For player characters and intentionally important NPC's, I tend to use point buy, mostly because it's the standard in my area and allows me to build something on the approximate power level of the other players. When it comes to less vital NPC's however, I roll for gender, race and stats using 4d6 drop one, in order, and then determining class and specialty. This seems to produce more memorable NPC's, although it is admittedly more time-consuming.
...
1) Rolling provides better balance between MAD and SAD classes - it's less likely that the SAD class will have the 18 to drop in their main stat.
...
I don't see how this creates a balance. It just shifts the relative attractiveness over to the MAD class.
...
2) Rolling provides better balance between power gamers and non-power gamers as well as experienced/inexperienced players for much the same reason - players are forced to make do with what they have rather than have full control over stat builds
...
I rather strongly disagree with this. An experienced player or whatever you are calling a power gamer* will probably still play the same way with non-optimal abilities.
An inexperienced or whatever you are not calling a power gamer* might not even be able to survive in the same environment.
...
3) No dumped stats - despite what other posters in this thread are saying, there is a substantial difference between having a rolled low stat that gets tucked away into a less-important stat and stat that is deliberately dumped to improve another stat. When you place your rolled stats, there is no extra value taken from one to maximize another. I also think there's a psychological difference that plays out at the table - fellow players seem to be more amenable to a PC claiming loot to fix a weakness created by a rolled stat than they are for a dumped stat because they perceive the player was "stuck with" the stat in the former, but deliberately took it in the latter.
...
This I kinda agree with. You will still have high and low scores but probably not quite as high and not quite as low. But that is only a probability. You might actually end up with even higher and even lower. I also agree that fellow players are probably a bit more sympathetic of a low rolled score.
...
4) Entirely subjectively - it's fun to sit around the table together and watch each other roll the stats. I have them roll up 2 sets of 6 and pick the set that they like better.
It can still give problems. The group I joined we rolled 2 full sets of 2d6+6. My high stat is a 13. Another guy's low stat is a 12. I am still trying to make it work, but many people would hate it.
On line die roller. It is a PbP campaign.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen some fair ways of rolling stats. I think my favorite goes like this:
Each player rolls 4d6, drop lowest, 6 times.
All the results for each player are recorded.
Now each player chooses one of the rolled sets to use. Players can choose the same set multiple times.
Everyone has the same opportunity for the same stats. You could end up with everyone using the same set, or you could end up with a caster taking a set that has an 18 and a 6, while another player takes one with a bunch of 14-16 stats but no penalties.
Here's an example set for a 4 person party:
set 1: 11 13 12 12 8 14
set 2: 11 14 14 13 13 14
set 3: 10 10 11 15 11 13
set 4: 14 13 7 12 8 8
Rolled using an online die roller. Hmm, those sets are somewhat cruddy. I could see a full caster going with set 3, and most players choosing set 2. Looks like sets 1 and 4 are just flat out worse than set 2 so I doubt anyone would pick them.
Anyway, that's just a (somewhat pathetic) example of how the system can work. At least you don't have set 4's roller frowning as he looks at everyone else's stats.
I've seen some fair ways of rolling stats. I think my favorite goes like this:
Each player rolls 4d6, drop lowest, 6 times.
All the results for each player are recorded.
Now each player chooses one of the rolled sets to use. Players can choose the same set multiple times.Everyone has the same opportunity for the same stats. You could end up with everyone using the same set, or you could end up with a caster taking a set that has an 18 and a 6, while another player takes one with a bunch of 14-16 stats but no penalties.
Ha! As someone who traditionally rolls mid-to-low on rolled stats, I'd TOTALLY take the rolls of some of the other guys in my group who traditionally roll super-high! That might sway me away from being locked in the point-buy corner
Before i even joined my group, they embraced high powered play and instituted a "reroll anything less then 10" rule. Somehow i still ended up with a high stat of 15 once. It was a game where everyone else rolled at least 2 18s. Incidentally i am rather fond of point buy. Although i rejiggured the cost values a little bit.
I've seen some fair ways of rolling stats. I think my favorite goes like this:
Each player rolls 4d6, drop lowest, 6 times.
All the results for each player are recorded.
Now each player chooses one of the rolled sets to use. Players can choose the same set multiple times.Everyone has the same opportunity for the same stats. You could end up with everyone using the same set, or you could end up with a caster taking a set that has an 18 and a 6, while another player takes one with a bunch of 14-16 stats but no penalties.
Here's an example set for a 4 person party:
set 1: 11 13 12 12 8 14
set 2: 11 14 14 13 13 14
set 3: 10 10 11 15 11 13
set 4: 14 13 7 12 8 8Rolled using an online die roller. Hmm, those sets are somewhat cruddy. I could see a full caster going with set 3, and most players choosing set 2. Looks like sets 1 and 4 are just flat out worse than set 2 so I doubt anyone would pick them.
Anyway, that's just a (somewhat pathetic) example of how the system can work. At least you don't have set 4's roller frowning as he looks at everyone else's stats.
I can see how that would work fairly.
But I don't really see it as much of an improvement over point buy. It doesn't give you variation or randomness. Now you are building off 1 to 4 sets of numbers.
No, this is where the GM fails (IMO).
I'd say this is where class design fails, actually.
