Most of the problems I have had with stat generation come from over imposing DMs who need to control the players more and more.
Then you shouldn't have a problem with point buy, which gives total control to the players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except it doesn't really work that way.
Take a level 1 medium ranger with a great-axe attacking an AC 21 foe without a feat applying to the attack. With a STR of 14 the ranger will hit on a 18+ and do 3-14 points of damage, while with a STR of 18 the ranger will hit on a 16+ and do 5-16 points of damage - the 18 STR ranger hits not 10% more often but TWICE as often as the 14 STR ranger as well as doing more damage. Even against an AC 10 opponent the STR 14 ranger will hit 70% of the time versus the STR 18 ranger's 80% hit rate, meaning the 18 STR ranger is about 14% more likely to hit, or 14% more effective against AC 10 opponents.
Actually, it does work the way Sgt Spectre says and it works the way you lay it out here. The difference is perspective. If the 14 Strength ranger is doing nothing but comparing successes, then your perspective dominates. But if he's not - if he's looking at all outcomes - then Sgt Spectre's perspective dominates. It's up to the GM to help manage those expectations and perspectives because they can crop up whether you use point buy or rolling for stats unless everyone ends up being built the same.
I enjoy all the side discussion in this thread. Rolling v. point buy is a fun metaphor for real life, and it's fun watching all the arguments it provokes. By the way, real life is the ultimate rolling experience, so those that want a truly realistic experience have an argument in favor of rolling for points. Life ain't a 20 point buy.
And since I game to get away from how sucky and unfair real life is, gimme PB any day of the week.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OTOH, I´ve seen it way too often that very high(ish) point buy values or really lucky rolls led to players who were over-protecting of their "luck" characters and steered them as far from danger as possible.
I actually have the opposite experience. In games I've ran, or played in, in which characters had very high stats, this was generally interpreted by the players as a license to make quirky, idiosyncratic, interestingly flawed, or other bits of character fluff that get in the way of optimal playing.
It's when characters have very low stats, I find, that players feel like they need to buckle down, optimize, and "win" rather than just having fun with a character concept they like.
But different groups are obviously going to deal with this stuff differently. So just know your group, since everybody's mileage will vary. I just know if I give my group generous arrays, a large point buy, or some sort of rolling scheme that generates high scores, I'm going to end up with more interesting characters from an RP perspective than if I do the opposite.
|
someone with an 18 in a stat gets +4 (20%) bonus on something
while someone with a 14 gets +2 (10%) difference of 10%Except it doesn't really work that way.
Take a level 1 medium ranger with a great-axe attacking an AC 21 foe without a feat applying to the attack. With a STR of 14 the ranger will hit on a 18+ and do 3-14 points of damage, while with a STR of 18 the ranger will hit on a 16+ and do 5-16 points of damage - the 18 STR ranger hits not 10% more often but TWICE as often as the 14 STR ranger as well as doing more damage. Even against an AC 10 opponent the STR 14 ranger will hit 70% of the time versus the STR 18 ranger's 80% hit rate, meaning the 18 STR ranger is about 14% more likely to hit, or 14% more effective against AC 10 opponents.
And it isn't just STR for hitting things - a DEX 14 character with same gear as a DEX 18 character can find themselves being hit twice as often ( a 100% increase in damage mitigation from DEX) - a CON 14 cleric might have 38 HPS at level 5 while a CON 18 cleric will have 48 (a 27% increase in survivability) - a INT 14 wizard has 4 SPs per level while an INT 18 wizard has 6 (a 50% increase) - a WIS 14 druid gets 1 powerful 4th level spell per day at level 7 while a WIS 18 gets 2 (100% increase) - a 14 CHR cleric can channel 5 times per say while an 18 CHR cleric can channel 7 (and be less likely to be resisted).
From a GM point of view it is certainly possible to make encounters which are a challenge for either a 14STR ranger or an 18STR ranger, but not both at the same time. It is rarely fun to be the ranger who rolled a high of 14 and does less than half the damage of another martial using the exact same gear, or even worse a cleric who had hot dice and in addition to hitting more often for more damage has more HPs & a higher AC. 3.x/PF makes attribute scores so significant to player power that random rolling can create power variances that make it hard to have fun.
