Am I the only one who prefers rolling over point buy?

[Dragonamedrake]

I blame MMO's. MMO's are the cause of all this "Everyone must be equal" crap. I have seen a big increase in Point buy and complaints that one person has an advantage over another because of BLA post after the popularity of MMO's spiked. Heck we had a few 1000+ post not to long ago. One was a guy complaining about a fellow party member getting extra Knowledge skill points. The other was about a party member charging for magic items he made so he had more gold then everyone else.... all I hear is.

WAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Seriously. Who cares if someone has better stats then you. Just roll with it... As for point buy. There is nothing wrong with it either. I just see both as being perfectly good options.

[cranewings]

I've found that 1st level characters do an ok job at staying alive along side 6th level ones. I'm thinking of trying to put together a group for a meat grinder sandbox, with 3d6 straight down the line, returning to 1st level when you die for any reason. I think it would be a lot of fun.

The only thing holding me back is my fear of magic items building up to excessive levels through inheritance from dead characters.

If I was brutal with using sunder, rust monsters, theft and fireballs to mitigate some of it, it wouldn't be as big a deal, but I don't know how much fun that treadmill would be.

[cranewings]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

I suggest you roll a character with all 10s and play alongsides someone with all 18s before trash talking people who prefer point buy.

My original 2e group did that all the time. Near as I can tell, that style of play died in 2e. Nostalgically, I miss it, but that sort of game is sort of like a 120 minute IPA: it takes a strong stomach to develop a taste for it.

[Odraude]

I prefer Point Buy because in my experience, people seem to care much more about their character's personality and the game as a whole. At least where I'm at, rolling is synonymous with 'Throw-Away Character". Few people that I know that has done rolling rarely, if ever, really gets into the personality of the character. Now, this may be different with each person.

I've recently tried 2d6+5 and even that produced some wild score, from one person with 9 point buy equivalency to one with 25 point buy. While the one with 9 wasn't jealous, he also wasn't having fun failing everything except knowledge rolls (which he did make in spades).

[darth_borehd]

I like dice, but rolling for stats ALWAYS produces higher stats than statistically possible.

How can that be? Because people cheat, even if they don't call it that. There is a tendency to just "throw away" a bad set of rolled stats and keep trying until you get enough 18s and other high numbers. Play multiple campaigns with the same group pf people often enough and you'll notice some always seem to have at least one 18.

Point buy has been shown to be much fairer and more sensible.

[cranewings]

darth_borehd wrote:

I like dice, but rolling for stats ALWAYS produces higher stats than statistically possible.

How can that be? Because people cheat, even if they don't call it that. There is a tendency to just "throw away" a bad set of rolled stats and keep trying until you get enough 18s and other high numbers. Play multiple campaigns with the same group pf people often enough and you'll notice some always seem to have at least one 18.

Point buy has been shown to be much fairer and more sensible.

You know, I always just turned a blind eye to that when we were going to run some kind of story game. If I wanted the game to be a meat grinder / challenge, I would make everyone roll in front of me and I'd write down their stats so no one could cheat.

You are right though. It isn't technically cheating if you roll in sets of 6.

[Bill Dunn]

Dragonamedrake wrote:

I blame MMO's. MMO's are the cause of all this "Everyone must be equal" crap. I have seen a big increase in Point buy and complaints that one person has an advantage over another because of BLA post after the popularity of MMO's spiked. Heck we had a few 1000+ post not to long ago. One was a guy complaining about a fellow party member getting extra Knowledge skill points. The other was about a party member charging for magic items he made so he had more gold then everyone else.... all I hear is.

WAAAAAAAAAAAA!

The complaints with respect to stats have been around a lot longer than MMOs.

[Adamantine Dragon]

darth_borehd wrote:

I like dice, but rolling for stats ALWAYS produces higher stats than statistically possible.

How can that be? Because people cheat, even if they don't call it that. There is a tendency to just "throw away" a bad set of rolled stats and keep trying until you get enough 18s and other high numbers. Play multiple campaigns with the same group pf people often enough and you'll notice some always seem to have at least one 18.

Point buy has been shown to be much fairer and more sensible.

Heh. I would have denied this and argued the point at one time since all of my games have involved rolling dice in front of the GM or using one of the online secure random dice generators.