Of course, there's not a big difference between 'I need more points for this class to make it good' and 'I need to roll multiple high stats for this class to make it good', if you think about it for fifteen seconds
This was one reason I liked the Pathfinder Beta rule on wizard schools - you got a spell-like ability for each spell level instead of a bonus spell, but the DC was based on Charisma.
I've seen some fair ways of rolling stats. I think my favorite goes like this:
Each player rolls 4d6, drop lowest, 6 times.
All the results for each player are recorded.
Now each player chooses one of the rolled sets to use. Players can choose the same set multiple times.Everyone has the same opportunity for the same stats. You could end up with everyone using the same set, or you could end up with a caster taking a set that has an 18 and a 6, while another player takes one with a bunch of 14-16 stats but no penalties.
Here's an example set for a 4 person party:
set 1: 11 13 12 12 8 14
set 2: 11 14 14 13 13 14
set 3: 10 10 11 15 11 13
set 4: 14 13 7 12 8 8Rolled using an online die roller. Hmm, those sets are somewhat cruddy. I could see a full caster going with set 3, and most players choosing set 2. Looks like sets 1 and 4 are just flat out worse than set 2 so I doubt anyone would pick them.
Anyway, that's just a (somewhat pathetic) example of how the system can work. At least you don't have set 4's roller frowning as he looks at everyone else's stats.
I have a friend who ALWAYS , ALWAYS gets freaking awesome results with rolls.
With this we would all be freaking awesome hehe.
PD: I use the same dices she used just after , no , she did not cheat :P.
I'm a stat roller. When I run table-top games of D&D and PF, we roll stats. No exceptions. There are a few reasons for this:
2) Rolling provides better balance between power gamers and non-power gamers as well as experienced/inexperienced players for much the same reason - players are forced to make do with what they have rather than have full control over stat builds
I'm also a fan of rolling, however I dont think this is right.
.In my opinion, discrepancies in system mastery are going to be amplified by variations in stat values. People who understand the system well are going to be able to eke out extra advantages if they're lucky rollers and deal with the consequences if they're unlucky. At least with point buy, those who are clueless about the system can easily find heaps of advice online as to how to build their character.
I do still prefer rolling (since at our table, we're all roughly as competent as each other in this regard) but I think this is a negative for that system, not a positive.
when i roll. i get either the lowest abysmal rolls, or the highest of the 7 heavens, i never get to go in between on a middleground. it's why i like point buy.
I think one of the biggest problems with points buy is the predictability of characters you just know that the barbarian who has muscles in his shit will have an int and charisma that's in the crapper very rarely will they be average
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the biggest problems with points buy is the predictability of characters you just know that the barbarian who has muscles in his s$!@ will have an int and charisma that's in the crapper very rarely will they be average
Every class has stats that are usually the dump stats and they will be those with point buy or with rolled stats (if you can freely allocate your rolled stats). Claiming that low values in certain stats exist only with point by borders on lying.
Complaining that many barbarians have low cha is like complaining that many wizards have low strength.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my experience, if you cut to the heart of it, rolling and point buy give you two specific types of gameplay feel.
Rolling gives the feeling that it's not in your control. This is good for a player that wants the game to tell him what to play.
The extreme is to roll in order and then choose a class based on the stats you've been given. This emulates the character coming out of an organic world and deciding what to do with his life.
Point Buy gives the feeling of complete control. You will know exactly what you are going to get, down to the final point.
This is great for a player that has a specific character type he wants to play. A player that says "I want to try a Barbarian/Oracle" before he starts playing will get the most bang for his buck by doing point buy, because he gaurantees that his character isn't hobbled right from the start.
There's a third option, but it's mostly GM used: Stat Array. This helps the GM because of two factors. First, it keeps the power level of the character vs the CR in check. Someone with 4x 18s or 4x 10 or lower can really affect the power level of the party. If it's a key character (tank, etc) it can make the GM's job just that much harder in balancing things (especially if he's running a pre-made, although they typically are made for 15 pb and/or non-min-maxing).
The second is that it keeps the power level between characters the same. This can be to make sure people aren't feeling like they aren't contributing, as much as to stop jealousy in the less mature players.
System mastery already can skew things enough, having a power discrepancy (vs CR or each player) just magnifies this.
.
I've played and enjoyed a number of these (never really did the stat array before as a player, although I offered it as an alternative to point buy to my players once).
Played the "roll in order" random method, and picked my class and race based on what I got (severely mentally deficient Half Orc Barbarian).
Most of the time I prefer picking my character ahead of time, and point buy is my favored for that.
Ultimately, as a player I will go with whatever the group is wanting to go with (or GM wants us to use), not a game-dropping point for me.
Did I mention I use organic rolls?
No slipping that low roll into an unimportant stat, nope.
Well there is a stat swap but most people use it to put their best score into their primary ability not to tuck a low roll out of the way.
This is what I call Hardcore gaming. And let me tell you it is a blast. It also tends to build group cooperation as they try to cover weaknesses in their secondary stats.
|
|
Did I mention I use organic rolls?
No slipping that low roll into an unimportant stat, nope.
Well there is a stat swap but most people use it to put their best score into their primary ability not to tuck a low roll out of the way.This is what I call Hardcore gaming. And let me tell you it is a blast. It also tends to build group cooperation as they try to cover weaknesses in their secondary stats.