Hmmm really just appears as people who choose to make choices for a more combat oriented character, as levels progress a difference of +2 starts to not matter as much as I have dual wielding rangers kill things faster than a two handed fighter, once again it's equipment, planning and team work. I really have yet to see in 20+ years of gaming where the difference of +2 to +4 on a simple stat is so troublesome where point buy would be a must. Once again with higher levels and feats added into the mix it's no longer just the 2 point difference, perhaps at some lower levels maybe where you need to roll 16 and got a 14, well that's just an "aw shucks". What can you say, some people will be better at things, buddy of mine is a lot better marksman, but I did better in cqb. Ultimately that person with a +2 bonus can't be everywhere at once, if he can, then the +2 isn't the problem isn't the issue it's something else. The main point I am getting at is if you play with optimizers and non optimizers it will effect gaming more so than a 16 str compared to a 18. Once again it's personal experience.
Though while a difference of 1 to 2 is an increase of 100% it takes more planning than a simple +1 to unbalance the game, using similar logic if I had a fighter that could hit on a 4 or more and another that could hit on a 5.... Will I really feel that bad off? Level 1 trying to hit a 21 is just tough, I was told a good concept to base armor is essentially you level +10 I believe. But ultimately it's knowledge that will make or break a character not effectively 10%
|
No
Yes. You can no more see the metaphysical underpinnings of the universe than I, so you have no more ground to stand on than I do either. It could be random, it could be designed. The d20 system is a poor model for reality, and the minor variance of ability scores cannot be sussed out in real life actions..
I like rolling. I actually mostly just like not perfect arrays. I hate that all fighters lack charisma. This is a side effect of rolling and of point buy so I lose no matter what.
Seriously though, I think spell casters gain the most from point buy and since they are already superior I prefer to roll to help out the martials. It used to be if you had crummy rolls excepting one 17, you were a wizard and your fighter buddy sporting two 18's a 14 12, 10, and 8 was also awesome.... and had an 8 charisma.... SAD FACE.
It's easy to respond when you strawman a person's argument, so applause. Do you serious believe there are not people who are brilliant athletes? Do you also not believe their are some people in this world who are not at all bright and also not great physical specimens? I agree with you, PF does not really model life well, but I still contend that point roll is more accurate to life than a 20 point buy.NoYes. You can no more see the metaphysical underpinnings of the universe than I, so you have no more ground to stand on than I do either. It could be random, it could be designed. The d20 system is a poor model for reality, and the minor variance of ability scores cannot be sussed out in real life actions..
And again ... I want to play a game. If I wanted to play real life, I'd go outside.
|
|
It's easy to respond when you strawman a person's argument, so applause. Do you serious believe there are not people who are brilliant athletes?
Who is straw manning now?
Of course there are brilliant athletes. But you cannot say that they were gifted with an 18 via rolling rather than purchasing one via point buy with any credibility, because you cannot pin the system down. They might have built up to that 18 over their leveling, they might have been granted free ability score boosting feats.
To say that rolling it a better simulation of real life than point buy does not follow, as your very premise is flawed thanks to an incomplete (perhaps too narrow rather?) model.
My preferred method for rolling is that each array becomes available for all players to use.
In this case you probably want to limit it to 2-3 different arrays, usually.
I've broken the current group from dice by the simple method of everyone rolling and the dimbulb that insisted on us doing so gets the lowest stats. Hey, if you believe it's a good system, put up or shut up.
Incidentally, he rolled a 23 pt toon, if I remember correctly, 5/6. I warned everyone I would beat their rolls (I roll crazy high), but would pay the pizza share for whoever beat me. I manned up and bought for the only person to match my 41 pt toon! (1/6 and 1/6)
My current solution to the Gordian Knot is to grant a stat bump to the next lower player, two to the next, etc. And: no, I haven't tried this yet.
|
|
someone with an 18 in a stat gets +4 (20%) bonus on something
while someone with a 14 gets +2 (10%) difference of 10%Except it doesn't really work that way.