But just for fun the other day I went through my library of characters going back decades and looked at their stats...

Without exception as the characters got older, their stats got better. Meaning that the more I had rolled instead of used point buy, the better the stats were.

Now, I don't REMEMBER cheating, and I don't think I did, but I can't honestly say that the results meet any sort of statistical rigor even taking into account that some characters I didn't like or that got killed early didn't make it into my permanent library.

So I'm forced to conclude, in spite of my own desire to deny it, that SOMETHING skewed the rolled results heavily towards better stats when rolling them.

It's been a long time so I don't really recall, but I suspect that my younger days playing the game included some rather lenient GMs who probably told me to reroll "average" results, and I don't recall ever arguing that I'd rather play the lesser stats...

So I think you've got a point here...

[Odraude]

Also, if you're just going to keep rolling dice until you get stats you like, why bother rolling in the first place? Just skip the middle man and use point buy.

[Dragonamedrake]

Bill Dunn wrote:

The complaints with respect to stats have been around a lot longer than MMOs.

True but its gotten worse after the MMO boom. And plus I like to blame MMO's for everything duh... :P

[David knott 242]

I second the above. It is annoying to me when people without a good grasp of statistics come up with weird (in regard to rerolls or setting minimum values, that is) schemes for rolling statistics or ability scores. It is annoying to them when I point out the actual statistical averages of their schemes. Here are a good and a bad example:

1st DM: He originally went with rolling ability scores, but when one player rolled ridiculously well, he gave us all a very generous point buy that was approximately equal to what that player rolled. Hit points at the first two levels were maximized, then we had a choice of rolling hit dice or using the PFS system (half maximum plus 1). I always went with the latter.

2nd DM: He used a point buy for stats, so nothing to say there. For hit dice he gave us the choice of the PFS system or rolling as well -- but anyone who rolled less than half the maximum got that many hit points. He did not even realize that he was basically compelling us to roll -- there was too much upside and too little downside to rolling the hit die.

[TOZ]

Odraude wrote:

Also, if you're just going to keep rolling dice until you get stats you like, why bother rolling in the first place? Just skip the middle man and use point buy.

Or get real crazy and agree as a group what stats everyone gets without rolling OR point-buy.

[Martin Kauffman 530]

I have DM'ed a number of home campaigns. We have always used the open roll of six 4d6 method; and then the player assigns the scores as s(he) chooses. This has proven to work very well over the years as it is more generous than rolling 3d6 and assigning the stats in the specific order rolled to the character. It is less generous than some other ways to assign stats; and there is a risk of having sub-optimal or even poor stats. However, the members of my games seem to enjoy this method as it can make for more interesting character backgrounds and role playing, as well as making the game more challenging. The players pride themselves on their good play, cooperation and survivability, even against tough encounters. My groups have stuck with this method, which I guess is old school, even when offered the opportunity to use a point buy model. I do not say that you should use this method, only that my groups seem to enjoy it; and that we have had no dropouts due to character disatisfaction with their stat rolls. If your group wants to use another method, go ahead as long as the players and DM all agree in advance on the game's ground rules and specific method to be used. Now, despite all the above, I think that for an organized play campaign- such as Pathfinder Society organized play- a point buy system is the only feasible way to go in terms of uniformity and ease of module design.

[Thac20]

Here is an idea for a hybrid system:

1) Start with 20 point buy. Design your character, choosing race, class, traits etc. No dump stats (below 10 pre-racial) are allowed.

2) Roll 4d6 keep 3 for each stat that was 10. Use the new number for that stat.

This method should ensure your character's critical stats have good values, while allowing randomness in non-critical stats.

[Meophist]

Odraude wrote:

Also, if you're just going to keep rolling dice until you get stats you like, why bother rolling in the first place? Just skip the middle man and use point buy.

If you're going to skip the middle man, might as well just give everybody 18's in everything.

Skipping the middle man doesn't exactly lead to point buy. Point buy is just another middle man.

[Odraude]

True, but honestly, the 'keep rolling until I get awesome stats' method seems to go against the organic feel that many people claim to love about rolling stats. In my opinion, I find it close to be a worse style of power gaming than min/maxing with point buy.