See this I could go for. However, usually hard core rollers are, 4D6 drop the lowest re-roll 1s put them in any order you like and if you dont like it simply re-roll all of them.
The rule we typically go with is if you have 4 or more stats that are <0 or are at 0 then you get to reroll, but for the most part you are stuck with what you get, and you get one reroll, but if you do your stats are locked in the order you rolled them.
For D&D style games I dramatically prefer rolled stats, every group I have ever played with prefers rolled stats. It's almost certainly has something to do with all of coming from a background of AD&D, and an appreciation of the tradition, but we also find the whole process to be incredibly fun too.
I've never once seen a person get upset that somebody else rolled really well, or felt inadequate because their stats weren't up to par with the rest of the group. We instead we celebrated the differences in the characters and the guy with the good stats was the lucky guy and we congratulated him.
In point buy characters feel bland and uninteresting and usually pretty weak as well. You have just enough points to get what you need to make your character work and nothing else. Player stats usually end up nearly identical removing anything to distinguish your character from others.
That said I play lots of other games that don't use dice rolled stats, and have loads of fun with them. I think the part that distinguishes them from D&D-esque games is that your point buy isn't just limited to Ability scores, but to everything. So if you want to have dramatically better ability scores you can just make sacrifices elsewhere. The result of this flexibility being a much stronger sense of character identity than point buy limited just to ability scores.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer rolling for stats, for one thing I usually don't roll anything lower than a point buy would get me. For example, we reconstructed our very first characters (standard rolling) as point buy, but noticed we were pretty much lower than our original builds. When we looked at our original builds, the rolled stats were all around 25-30 point value. The transition to a 15 point buy meant we went from being well rounded characters to having to decide where to cut so we could do well in our main strength.
From an RP perspective, rolls reflect the randomness of our births. Point buys mean most builds fall into a standard mold.
From another perspective, I just prefer not being having to build a stat array along with everything else. I have enough choices to make, this is one less thing to kick myself about.
the stats aren't just simply a thing derived from one's birth, training yourself to a given path also molds those scores
it's why point buy sounds more realistic to me than rolled stats, the basic premise, is you aren't born with a set amount of stats, but you are born with a series of genetic physical differences and a series of cultural differences, which would be represented by racial modifiers and class selection, not your base attributes
the concept of point buy is like, if we treat level as akin to age and experience, older characters often have more points to spend, not because they are older or have a divine blessing, but because they are more experienced and happen to be higher level.
i prefer the following houserule alongside my point buy in place of the stat point every 4 levels.
at every level, including first, you recieve 2 additional points you can use to raise your attributes in the point buy method. this point buy, represents the improvement of your attributes. i also use the rule that level 1 PCs can't start with an attribute higher than 17 after racial modifiers. you can bank unspent points for later and this is usually in addition to a 25 point allotment, but i like to add, that after racial modifiers, you can't have an attribute higher than 17+1/4 of your level before items.
and i work on the following chart
a 19 costs 21 points, 4 points more than an 18
a 20 costs 26 points, 5 points more than a 19
a 21 costs 31 points, or 5 points more than a 20
a 22 costs 37 points or 6 points more than a 21
For D&D style games I dramatically prefer rolled stats, every group I have ever played with prefers rolled stats. It's almost certainly has something to do with all of coming from a background of AD&D, and an appreciation of the tradition, but we also find the whole process to be incredibly fun too.
I've never once seen a person get upset that somebody else rolled really well, or felt inadequate because their stats weren't up to par with the rest of the group. We instead we celebrated the differences in the characters and the guy with the good stats was the lucky guy and we congratulated him.
In point buy characters feel bland and uninteresting and usually pretty weak as well. You have just enough points to get what you need to make your character work and nothing else. Player stats usually end up nearly identical removing anything to distinguish your character from others.
That said I play lots of other games that don't use dice rolled stats, and have loads of fun with them. I think the part that distinguishes them from D&D-esque games is that your point buy isn't just limited to Ability scores, but to everything. So if you want to have dramatically better ability scores you can just make sacrifices elsewhere. The result of this flexibility being a much stronger sense of character identity than point buy limited just to ability scores.
i like those other systems too, but if you want to make point buy characters feel interesting, just forget they have numbers on a character sheet and roleplay them with a personality you find interesting with the numbers you have
there isn't much difference between a barbarian with 17 strength and 10 intelligence and charisma, and a barbarian with 19 strength and 7 intelligence and charisma. they are both strong barbarians and can be pretty much interchangeable with roleplay. the only differences are mechanical. i find dump stats of 7 or 5 more interesting than dump stats of 10. if every barbarian is the same to you in point buy, then clearly, your group must play all their barbarians the same. sounds like some people need to reimagine those scores rather than play dumb ugly thogg. as a good example of a unique human barbarian with 7 intelligence and charisma, look at Owlbear from skull and shackles, he's an autistic man-child with poor social skills, a learning disability, a likeable, though sometimes annoying personality, and reminds me a bit of a modernized dopey from snow white done slightly better. generally sweet, simple, seeking approval, easy to please, and a bit awkward. but he is an interesting spin on the 7 int 7 cha 19 str human barbarian.