Take a level 1 medium ranger with a great-axe attacking an AC 21 foe without a feat applying to the attack. With a STR of 14 the ranger will hit on a 18+ and do 3-14 points of damage, while with a STR of 18 the ranger will hit on a 16+ and do 5-16 points of damage - the 18 STR ranger hits not 10% more often but TWICE as often as the 14 STR ranger as well as doing more damage. Even against an AC 10 opponent the STR 14 ranger will hit 70% of the time versus the STR 18 ranger's 80% hit rate, meaning the 18 STR ranger is about 14% more likely to hit, or 14% more effective against AC 10 opponents.
And it isn't just STR for hitting things - a DEX 14 character with same gear as a DEX 18 character can find themselves being hit twice as often ( a 100% increase in damage mitigation from DEX) - a CON 14 cleric might have 38 HPS at level 5 while a CON 18 cleric will have 48 (a 27% increase in survivability) - a INT 14 wizard has 4 SPs per level while an INT 18 wizard has 6 (a 50% increase) - a WIS 14 druid gets 1 powerful 4th level spell per day at level 7 while a WIS 18 gets 2 (100% increase) - a 14 CHR cleric can channel 5 times per say while an 18 CHR cleric can channel 7 (and be less likely to be resisted).
From a GM point of view it is certainly possible to make encounters which are a challenge for either a 14STR ranger or an 18STR ranger, but not both at the same time. It is rarely fun to be the ranger who rolled a high of 14 and does less than half the damage of another martial using the exact same gear, or even worse a cleric who had hot dice and in addition to hitting more often for more damage has more HPs & a higher AC. 3.x/PF makes attribute scores so significant to player power that random rolling can create power variances that make it hard to have fun.
Ok so let me get this straight a str 18, hits on 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. and the strength 14 hits on a 18, 19, 20.
Now there are 20 possible rolls on a d20... meaning looking at it at about 100% total, each one is about 5%... so the difference is... 10% a difference of about 2 numbers. Even with a increase of +100% in base stat bonus?( 2 goes up to 4, while your not wrong that it technically doubles his chance to hit, his % of rolling a useful roll is still the same as the numbers on the D20 are still the same a difference of 10 or 14% as you also stated)
Also reading that logic a bit, a 14 (+2) strength compared to a 18 (+4) which is a +100% in the stats effectiveness... yields only a +14% more probability to hit. With a game like D&D and pathfinder, where a roll of 20 always hits, even with the grossest numbers you still have 5% chance to hit. Plus the 14 Dex character would wear heaving armor since they dont have to worry about the Max Dex bonus to AC that the 18 Dex did. His 18 dex limits him to less effective armor usually while the 14 dex wears heavier armor to achieve the same AC so its now just a matter between flat footed AC and Touch AC.
The CON cleric and hit points, once again it depends on the class, a barbarian with d12 hit points wont be affected as much per say with +2 more hit points as say a class that only gets a d6. Even then a +100% increase in a stat (con this time) only yields 27% survivability.
Not saying that stats cant effect a game, ultimately saying that it takes more than just a few points here and there to ruin a game. At lower levels when facing say a boss with inflated armor per say, it can make a difference (as stated earlier 14%?) But usually if I as the fighter have a 18 in strength, I can only hope that the Ranger put his best stat in say Dex and perhaps has a composite/ compound bow set for whatever strength bonus he has to deal that wonderful damage at a distance.
I suspect this is how it works:
4 players, each roll 4d6, 7 times, drop lowest.
so you might have the following arrays
17,15,12,13,9,10
13,12,11,13,7,8
18,12,18,12,18,10
15,14,13,12,14,10Or something, whatever.
Each player then votes on which array they think is best. In my example there might be one really good one that you think everyone will vote on. So the votes are tallied and the winning array is the one everyone uses.
Lovely array to do probabilities. "4 players, each roll 4d6, 7 times, drop lowest."
17,15,12,13,9,10
Odds are 1 in 12,570,302.
13,12,11,13,7,8
Odds are 1 in 29,303,248.
18,12,18,12,18,10
Odds are 1 in 561,338,337.
15,14,13,12,14,10
Odds are 1 in 1,561,643.
Keep in mind the most likely outcome is 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13 which has odds of 1 in 284,373. The third roller's rolls are not probable. The GM should make sure s/he is not cheating: weighted or shaved dice // adding incorrectly // making up numbers that the dice doesn't actually roll.
