like point buy. I only use point buy. I do not like to gamble (in this case). This does not make rolling wrong, or right, or better, or worse. Those terms are only relevant to one's personal preferences in the matter. There is no rational argument one can make in these cases other than "I like it this way". Point buy has one advantage over rolling, and only one - it allows standardization and transferability between campaigns. That's it. If you don't need those things, then point buy is no better than rolling. As long as the group is having fun.
That all said, man, I hate rolling for stats.
No love whatsoever for stat rolling.
If a large part of the fun for the players is rolling stats, I really don't get what kind of game it's supposed to be.
Whenever this subject comes up you always ends up hearing the "I've been playing for 30 years/This is not a MMO" lines. Please, just stop it. It really doesn't help your cause.
The majority (if not the totality) of methods proposed for rolling in this thread so far give better arrays than the standard 15 points buy..not sure how the so-called powergaming is linked to the point buy method.