Nothing wrong with my group, we just feel that it is poor role playing to play a character that doesn't match your stats. Also 10 is not intelligent or charismatic, it's average. An intelligent and charismatic barbarian would need at least a 12 in both Intelligence and Charisma which would cut heavily into other stats that are quite important to playing even a marginally competent Barbarian.
Nothing wrong with my group, we just feel that it is poor role playing to play a character that doesn't match your stats. Also 10 is not intelligent or charismatic, it's average. An intelligent and charismatic barbarian would need at least a 12 in both Intelligence and Charisma which would cut heavily into other stats that are quite important to playing even a marginally competent Barbarian.
i didn't mention an intelligent charismatic barbarian, just an alternate spin on a Low INT Low CHA barbarian that was done in an AP.
a 7 is only 10% below average and a 12 is only 5% above average.
You can do as many different variations of the Low Int Low Cha barbarian you want. Eventually, you realize it's still the same stupid barbarian that is always played.
It's basically an enforced and very negative stereotype. It's that way with most classes.
In the end characters tend to be far more interesting when they break from normal expectations rather than conforming to them. Rolled stats make this far easier by providing odd outlier stats to work with.
I'm a stat roller. When I run table-top games of D&D and PF, we roll stats. No exceptions. There are a few reasons for this:
1) Rolling provides better balance between MAD and SAD classes - it's less likely that the SAD class will have the 18 to drop in their main stat.
2) Rolling provides better balance between power gamers and non-power gamers as well as experienced/inexperienced players for much the same reason - players are forced to make do with what they have rather than have full control over stat builds
3) No dumped stats - despite what other posters in this thread are saying, there is a substantial difference between having a rolled low stat that gets tucked away into a less-important stat and stat that is deliberately dumped to improve another stat. When you place your rolled stats, there is no extra value taken from one to maximize another. I also think there's a psychological difference that plays out at the table - fellow players seem to be more amenable to a PC claiming loot to fix a weakness created by a rolled stat than they are for a dumped stat because they perceive the player was "stuck with" the stat in the former, but deliberately took it in the latter.
4) Entirely subjectively - it's fun to sit around the table together and watch each other roll the stats. I have them roll up 2 sets of 6 and pick the set that they like better.
1. An 18 is way over valued. I would gladly trade in an 18 16 12 for 16 16 14, even for a SAD class.
2. Rolling does nothing for balance. If I roll like a superhero, and next guy rolls terrible we will not be equal. Now of course the GM can let him reroll, but if there is a base minimum then it is better to just use stat arrays.
3. Most people I know have a weakness. I am not saying dumping a stat is a great thing, but it can simulate that, and dumped stats are not bad. If the player takes it to extremes such as a 5, then running a game where any stat can be drain or damaged is an option.
Did I mention I use organic rolls?
No slipping that low roll into an unimportant stat, nope.
Well there is a stat swap but most people use it to put their best score into their primary ability not to tuck a low roll out of the way.This is what I call Hardcore gaming. And let me tell you it is a blast. It also tends to build group cooperation as they try to cover weaknesses in their secondary stats.
If this is done I would roll first and choose a class 2nd. In real life your abilities do have control over what you do. Being a wizard or fighter with a 10 or 11 in your primary stat is not going to be fun for most people.
Nothing wrong with my group, we just feel that it is poor role playing to play a character that doesn't match your stats. Also 10 is not intelligent or charismatic, it's average. An intelligent and charismatic barbarian would need at least a 12 in both Intelligence and Charisma which would cut heavily into other stats that are quite important to playing even a marginally competent Barbarian.
20 point puy (human)
str 16
con 14(16 because of +2 from being human)
dex 9
int 12
wis 12
cha 12
20 points and I just gave you an barbarian with above average mental stats, that is good in combat.
Nothing wrong with my group, we just feel that it is poor role playing to play a character that doesn't match your stats. Also 10 is not intelligent or charismatic, it's average. An intelligent and charismatic barbarian would need at least a 12 in both Intelligence and Charisma which would cut heavily into other stats that are quite important to playing even a marginally competent Barbarian.i didn't mention an intelligent charismatic barbarian, just an alternate spin on a Low INT Low CHA barbarian that was done in an AP.
a 7 is only 10% below average and a 12 is only 5% above average.
Not really, no. Ability scores, just like real-world determinations of intellect like IQ, are spread on a bell curve, not a linear distribution.
So, even though IQ is a linear scale, the number of people in each category are distributed via a bell curve. A player with an 18 intelligence, therefore, is likely to be in the top 1% of the population.
However, as my previous experiment showed, if we start "human intelligence" at 3 (1 point above being an animal) where an IQ of 40ish would be (a severely handicapped person), an int of 7 will bring you up to an IQ of 72 which is 'borderline handicapped'.
Similarly, you need to hit an IQ of 15 before you can be considered "gifted" (IQ 136)
Honestly , if you are not playing with people who REALLY look over their stats , rolling will give you a bigger variety , it is that simple.
Example:
20 point puy (human)str 16
con 14(16 because of +2 from being human)
dex 9
int 12
wis 12
cha 12
20 points and I just gave you an barbarian with above average mental stats, that is good in combat.