I like rolling. I actually mostly just like not perfect arrays. I hate that all fighters lack charisma. This is a side effect of rolling and of point buy so I lose no matter what.
Seriously though, I think spell casters gain the most from point buy and since they are already superior I prefer to roll to help out the martials. It used to be if you had crummy rolls excepting one 17, you were a wizard and your fighter buddy sporting two 18's a 14 12, 10, and 8 was also awesome.... and had an 8 charisma.... SAD FACE.
18, 18, 14, 12, 10, 8
First off, interesting how they are all conveniently even numbers.Assuming "4d6 drop the lowest, 6 times":
Odds of rolling 6 even numbers: 1 in 63.
Odds of rolling these stats: 1 in 53,214,817.
Back when we used to roll (we did it, but we have seen the light of truth and it is both beautiful and liberating), I was helping a friend roll up her first D&D character, a bard, while everyone else was making a character. My poor buddy Brandon ended up with crappy rolls, so bad that he had to re-roll them according to the PHB. Meanwhile, he bard rolled 4 17s and 2 18s, using 4d6-drop. lowest method. Half-way through the rolling, I was like "guys, look at this", and finished rolling.
If anyone had brought me the sheet, I'd have been certain they were the most obvious cheaters in the history of cheating, but what could I say? I was the GM, I'm the one that rolled them, right there in front of everyone.
I'm not sure what the statistical probability of four 17s and 2 18s is, but damn, it's gotta be low.
Probability of rolling 4-17s and 2-18s in a 4d6 drop the lowest, 6 times is 1 in 1,260,160,177.
*the player handed you weighted or shaved dice*
On the subject of a 14 STR martial versus an 18 STR martial:
The correct thing to compare is average damage per round.
Let's say it's a simple case of a level 1 Fighter with a greatsword. We'll give him weapon focus but not power attack. We'll ignore critical hits.
14 Strength: +4 2d6+3. Average damage per hit: 10
18 Strength: +6 2d6+6. Average damage per hit: 13
Target AC 11: Average damage per attack is 7 (at Str 14) or 10.4 (at Str 18)
Target AC 14: Average damage is 5.5 or 8.45
Target AC 17: Average damage is 4 or 6.5
Target AC 20: Average damage is 2.5 or 4.55
Target AC 23: Average damage is 1 or 2.6
Which means:
Target AC 11: DPR at Str 18 is 49% better.
Target AC 14: DPR at Str 18 is 54% better.
Target AC 17: DPR at Str 18 is 63% better.
Target AC 20: DPR at Str 18 is 82% better.
Target AC 23: DPR at Str 18 is 160% better.
(Note that ACs of 20+ aren't very common in level 1 play.)
Umm, your argument has no content or proof of your position.And the proof of your position is mere conjecture.
I think what Mr Pitt is saying is that in real life, some people are astronauts, excelling both physically and mentally, and others are mentally subnormal and (unlike Forrest Gump) do not excel in other fields either. This situation would not be possible with point-buy or stat array.
(Of course, people who are well below average would not be invited to join adventuring groups, so trying to represent the full range of humanity is probably not helpful.)|
|
On the subject of a 14 STR martial versus an 18 STR martial:
The correct thing to compare is average damage per round.
Let's say it's a simple case of a level 1 Fighter with a greatsword. We'll give him weapon focus but not power attack. We'll ignore critical hits.
14 Strength: +4 2d6+3. Average damage per hit: 10
18 Strength: +6 2d6+6. Average damage per hit: 13
Target AC 11: Average damage per attack is 7 (at Str 14) or 10.4 (at Str 18)
Target AC 14: Average damage is 5.5 or 8.45
Target AC 17: Average damage is 4 or 6.5
Target AC 20: Average damage is 2.5 or 4.55
Target AC 23: Average damage is 1 or 2.6Which means:
Target AC 11: DPR at Str 18 is 49% better.
Target AC 14: DPR at Str 18 is 54% better.
Target AC 17: DPR at Str 18 is 63% better.
Target AC 20: DPR at Str 18 is 82% better.
Target AC 23: DPR at Str 18 is 160% better.
(Note that ACs of 20+ aren't very common in level 1 play.)
Well comparing with a two hander which does strength and a half is definitely going to increase the damage. But if say your a sword and board fighter with a long sword?