[Jal Dorak]

I expect the debate will only get more heated when 5e launches, given the supposed focus on ability scores.

3.X is partly responsible for the distortion; older editions found a nice balance between the importance of abilities and the fairness of rolling. In 3.X, especially at lower levels, having a crap ability score array means almost certain death.

Let's do a 1st-level Fighter duel, two fighters with different stats, same equipment (ignore feats, assume max hp):

1st Fighter: Str 15, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8 (elite array)
2nd Fighter: Str 13, Dex 11, Con 12, Int 9, Wis 12, Cha 8 (non-elite)
Both fighters have: Chainmail, light shield, longsword

3.5 Fighters

Spoiler:

Fighter 1 (40% hit, 6.5 avg.dmg, 2.6 avg.dmg/round)
hp 12; AC 17; Atk +3 (1d8+2)
Knocks Ftr2 unconscious in about 5 rounds.

Fighter 2 (30% hit, 5.5 avg.dmg, 1.6 avg.dmg/round)
hp 11; AC 16; Atk +2 (1d8+1)
Knocks Ftr1 unconscious in about 8 rounds.

2e Fighters

Spoiler:

Fighter 1 (25% chance to hit, average damage 4.5, 1.1/round)
hp 10; AC 4; THAC0 20 (1d8)
Kills Ftr2 in about 10 rounds.

2e Fighter (25% chance to hit, average damage 4.5, 1.1/round)
hp 10; AC 4; THAC0 20 (1d8)
Kills Ftr1 in about 10 rounds.

Draw your own conclusions, but to my mind rolling was a lot more balanced within the party (and the monsters) in previous editions.

[EWHM]

In recent years, I've moved away from both. Instead, I've got sets of templates of stats. The ones with more intense focus are the equivalent of smaller point buys than the ones with broader focus. Basically I found that dump-statting made me very cranky as a GM as did the fact that alarmingly high fractions of characters looked more or less exactly the same. Given this, I decided, ok, just come up with the most min-maxed template that you're willing to tolerate as a GM without being annoyed, offer that as template 1, then make several less optimized templates that are built with more points and offer them as templates 2, 3 and so on. This approach seems to be reasonably well received by players and relieves me of the perceived need to metagame as a GM so as to break the 'division of labor' that dump-statted characters nearly always (logically and reasonably to be honest) seem to achieve.

[wraithstrike]

Dragonamedrake wrote:

I blame MMO's. MMO's are the cause of all this "Everyone must be equal" crap. I have seen a big increase in Point buy and complaints that one person has an advantage over another because of BLA post after the popularity of MMO's spiked. Heck we had a few 1000+ post not to long ago. One was a guy complaining about a fellow party member getting extra Knowledge skill points. The other was about a party member charging for magic items he made so he had more gold then everyone else.... all I hear is.

WAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Seriously. Who cares if someone has better stats then you. Just roll with it... As for point buy. There is nothing wrong with it either. I just see both as being perfectly good options.

This has nothing to do with MMO's. Drop the atitude and either think about it calmly* or do some research. This question has been answered more than enough times.

*Hopefully you can think of at least 2 reasons.

[Mystic_Snowfang]

Our group uses point buy in an effort to stop Conti (one of the guys in our group) from being OP...

....

It hasn't worked worth a damn

[TriOmegaZero]

You can't stop someone from being overpowered without taking his choices away. The only way to stop him is to ask him to stop.

[Kryzbyn]

Everyone gets 18,17,16,15,14,12. Now go play!

[Mystic_Snowfang]

Kryzbyn wrote:

Everyone gets 18,17,16,15,14,12. Now go play!

Conti will still find a way to be OP...

He always does.
Restrict him to a ten point buy human with only core rule book, and he'll STILL find a way to kick the ass of any monster that should be difficult for him.

[FallofCamelot]

Odraude wrote:

Also, if you're just going to keep rolling dice until you get stats you like, why bother rolling in the first place? Just skip the middle man and use point buy.

I use point buy for PFS, I roll stats in my home games. I know which one I prefer.

[Windcaler]

Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

I've always prefered rolling a chracter. I find it more realistic. The way I usually do it is I choose the race, roll the dice, choose the alingment THEN choose a class based on my characters strengths and weaknesses.