Heh , the number of player who would ever put their points like this is MUCH smaller than the oner who would drop char/int/wis without even a second thought IF they could pick to do so.
Chances are if they could they would have atmost all 3 at 10, if not one or more less.
That is a logical thing to do if you want to focus on fighting.
But if you give the guy the: 16/12/9/12/12/12 , he can only get one of them below 10.
I'm a stat roller. When I run table-top games of D&D and PF, we roll stats. No exceptions. There are a few reasons for this:
1) Rolling provides better balance between MAD and SAD classes - it's less likely that the SAD class will have the 18 to drop in their main stat.
2) Rolling provides better balance between power gamers and non-power gamers as well as experienced/inexperienced players for much the same reason - players are forced to make do with what they have rather than have full control over stat builds
3) No dumped stats - despite what other posters in this thread are saying, there is a substantial difference between having a rolled low stat that gets tucked away into a less-important stat and stat that is deliberately dumped to improve another stat. When you place your rolled stats, there is no extra value taken from one to maximize another. I also think there's a psychological difference that plays out at the table - fellow players seem to be more amenable to a PC claiming loot to fix a weakness created by a rolled stat than they are for a dumped stat because they perceive the player was "stuck with" the stat in the former, but deliberately took it in the latter.
4) Entirely subjectively - it's fun to sit around the table together and watch each other roll the stats. I have them roll up 2 sets of 6 and pick the set that they like better.
1. An 18 is way over valued. I would gladly trade in an 18 16 12 for 16 16 14, even for a SAD class.
2. Rolling does nothing for balance. If I roll like a superhero, and next guy rolls terrible we will not be equal. Now of course the GM can let him reroll, but if there is a base minimum then it is better to just use stat arrays.
3. Most people I know have a weakness. I am not saying dumping a stat is a great thing, but it can simulate that, and dumped stats are not bad. If the player takes it to extremes such as a 5, then running a game where any stat can be drain or damaged is an option.
+1
Nothing wrong with my group, we just feel that it is poor role playing to play a character that doesn't match your stats. Also 10 is not intelligent or charismatic, it's average. An intelligent and charismatic barbarian would need at least a 12 in both Intelligence and Charisma which would cut heavily into other stats that are quite important to playing even a marginally competent Barbarian.i didn't mention an intelligent charismatic barbarian, just an alternate spin on a Low INT Low CHA barbarian that was done in an AP.
a 7 is only 10% below average and a 12 is only 5% above average.
Not really, no. Ability scores, just like real-world determinations of intellect like IQ, are spread on a bell curve, not a linear distribution.
So, even though IQ is a linear scale, the number of people in each category are distributed via a bell curve. A player with an 18 intelligence, therefore, is likely to be in the top 1% of the population.
However, as my previous experiment showed, if we start "human intelligence" at 3 (1 point above being an animal) where an IQ of 40ish would be (a severely handicapped person), an int of 7 will bring you up to an IQ of 72 which is 'borderline handicapped'.
Similarly, you need to hit an IQ of 15 before you can be considered "gifted" (IQ 136)
i was talking about the bonuses and penalties on the die
the I.Q. stuff is merely mentioned by DMs who wish to limit a fighter or barbarian's tactical choices
thing is, on the battlefield that is fantasy combat, if you get defeated often by a particular tactic on a regular basis, you are either going to learn eventual counters, even if you are an animal, or you are going to adopt that tactic to the best your brain and appendages can push you.
it's why most of my group used mounted archers for years, our foes were beating the snot out of us, so we trained in mounted archery to counter the tactics our foes commonly used against us.
You can do as many different variations of the Low Int Low Cha barbarian you want. Eventually, you realize it's still the same stupid barbarian that is always played.
It's basically an enforced and very negative stereotype. It's that way with most classes.
In the end characters tend to be far more interesting when they break from normal expectations rather than conforming to them. Rolled stats make this far easier by providing odd outlier stats to work with.
there is more to a character than the numbers on their sheet, it's when you percieve the characters to be the same in numbers, and thus exactly the same, when the game has devolved into a numbers game
i haven't played barbarians with above average charisma, but i have played barbarians with above average intelligence and wisdom scores, that had a lot more depth than "Hulk Smash." a lot of them were classic "Helk Smash" Races too like Half-Giants, Onispawn and Orcs, though i had to sacrifice that 18+ Str to do it.
an 18 or higher in anything, is overrated and overvalued. a 17 after racial modifiers is perfectly fine to me. hell, i've even played characters with a 15 in their main stat off the bat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing wrong with my group, we just feel that it is poor role playing to play a character that doesn't match your stats. Also 10 is not intelligent or charismatic, it's average. An intelligent and charismatic barbarian would need at least a 12 in both Intelligence and Charisma which would cut heavily into other stats that are quite important to playing even a marginally competent Barbarian.i didn't mention an intelligent charismatic barbarian, just an alternate spin on a Low INT Low CHA barbarian that was done in an AP.
a 7 is only 10% below average and a 12 is only 5% above average.
Not really, no. Ability scores, just like real-world determinations of intellect like IQ, are spread on a bell curve, not a linear distribution.
So, even though IQ is a linear scale, the number of people in each category are distributed via a bell curve. A player with an 18 intelligence, therefore, is likely to be in the top 1% of the population.