But overall the percents here while sounding impressive when calculated to raw numbers for damage the vaunted 160% damage is a increase from 1 to 2.6, while that is 160% better with two hands, strength and a half applied, the stat bonus from 2 to 4 for the 18 was 200% the damage even with the strength and a half bonus isn't yielding party and game breaking outputs even equal to 200% damage for the doubled value of strength from +2 to +4.
Though I would say damage would be secondary to hitting, if you can't hit it, it doesn't really matter. And you don't get strength and a half to hit unless something changed ?
So my point is thus still, it takes more than just a couple stats to unbalance a game unless grossly so. More so than that it will take stats, character foresight for advancing levels and a strategy for use during combat.
|
|
(Of course, people who are well below average would not be invited to join adventuring groups, so trying to represent the full range of humanity is probably not helpful.)Pretty much: This.
If I´d willingly head into dangerous situations knowing that I´ll kill and possibly be killed, I wouldn´t team up with/tag along someone who isn´t as willing or a reliable pro whom I can count on in the same dangerous situation. That holds true for "low stat"-people as well as charakters with builds that will beginn to work as intended in X levels and who are balast until then.
Yup essentially everyone needs to be able to bring something to the table, the ability to fight, heal or otherwise support. If a strength 18 fighter has to fight along a strength 8 fighter something is kinda odd... Improper choice for build per stats either rolled or bought.
But sometimes a fighter or character with a quirk is very fun to play.
I still don't believe that rolling stats is bad because it doesn't yield a level average of stats as a point buy or a predetermined set of stats to arrange set by a game master.
I usually roll the dice then after looking at the numbers start to brain storm what to build for, gets me out of the habit of just building what I know and am comfortable with.
Well comparing with a two hander which does strength and a half is definitely going to increase the damage. But if say your a sword and board fighter with a long sword?
That doesn't affect the chance of hitting. It just changes the average damage.
Str 14: +4 1d8+2. Average damage per hit: 6.5Str 18: +6 1d8+4. Average damage per hit: 8.5
Whether longsword or greatsword, damage per hit is about 30% higher for Str 18.
Combined with the increased chance of hitting, average damage per round at Str 18 is at least 50% better than Str 14.
If I´d willingly head into dangerous situations knowing that I´ll kill and possibly be killed, I wouldn´t team up with/tag along someone who isn´t as willing or a reliable pro whom I can count on in the same dangerous situation.
Okay, but at level 1, how do you evaluate your team mates and determine that they are up to snuff? When you all meet in the traditional inn and accept the quest hook, do you then ask all of your team mates to meet you out in the training yard for inspection?
And even if you did something like that, you still wouldn't know much about a character's stats.
I don't think there is anything wrong with point-buy. It provides a more or less level playing field. I prefer rolling because I don't like players to have exact control over their stats, even when I am a player.
|
|
Well comparing with a two hander which does strength and a half is definitely going to increase the damage. But if say your a sword and board fighter with a long sword?That doesn't affect the chance of hitting. It just changes the average damage.
Str 14: +4 1d8+2. Average damage per hit: 6.5
Str 18: +6 1d8+4. Average damage per hit: 8.5
Whether longsword or greatsword, damage per hit is about 30% higher for Str 18.
Combined with the increased chance of hitting, average damage per round at Str 18 is at least 50% better than Str 14.
That is the odd thing when dealing with percent at such low numbers, the difference if 2 damage is effectively 24%, it's akin to saying a 0 as opposed to +1, while it is a straight 100% increase, it is still just +1 to hit or damage, not very game breaking or unbalancing. But with low numbers of 1 through 4 even minute increases can be flaunted to sound like epic amounts by using percent. 0 to 1 is a 100% increase, 2 to 4 is also increasing the bonus by 100% as you have doubled the value, but when you take it out of that perspective and put it with the d20, which was used to represent a simple 100% with 20 maximum possible numbers and always irregardless Atleast a 5% chance to hit on a roll of 20 the same level 1 fighters (str 14 and 18) attacking a ac25 target both still need a natural 20 to hit irregardless of strength, though the 18 str fighter will enjoy a benefit to damage of +2 over the str 14. With an abstract system of representation if 100% (d20) and a given chance of always a 5% chance to hit, I still can't see a game breaking value in the difference in roll vs. point buy unless you happen to be really lucky and the other player is very unlucky. All point buy does is make everyone even which isn't bad I just find it restricting. Not because I want to build a uber death machine, but more so that I like a large spread in the stats which helps me decide what this character will be. As soon as I roll the stats I start imagining where they would go and the back story of the character, what troubles, bonuses and responsibilities did they have growing up. As opposed to the system where my gm gives me 6 stats like 4 x 12a, 1 x 15, and 1 x 16. While those stats are playable easily I find it more entertaining to roll and see, giving me a 18, 16, 11, 12 and a 11. Plus with the point buy a bonus and a kind of flaw is you generally don't see odd numbers as bonuses are had on evens. Once again all opinion on the preference of stat generation.