Am I the only one?

You're not the only one, though I do prefer point buy. I like it more because it puts all the characters on equal footing and you dont have to worry about the player who was planning on playing a spellcaster and suddenly roll all their stats under 10 (this happened in my game three times before I changed to point buy). Likewise you dont have to worry about that barbarian/fighter who gets 3 18s

If you prefer rolling then use it in your game. It has its place but I feel the high variables can really screw a player over or just create characters that have a very high potential to be disruptive.

[Shiney]

I prefer to roll, but in my campaigns, the DM always gives us an option. Observed rolling, or a point buy. And both methods are usually on scale with eachother in our games. There's been times when I've had a character with terrible stats, and times when I've been nigh godlike, but they've all been fun to play in their way.

[The Rot Grub]

When I run my first Adventure Path, I think I'm going to use 20-point buy. All my players will be relatively new to tabletop gaming and I want them to have the satisfaction of realizing their own character concept. I also want to preempt the possibility of someone getting poor rolls and having to play this character for months, even years.

If the players disagree and want to roll, however, I will let them do it but the point-buy equivalents of their scores would need to be within a narrow +/- range centered on 20.

Now, when we do one-shot adventures, they will roll their own characters in order and only be able to switch one score, Balance Be Damned! :D

[Kirwyn]

I love rolling!!!!
Behind the screen though it presents some issues. I've had a group where the top two characters were equivalent to the rest of the group in terms of being challenged.
I'm working on my own B/X D&D, 3.x,4E amalgam rule set and ironman rules will be in play. Roll'em in order!!

[ciretose]

Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

I've always prefered rolling a chracter. I find it more realistic. The way I usually do it is I choose the race, roll the dice, choose the alingment THEN choose a class based on my characters strengths and weaknesses.

Am I the only one?

No

[Talonhawke]

Mystic_Snowfang wrote:

Kryzbyn wrote:

Everyone gets 18,17,16,15,14,12. Now go play!

Conti will still find a way to be OP...

He always does.
Restrict him to a ten point buy human with only core rule book, and he'll STILL find a way to kick the ass of any monster that should be difficult for him.

Strangely I don't think stats or Race are the issue at the bottom of this.

[Tirq]

I rolled once, I got 12 in everything except for one 16, when the rule was 4d6, reroll 1s, drop lowest.

And we rolled for health. We were level 5, and I had 25 health. I rolled super low.

I'm not a big fan of Rolling, but if I ever rolled high, then I might like it.

[Cole Deschain]

Ciaran Barnes wrote:

4, 7, 10, 10, 12, 13 isn't a fun array. Swap out one with a 16 and its still mediocre.

Eh, maybe I've just been fortunate, but even my most crapsack rolls have yielded fun characters. I've had many a guy who, numbers-wise, should have been less than stellar at his job- but I've generally managed a workaround so the guy is at least memorable.

[Umbral Reaver]

I wonder if rolling would never have occurred or might perhaps be a 'silly optional rule' along with other joke options if Gygax and Arneson had started with point buy from the very beginning and stuck with it. I do not believe the rolled method has as much strength without the religious backing it has from traditionalists.

[Mikaze]

Rolling makes it that much more unlikely that I can play the character I actually want to play and be invested in.

Considering the backlog of concepts I really want to play someday, I tend to look at rolling with trepidation.

[Icyshadow]

Dragonamedrake wrote:

I blame MMO's. MMO's are the cause of all this "Everyone must be equal" crap. I have seen a big increase in Point buy and complaints that one person has an advantage over another because of BLA post after the popularity of MMO's spiked. Heck we had a few 1000+ post not to long ago. One was a guy complaining about a fellow party member getting extra Knowledge skill points. The other was about a party member charging for magic items he made so he had more gold then everyone else.... all I hear is.

WAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Seriously. Who cares if someone has better stats then you. Just roll with it... As for point buy. There is nothing wrong with it either. I just see both as being perfectly good options.

THIS.

...and I actually prefer rolling. Just more fun, and fun is what this game is about.

[Kagehiro]

LazarX wrote:

Kagehiro wrote:

Always enjoyed rolling. I prefer the randomness to the "fairness" I suppose.