However, as my previous experiment showed, if we start "human intelligence" at 3 (1 point above being an animal) where an IQ of 40ish would be (a severely handicapped person), an int of 7 will bring you up to an IQ of 72 which is 'borderline handicapped'.
Similarly, you need to hit an IQ of 15 before you can be considered "gifted" (IQ 136)
i was talking about the bonuses and penalties on the die
the I.Q. stuff is merely mentioned by DMs who wish to limit a fighter or barbarian's tactical choices
thing is, on the battlefield that is fantasy combat, if you get defeated often by a particular tactic on a regular basis, you are either going to learn eventual counters, even if you are an animal, or you are going to adopt that tactic to the best your brain and appendages can push you.
it's why most of my group used mounted archers for years, our foes were beating the snot out of us, so we trained in mounted archery to counter the tactics our foes commonly used against us.
Oh, sure. I mean, the other thing to consider is that intelligence is often the ability to handle lots of different intellectual scenarios. A person that is below average intelligence in their own area of expertise an easily be more knowledgeable than a highly intelligent person.
To wit, it is very possible that the town blacksmith knows a heck of a lot more about metalworking than the group's wizard, even though the wizard most assuredly has a higher intelligence.
This same effect will apply to a fighter with a 7 intelligence. He is not going to be as well rounded in terms of his reasoning and ability to process information. Some things may just be beyond him. This is reflected by his reduced skill points and the penalties he gets on int based skills.
Should he be "stupid" or roleplayed as such? Well, no. Maybe he gets frustrated by dense reading, doesn't "get" philosophy and sucks at math... doesn't mean that he suddenly has to forget basic things, talk with a speech impediment and act like a moron.
Honestly , if you are not playing with people who REALLY look over their stats , rolling will give you a bigger variety , it is that simple.
Example:
20 point puy (human)str 16
con 14(16 because of +2 from being human)
dex 9
int 12
wis 12
cha 12
20 points and I just gave you an barbarian with above average mental stats, that is good in combat.
Heh , the number of player who would ever put their points like this is MUCH smaller than the oner who would drop char/int/wis without even a second thought IF they could pick to do so.
Chances are if they could they would have atmost all 3 at 10, if not one or more less.
That is a logical thing to do if you want to focus on fighting.
But if you give the guy the: 16/12/9/12/12/12 , he can only get one of them below 10.
Variety does not matter if the player won't play the mental stat as it is, and the player that won't play the stat and is only looking for power will basically give you the same build either way. Rolling wont change that.
Variety does not matter if the player won't play the mental stat as it is, and the player that won't play the stat and is only looking for power will basically give you the same build either way. Rolling wont change that.
Well , i dont agree with you here.
I think if the player roll his stats , maybe he wont be so bad at things he would have made himself bad at , while not being so good at what he would made himself a monster at.
Number of barbarians that will get a 7 atleast in one wis/int/char , while even adding this to roleplay , is BIG. And many of them will go for 18 str or higher dex/con.
If the guy roll , he can put his worse results in wis/char/int , but maybe they are not that bad , while he may not have a 18 for str and so on.
Heh im used to not getting awesome results in rolls , but i still would rather roll than point build.
there is more to a character than the numbers on their sheet, it's when you percieve the characters to be the same in numbers, and thus exactly the same, when the game has devolved into a numbers game
i haven't played barbarians with above average charisma, but i have played barbarians with above average intelligence and wisdom scores, that had a lot more depth than "Hulk Smash." a lot of them were classic "Helk Smash" Races too like Half-Giants, Onispawn and Orcs, though i had to sacrifice that 18+ Str to do it.
I didn't say there can't be a lot of different and even interesting ways to play a given set of stats, but that any given set of stats has a certain range of possible character types.
Given the ability requirements to be an effective barbarian, taken with the limited nature of point buy this forces any barbarian into a given range of stats in order to be effective. This range basically precludes any character that socially or mentally competent. The idea of a Barbarian that is both competent at his job and a genius is impossible without some crippling disability, probably crippling social disability.
The result is that negative stereotypes such as Barbarians, or and main fighter for that matter, is stupid and socially inept, and all casters are weak and frail. Your stupid and social ineptitude and weak and frailty may vary, but you are still stuck in that range without making serious sacrifices.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Variety does not matter if the player won't play the mental stat as it is, and the player that won't play the stat and is only looking for power will basically give you the same build either way. Rolling wont change that.Well , i dont agree with you here.
I think if the player roll his stats , maybe he wont be so bad at things he would have made himself bad at , while not being so good at what he would made himself a monster at.
Number of barbarians that will get a 7 atleast in one wis/int/char , while even adding this to roleplay , is BIG. And many of them will go for 18 str or higher dex/con.
If the guy roll , he can put his worse results in wis/char/int , but maybe they are not that bad , while he may not have a 18 for str and so on.
Heh im used to not getting awesome results in rolls , but i still would rather roll than point build.
First of all 18's are over rated, and when people do point buy they dont generally try to get an 18 unless the character is SAD, and those are usually casters. Even if rolling for a caster and 18 is not needed since they can craft magic items to boost the stat and take feats to up the DC of spells.
which is to say-->Rolling has had no effect on powergaming, unless someone rolls very poorly, and the GM refuses rerolls. That is another way of saying the basic effectiveness of the character is not hurt at all if he has average rolls. No matter if I(not me specifically) point buy or roll each stat has a priority, and that won't change because I rolled.