If we are attacking an ac15 target with a fighter level 1, at strength 14 I have a 55% miss chance ( as I hit on a roll of 12 or higher on a d20) if attacking with a strength 18 I have a 45% miss chance (as I now hit on a roll of 10 or higher). Making me 10% more likely to hit as an increase due to effectively double the bonus from strength.
Now if one fighter has strength 18 and the other has strength 14, do you consider that game breaking? The same thing can result from a point buy where one optimizes and say creates a dump stat like charisma and the other player simply doesn't make it a dump stat and puts it at 10 instead of 8 as with a couple other stats being more even and mot such a drastic spread of points?
Now if one fighter has strength 18 and the other has strength 14, do you consider that game breaking? The same thing can result from a point buy where one optimizes and say creates a dump stat like charisma and the other player simply doesn't make it a dump stat and puts it at 10 instead of 8 as with a couple other stats being more even and mot such a drastic spread of points?
If every PC uses the point-buy, it's a choice, and usually one that has some thought to it. (Be it "I don't like to play characters with dump stats" or "CHA isn't important anyway, I better have the most STR possible")
But having a huge difference in the available ability scores (however they came to be) will most of the time, if the players aren't very mature, lead to someone feeling unlucky or worse.
Such is the chaos of the dice.
We rolled for stats, and I must admit I was a bit jealous of other people's stats. Some of them were absurdly lucky with multiple 18s, while my highest, without racial, was 15.
I felt better after it became clear I could still thrive via the untamed power of system mastery. I still joke about using a wish to steal people's stats, though.
I'm just more used to point buy. It is my preference. Seems more equal, although I would say dice rolling is still fair. Everyone has the same chances, after all.
|
|
Now if one fighter has strength 18 and the other has strength 14, do you consider that game breaking? The same thing can result from a point buy where one optimizes and say creates a dump stat like charisma and the other player simply doesn't make it a dump stat and puts it at 10 instead of 8 as with a couple other stats being more even and mot such a drastic spread of points?If every PC uses the point-buy, it's a choice, and usually one that has some thought to it. (Be it "I don't like to play characters with dump stats" or "CHA isn't important anyway, I better have the most STR possible")
But having a huge difference in the available ability scores (however they came to be) will most of the time, if the players aren't very mature, lead to someone feeling unlucky or worse.
True, but a game like pathfinder should require a fair level of maturity . If they want to be immature they can go play call of duty on a console and yell about "noobs".
|
|
And no fighter is dropping their strength to 14 to avoid a dumping Charisma. Maybe to 16 for a better spread of other abilities.Now if one fighter has strength 18 and the other has strength 14, do you consider that game breaking? The same thing can result from a point buy where one optimizes and say creates a dump stat like charisma and the other player simply doesn't make it a dump stat and puts it at 10 instead of 8 as with a couple other stats being more even and mot such a drastic spread of points?If every PC uses the point-buy, it's a choice, and usually one that has some thought to it. (Be it "I don't like to play characters with dump stats" or "CHA isn't important anyway, I better have the most STR possible")
But having a huge difference in the available ability scores (however they came to be) will most of the time, if the players aren't very mature, lead to someone feeling unlucky or worse.
I would
But I try not to optimize stats at the beginning, I like having flaws to overcome in game.
Usually some newer players or optimizers look at my setup as odd but I tend to optimize by class choices, feats, weapons and tactics. No doubt if I optimized the stat at the beginning I would be stronger, but heroes of legend often weren't perfect and had distinct and powerful flaws.