Here's the real question and answer honestly. Do you enjoy the sucky sets of numbers as much as the lucky ones?

That would depend on your definition of sucky. I think character flaws make fun roleplaying hooks/quirks, so long as there is a redeeming quality in there somewhere. If I rolled straight 18s (improbable though it might be) I wouldn't enjoy the character as much as if I'd rolled straight 13s. On the flip side of that coin, if I roll straight 3s, I'm not going to enjoy the character as much as if I'd rolled straight 9s.

If sucky to you is the character with straight 3s, then no... I would not enjoy playing him. As for my personal expectations/metric, I most enjoy a character somewhere in the +5 to +10 ballpark. They're strong enough to seem extraordinary compared to a common person, but not godlike (imo).

[Icyshadow]

Kagehiro, I think the problem is that some classes work fine with some flaws, but others require a bit of everything. Paladin has Wisdom and Intelligence technically as dump stats, but a dumb, ignorant Paladin sounds like an oxymoron, at least to me.

[Winter_Born]

From the amount of people who post impossible stats scores here, I can see why "rolling" is popular.

[knightnday]

Our group prefers to roll. After all, that's why we have all these dice!

[TheWarriorPoet519]

I tend to roll.

I also tend to run very high power games.

[Orthos]

Icyshadow wrote:

Kagehiro, I think the problem is that some classes work fine with some flaws, but others require a bit of everything. Paladin has Wisdom and Intelligence technically as dump stats, but a dumb, ignorant Paladin sounds like an oxymoron, at least to me.

I had a 7 WIS Paladin (clicky!) and had a blast with her.

Cooking is a Wis based skill. Keep her out of the kitchen! *choke choke cough gag wheeze*

[LazarX]

Dragonsage47 wrote:

Gotta have everyone be equal I see, bc the world is full of equal people, everyone is equally fast, strong, smart, good looking, wise...there is absolutely no variation in the real world and thus we should bring that over to our games... Idk...smacks of socialism creeping into my RPG's... no thanks enough of that in America for me... fortunately my whole game group agrees... point buy leads to little or no variation and thus reduces flavor for us...

You know, just because you don't use a given method, doesn't mean you have to be snarky about it. Rolling doesn't guarantee variety as I've seen people abort bunches of what they considered fail sets of stats until they got what they wanted.

And not everyone who uses point buy uses the messageboard munchkin formulae.

[Sunderstone]

LazarX wrote:

You know, just because you don't use a given method, doesn't mean you have to be snarky about it. Rolling doesn't guarantee variety as I've seen people abort bunches of what they considered fail sets of stats until they got what they wanted.

And not everyone who uses point buy uses the messageboard munchkin formulae.

Agree.

[Odraude]

Sunderstone wrote:

LazarX wrote:

You know, just because you don't use a given method, doesn't mean you have to be snarky about it. Rolling doesn't guarantee variety as I've seen people abort bunches of what they considered fail sets of stats until they got what they wanted.

And not everyone who uses point buy uses the messageboard munchkin formulae.

Agree.

But, if he isn't snarky about it, the commies will win! Do we really want that!?!

:)

[Auxmaulous]

PB (Opinion, so spare me the rage) does seem a bit boring with all spreads being the same. Considering the history/tradition and nature of the game (fantasy) I can see why people would be resistant to PB vs. rolling stats. That being said for society or tourney play it makes more sense.

I don't have problems with PB in flatter games, say a modern horror games with everyone playing a human. It just doesn't seem to fit in a fantasy genre where everyone’s stats are equal and all ending up looking exactly the same.

And for the record the last time I played AD&D (few months back) my pally had rolled pretty craptastic scores. Highest was a 17 (went on CHA) and then a 15 (STR). The rest of his stats had no modifiers. Probably one of the most fun characters I have played in a very long time.

Spoiler:

RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spoiler:

Explosive Runes

[LazarX]

Dragonamedrake wrote:

I blame MMO's. MMO's are the cause of all this "Everyone must be equal" crap. I have seen a big increase in Point buy and complaints that one person has an advantage over another because of BLA post after the popularity of MMO's spiked. Heck we had a few 1000+ post not to long ago. One was a guy complaining about a fellow party member getting extra Knowledge skill points. The other was about a party member charging for magic items he made so he had more gold then everyone else.... all I hear is.

WAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Seriously. Who cares if someone has better stats then you. Just roll with it... As for point buy. There is nothing wrong with it either. I just see both as being perfectly good options.

I disagree. I've seen people come up with homebrew point formulas all the way back in 1st Edition AD+D. they would be in the format of build your points from 72 or something like that. This was before the fricking Internet, let alone MMO's.

[Stubs McKenzie]

Winter_Born wrote:

From the amount of people who post impossible stats scores here, I can see why "rolling" is popular.

Impossible as in ...

"I rolled 4d6 drop lowest 6 times and came up with a 35, 28, 36..." ?

Or do you mean to say

'From the amount of people who post here and play with lenient GMs who allow them to reroll if the stats aren't that great but don't explain that every time they post rolling (not "rolling") is popular.' ... ?

Here is a true story:
First character I ever created, 2nd ed, everything was done in front of the DM or it did not count, no ifs, ands or buts. Rolled 3d6 for stats to be placed where we saw fit, and we could take 2 points from one stat to put 1 point in another, max 3 times, max 1 per stat increase.

18/00 str rolled straight
13 = lowest rolled score (didn't redistribute points at all)
Out of the 8 levels my character achieved, rolled MAX (10) hps for every single level except one (rolled an 8).
That entire campaign, any time I wanted to do something nearly impossible ~ not all that often but happened more than a handful of times ~ (bend heavy steel bars, that sort of thing), he would give me a 1%-3% chance, I don't think I failed once... ever.

Am I suggesting you consider this the norm? Absolutely not. I am, however, suggesting that when you put quotations around the word Rolling as if to say we who post high stats on boards are in some way liars or cheats that you look like an arse? Why yes I am.

I have played very strong (high point) characters before, and I have played weak (low point) characters as well, both can be fun and rewarding in their own way... I would even go so far as to say as long as a character can meaningfully contribute on a decent basis, that flaws are more fun than the opposite. I actually loved 2nd ed because pretty much every character built had both obvious strengths and weaknesses, and not-so-obvious flaws/weaknesses that really fleshed out a character during creation... It was much more difficult to create a "god-like, free of weaknesses" PC in 2nd ed than it is in 3rd and later incarnations.

When I roll characters, I have a bunch of concepts in my head, but as soon as the numbers hit paper, sometimes new and interesting ideas for characters pop up unexpectedly... that is what I really love the most. Silly numbers rolled in order stir creative juices for no particular reason other than my own excitement :)

[CommandoDude]

Dragonamedrake wrote:

WAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Seriously. Who cares if someone has better stats then you. Just roll with it...

I care. I don't want to feel useless because I rolled poor stats while my friend gets all the action because he was lucky with his rolls and I wasn't.

DnD is a TEAM game. It's about fighting as a group. And inevitably, you get one person who rolled poorly and can't keep up with the group.

It's not fun to be unable to meaningfully contribute to the game.

[Stubs McKenzie]

Just because you rolled poorly, while someone else rolled well does not mean you cannot meaningfully contribute to the game, at least from a purely objective point of view.

However, if you (subjectively) feel that it does cause a rift, it is a great reason to play with point buy :)

[Sergeant Brother]

I am to the point now, after over 20 years of playing D&D, that I can't stand rolling characters and unless there are unusual circumstances, I will not play in a game where attributes are rolled. I have seen far too many games where one player had insanely high attributes while others had horrendously low ones, and in such games the low rolling party members simply couldn't contribute as much mechanically.

Also, I have consistently seen the power gamers, game breakers, and dishonest or bad players push the hardest for rolling while the honest players, the ones most concerned about character development, and plot favor point buys. Of course, this is only my personal observation, but it has been a consistent observation over the years.

As for the argument that real life isn't fair - well, I can't throw fireballs or slay dragons in real life either. I have the other areas of my life to deal with the unfair circumstances in my life that are beyond my control, in a game I play for fun I don't want to start with an insurmountable disadvantage because of random chance. Also, in real life I had no say over my race or my gender, yet I have made choices and taken actions which have significantly changed what might be called my attributes.