^ This guy here is right.
Point buy ensures that you can make sure your character has the stats you want where you want them, but I don't feel it makes the game better. Higher point buys allow for more flexibility, lower point buys force players to be as strong as weak NPCs designed to be killed in one or two hits.
I've done arrays, and I don't really like those either, mainly because there will be someone getting shafted.
Honestly I don't think giving out 2 18's is overpowered. A monk with an 18 DEX and an 18 WIS really isn't going to break the game, especially for DMs with experience in knowing how to mix up encounters.
Even when you look at something like a wizard, is it really OP if you let the player have an 18 in both DEX and INT? I mean really, he gets what, +2 to his AC and to hit with rays at most? Designing the game off such a principle really makes me dislike the point buy system.
But what I hate more than the point buy system, is when the point buy system is used to judge other stat buying systems as if it were a fair comparison. If I wanted to judge my game based on point buy, I would just be using point buy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well this has been a lively and (mostly) well mannered debate lots to think on and good points made by both sides
If this is done I would roll first and choose a class 2nd. In real life your abilities do have control over what you do. Being a wizard or fighter with a 10 or 11 in your primary stat is not going to be fun for most people.Did I mention I use organic rolls?
No slipping that low roll into an unimportant stat, nope.
Well there is a stat swap but most people use it to put their best score into their primary ability not to tuck a low roll out of the way.This is what I call Hardcore gaming. And let me tell you it is a blast. It also tends to build group cooperation as they try to cover weaknesses in their secondary stats.
Why on earth would you play a primary stat that low? That IS why there is a stat swap. So that even if you had your heart set on a wizard and only rolled a 10 Int, you could swap in the 15 from Dex and still be very smart. You then have a 10 Dex and that may affect your spell and tactical choices, making the wizard play differently from another wizard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For D&D style games I dramatically prefer rolled stats, every group I have ever played with prefers rolled stats. It's almost certainly has something to do with all of coming from a background of AD&D, and an appreciation of the tradition, but we also find the whole process to be incredibly fun too. ...
I am also from that time period. I used to like it. I don't hate it now, but I don't like it as much as I used to.
... I've never once seen a person get upset that somebody else rolled really well, or felt inadequate because their stats weren't up to par with the rest of the group. We instead we celebrated the differences in the characters and the guy with the good stats was the lucky guy and we congratulated him. ...
Few things here.
- In the newer versions of the game, I feel the ability scores have an even bigger impact on game play then they did back then. So not quite so good of scores didn't bother be much since just a little bit better wouldn't really have much effect on survivability or effectiveness.
- Back in them olden days - between more free time to play more often, faster pace of game, and the high lethality; I wouldn't actually end up playing a character with poor scores all that long. Within a few weeks I would probably be playing something new anyway.
- I have been the lone guy at the table with the crappy scores. I did not complain out loud to the others. But after a year and a half of just barely being able to survive and not really being able to contribute to success, I really wasn't having as much fun. It was even worse once we started getting into the high levels and I couldn't qualify for many feats, use the high level spells, spell DC's are too low, can't hit, can't do much damage, skill checks usually fail, saves usually fail, etc... {{ Yes, a high level of system mastery and carefully building to get around the weaknesses can make up for much of that, but I didn't have that level of system master at that time. }}
- I have been the lone guy at the table with the phenom scores. It was almost as bad. To avoid a TPK the GM had to keep the encounter levels down to a point where I was never challenged and never really threatened. If the group could survive an encounter without a death, I could almost solo it. I was bored and had to play stupidly to keep from overshadowing the whole rest of the table. {{ Yes, looking back I should have played a 'low powered' character like a rogue or combat maneuver monk not my eldritch knight. But that never occurred to me at the time. }}
... In point buy characters feel bland and uninteresting and usually pretty weak as well. You have just enough points to get what you need to make your character work and nothing else ...
If your rolled stats are higher and allow for more interesting characters, how is that different from just using a higher point buy. Someone up thread was talking about how his rolled stats always made better characters. But if you look at the numbers, he was using approximately a 30-35 point buy equivalent. Of course that makes better characters and will have higher non-primary abilities. You could get very similar results if you just let everyone build with 30-35 point buy instead or 15-20 point buy. If you don't like barbarians with an 18 strength, how is that different than just saying you can't start with any ability over 16. (And do you have as much problem with a 18 int wizard? I see that more often but not as many seem to mind that.) But actually, even with 20 point buy, I rarely have an ability at 18.
... Player stats usually end up nearly identical removing anything to distinguish your character from others ...
Not sure where this is coming from. We play almost exclusively point buy now. Not one of our character in the last 4 years has been even remotely similar to any of the others. Neither in ability scores nor in the rest of the build. (Well, except folks new to the game who tend to end up with pretty generic builds the first time.)
Every class has stats that are usually the dump stats and they will be those with point buy or with rolled stats (if you can freely allocate your rolled stats). Claiming that low values in certain stats exist only with point by borders on lying.