I am not out to "win" pathfinder, for me the fun is in the journey, not the final destination. Now please don't misunderstand that I will build the worthless character, a fighter with a strength and constitution of 8 as that is unrealistic as such a character would become discouraged from pursuing that life style or any real physical activity. They obviously didn't overcome their sickness or infirmity to become stronger like teddy Roosevelt, they remained weak and would pursue other interests.
|
|
Such is the chaos of the dice.
We rolled for stats, and I must admit I was a bit jealous of other people's stats. Some of them were absurdly lucky with multiple 18s, while my highest, without racial, was 15.
I felt better after it became clear I could still thrive via the untamed power of system mastery. I still joke about using a wish to steal people's stats, though.
I'm just more used to point buy. It is my preference. Seems more equal, although I would say dice rolling is still fair. Everyone has the same chances, after all.
Exactly, all I am saying that to be game breaking it takes a player not simple numbers usually. Now if one player rolled all 10's and the other rolled all 18's you may have a problem... (Chances if that both happening in the same game are like what .040%?)
It's just luck, kind of like being in a fight and those rolls came up for saving throws, one character dies the other lives, it is tragic, but it happens. The thrill of victory only exists with the agony of defeat is present.
Some argue that it gives a intrinsic bonus through out the game, but plan ahead. Plan your order of march, your strategy for fighting Melee, range or casters. Work together not against one another, the big stat person being a bully, tell them to stop in game or out if game it ruins the fun. A low stat hampering a character, then it's the group and parties job to come up with a solution. It was always more fun to find solutions in the game as opposed to change the game system for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics.
Look, we can argue basic statistics until we are blue in the face. All of these percentages are correct and none of them definitively prove anything. We all agree that more is better. We all are using the percentages that make our personal approximation of how much better look correct. Statistics like this can only measure quantity, not quality. So while we can say 10% more or 50% more, we are using a measure of quantity to try to describe quality. While the difference does have a quantitative part, it also has a qualitative part that is real but not easily expressed numerically.
As to whether real life is a point buy or rolled stats: Both methods can model reality well. Rolled stats tries to model reality by giving everyone variable numbers to work with, representing the fact that some people have it better than others and that life isn't fair. Point buy tries to model real life by grouping people of like capability together. Whether you are all playing elite soldiers, kids just starting out or famous celebrities what matters is that we focus on a group of peers, rather than group people of disparate skill levels together because geography. None of the people who have said point buy models real life have ever claimed that all people have the same point buy total.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True, but a game like pathfinder should require a fair level of maturity . If they want to be immature they can go play call of duty on a console and yell about "noobs".
You can expect a certain level of maturity. But you have to know your group.
(Please note that I'm not generalizing. Just talking of my own group here.)
|
|
True, but a game like pathfinder should require a fair level of maturity . If they want to be immature they can go play call of duty on a console and yell about "noobs".** spoiler omitted **
lol no problem, it's your group. I can't fault the system, it's just what works for your players. Ultimately I can't say any system is wrong, you just find one that works for you and your players. This is ultimately the best argument in this thread hands down that you have made. Irregardless of numbers, classes or options... Know your players.
|
|
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics.
Look, we can argue basic statistics until we are blue in the face. All of these percentages are correct and none of them definitively prove anything. We all agree that more is better. We all are using the percentages that make our personal approximation of how much better look correct. Statistics like this can only measure quantity, not quality. So while we can say 10% more or 50% more, we are using a measure of quantity to try to describe quality. While the difference does have a quantitative part, it also has a qualitative part that is real but not easily expressed numerically.
As to whether real life is a point buy or rolled stats: Both methods can model reality well. Rolled stats tries to model reality by giving everyone variable numbers to work with, representing the fact that some people have it better than others and that life isn't fair. Point buy tries to model real life by grouping people of like capability together. Whether you are all playing elite soldiers, kids just starting out or famous celebrities what matters is that we focus on a group of peers, rather than group people of disparate skill levels together because geography. None of the people who have said point buy models real life have ever claimed that all people have the same point buy total.
Here here!
Very much absolutely true !
All things considered play what works for you and what is fun, they are all options. Find what your comfortable with.