The point isn't that there won't be low scores. There will be and people will put them in places where they think it will harm them least. The point is how you get those low scores - the process required to get them. When you roll, they're happenstance and you make the best of what you get. But with point buy, you specifically dump them in order to boost something else with the points you shave. That's the difference. When you roll, you aren't compensated anything for a low score.
... The point is how you get those low scores - the process required to get them. When you roll, they're happenstance and you make the best of what you get. But with point buy, you specifically dump them in order to boost something else with the points you shave. That's the difference. When you roll, you aren't compensated anything for a low score.
I don't see how that is a difference in anything except your perception of the scores.
Mechanically - my rolled 14 cons & 7 wis is that same as my point buy 14 con & 7 wis.
In use - I will play my 7 wisdom the same whether I roll it or choose it.
I will agree there can be a perception of difference. I won't be looked down on by some players if I have a rolled 7 instead of a chosen 7 in a stat. But that is a fairly petty and minor advantage compared to all the disadvantages that I've seen with rolled stats.
Few things here.
In the newer versions of the game, I feel the ability scores have an even bigger impact on game play then they did back then. So not quite so good of scores didn't bother be much since just a little bit better wouldn't really have much effect on survivability or effectiveness.
Back in them olden days - between more free time to play more often, faster pace of game, and the high lethality; I wouldn't actually end up playing a character with poor scores all that long. Within a few weeks I would probably be playing something new anyway.
I have been the lone guy at the table with the crappy scores. I did not complain out loud to the others. But after a year and a half of just barely being able to survive and not really being able to contribute to success, I really wasn't having as much fun. It was even worse once we started getting into the high levels and I couldn't qualify for many feats, use the high level spells, spell DC's are too low, can't hit, can't do much damage, skill checks usually fail, saves usually fail, etc... {{ Yes, a high level of system mastery and carefully building to get around the weaknesses can make up for much of that, but I didn't have that level of system master at that time. }}
I have been the lone guy at the table with the phenom scores. It was almost as bad. To avoid a TPK the GM had to keep the encounter levels down to a point where I was never challenged and never really threatened. If the group could survive an encounter without a death, I could almost solo it. I was bored and had to play stupidly to keep from overshadowing the whole rest of the table. {{ Yes, looking back I should have played a 'low powered' character like a rogue or combat maneuver monk not my eldritch knight. But that never occurred to me at the time. }}
It's a bit of a yes and a no, in my estimation. In earlier days of D&D, modifiers could be pretty important - it's just that they were harder to come by because they clustered tighter at the top of the 3-18 scale. If anything, I would expect that to lead to more PCs in the shadily-rolled territory in order to get those high stats. 3e's stat distribution freed us, somewhat, from needing stellar stats to gain reasonably good modifiers.
Earlier editions of D&D often involved rolling a d20 under a stat to succeed at something. That too promoted the importance of stats because each point in it was a +5% chance of success. 3e's modifiers have the potential to lower the slope on that a bit because they're based on half your score (all, of course, depending on how the DCs are set).
That said, monsters benefiting from stat bonuses was new in 3e so there's some inflationary pressure between PCs and monsters.
I think most of the inflationary pressure, however, comes from expectations. Because those bonuses are within reach and improving them a step is also always within reach AND the magic items that allow such improvements are always on and always of benefit, players find that strategy of PC building extremely attractive.
If your rolled stats are higher and allow for more interesting characters, how is that different from just using a higher point buy. Someone up thread was talking about how his rolled stats always made better characters. But if you look at the numbers, he was using approximately a 30-35 point buy equivalent.
<snip>
But actually, even with 20 point buy, I rarely have an ability at 18.
I think you're highlighting one of the problems with comparing point buy values of rolled PCs. If you're willing to not buy up to the 18 (and upthread when wraithstrike says the 18 is overrated), then the extra points it costs to buy the 18 aren't a good indicator of the value of the rolled PC's high stats. For example, if someone had rolled all 14s, that's a character with a stellar set of moderate bonuses and who costs 30 points. But let's face it, he's not that attractive a character since his highest bonus is a +2, not all of those +2s are equally valued in his class, and he's got some distance to go to even get a +3 on one stat.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't get me wrong. I don't hate rolled stats. If it is a good group of players and a decent GM, but they use rolled stats, I am perfectly happy to sit at their table.
I just don't see the advantages supposedly bestowed by rolled stats.
Or if they monkey enough with their rolling method, I don't see that it is significantly different from using a high point buy.
|
|
You can do as many different variations of the Low Int Low Cha barbarian you want. Eventually, you realize it's still the same stupid barbarian that is always played.
It's basically an enforced and very negative stereotype. It's that way with most classes.
In the end characters tend to be far more interesting when they break from normal expectations rather than conforming to them. Rolled stats make this far easier by providing odd outlier stats to work with.
This is of course assuming you worry about each persons stats. I used to be a slave to attribute points like many folks. Trying other systems has freed me of that. I mean seriously you would give someone a hard time about a 10 charisma but not a 12 as a barbarian? Do you really stop someone at the table and say, "maybe if you had a point or two more intelligence you could think that up."? I get that a 7 cha shouldn't be prince charming but making a deal out of a few points is really arbitrary. Mechanically the character will fall short and that's all the adjudication necessary.