What's your favorite method of stat generation?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 281 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Nah! Just the focus this conversation took. There are other issues with rolling too. Primarily the 'sidekick' stats, although I personally dislike playing superhero stats when everyone else is average too.


LordKailas wrote:
So usually 4d6, re-roll 1s, drop the lowest and assign the numbers however you like is the "expected norm".

Re-rolling 1s is already a step away from the rules (which don't allow rerolls).

LordKailas wrote:
That being said, I don't like point buy because I normally play full spellcasters. My issue is that as a full spell caster I MUST have a 19 in my primary casting stat just in order to fully use my class abilities. This means that while technically I can get away with having a 15 in my casting stat, it means that I have zero choice when it comes to my stat increases.

Most players put almost all their stat increases into their primary stat, anyway. Also, higher point-buys eliminate this problem, because you can put more points in your primary stat without sacrificing your other stats as much.


Quote:

So let's try that.

Str: 3d6 ⇒ (5, 2, 1) = 8
Dex: 3d6 ⇒ (5, 1, 2) = 8
Con: 3d6 ⇒ (1, 3, 5) = 9
Int: 3d6 ⇒ (2, 6, 2) = 10
Wis: 3d6 ⇒ (5, 1, 1) = 7
Cha: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 4, 4) = 12
(-7 pt buy equiv)

Str: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 1, 2) = 7
Dex: 3d6 ⇒ (2, 4, 5) = 11
Con: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 1, 2) = 7
Int: 3d6 ⇒ (1, 3, 6) = 10
Wis: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 6, 6) = 16
Cha: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 2, 5) = 11
(3 pt buy equiv)

Str: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 5, 4) = 13
Dex: 3d6 ⇒ (1, 5, 6) = 12
Con: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 5, 5) = 14
Int: 3d6 ⇒ (3, 3, 2) = 8
Wis: 3d6 ⇒ (1, 3, 5) = 9
Cha: 3d6 ⇒ (4, 2, 6) = 12
(9 pt buy equiv)

Which of these would you pick? Or more importantly, which of these would you be excited to play?

This is the problem with flat die rolls.

Cloistered cleric type for a second would be quite fine.

Quote:

So let's try that.

Str: 4d6 - 2 ⇒ (6, 2, 6, 6) - 2 = 18
Dex: 4d6 - 4 ⇒ (6, 4, 6, 5) - 4 = 17
Con: 4d6 - 2 ⇒ (5, 2, 4, 6) - 2 = 15
Int: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (1, 4, 6, 2) - 1 = 12
Wis: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (6, 2, 3, 1) - 1 = 11
Cha: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (6, 3, 5, 1) - 1 = 14

Yowza! I don't know anyone who would turn down a 45-pt build.

How about character #2?

Str: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (6, 1, 5, 3) - 1 = 14
Dex: 4d6 - 3 ⇒ (3, 4, 5, 6) - 3 = 15
Con: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (1, 3, 2, 5) - 1 = 10
Int: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (1, 1, 2, 1) - 1 = 4
Wis: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (3, 1, 2, 1) - 1 = 6
Cha: 4d6 - 1 ⇒ (5, 6, 1, 5) - 1 = 16

Uhhhh....That's technically a 14 pt. build. But more importantly, would you want to be playing character #2 in the same campaign with character #1?

This is the problem with flat-formula die rolls.

Sure... first is straight up fighter type.

Considering good dex I'd probably make him some kind of ranger or archer with composite bows to use it.

Second one - is either mad halfiling sorcerer or mad halfling bard.
They fit together quite fine.

Quote:

Yowza! I don't know anyone who would turn down a 45-pt build.

Someone deadbound to play a wizard.

Quote:

Alice: Hey, wanna startRise of the Runelords this week!

Bob: Hells yeah I do! I've been playing fighters forever and really wanna play a wizard this time.
Alice: Okay, everybody roll for stats, 3d6 in order.
Bob: *rolls Str 16, 14 Dex, 15 Con, 7 Int, 9 Wis, 10 Cha*
Alice: Oh, and roll three arrays and pick your favorite
Bob: *rolls even less wizardy stats the other two times*
Alice: Pick your array, you're stuck with it for the next year or so! ♪
Bob: On second thought, can we just play Lords of Waterdeep this week?
"But that's not very likely to happen!"

Among, say, five players who all have ideas of what kind of character they want to play? It's more likely than you might think.

"If that happens, we'll just let them swap scores or roll a new array."

Cool, but that's a different method then.

TBH while I like quite much my method I believe it's better when you start session 0 with fair warning to not have any - imagined vision of character. That would be a fair warning before a session 0 - with assumption those who would prefer to play - should be ready for it.

I'm trying to run by roll20 - slowly as hell, especially with my work-induced hiatus campaign of modified Pathfinder with this rule, and with two arrays per character, results were quite decent.

One player get elven priestess with 4 Con, which would be much fun in a influenza ridden imperial colonies, but still it's well played so far.


OK now I tried myself to build a party with my method.
Basic assumption for sake of simplicity:

we have Elf, Dwarf, Gnome, Halfling and Tiefling, to not care about human variables (in my games homosapiens won't get this precious +2, and tiefeling won't get this stupid Cha penalty but let's go clear with rules).

Elven character:

S 14
D 14
C 10
I 13
W 16
Ch 9

I'd say cleric of Erastil, fighting mostly with composite bow.

Dwarven character

S 12
D 12
C 16
I 15
W 15
Ch 10

Interesting combination. Initially would go for a wizard... but maybe for a fun... monk.

Now the gnome:

S 12
D 9
C 16
I 17
W 12
Ch 11

And I was wise with making dwarf a monk, since here we have our sturgy gnome necromancer.

Halfling then:

S 7
D 8
C 8
I 16
W 15
Ch 12

Well... never enough full spellcasters... this one will be weakly and sickly halfling witch.

So tiefling

S 16
D 17
C 10
I 10
W 12
Ch 10

I'd go for a classic rogue.

So now there is some significant lack of proper tank. But still I suppose it's quite playable party... and I see noone to truly get everything on his own.

Dwarf could try a bit, but he is not that good.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

We roll for pointbuy.


So as a start Oc love your comic. As for my choice if I don't have a concept I don't care either way if I do I prefer point buy to have more control over my stats.
Everyone else its weird to quantify which method is more fun that is like telling people who liked 4e that they are wrong, either way your preference is a completely subjective decision.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

we just did this for a Starfinder game and I loved it so much I'll probably use it from now on.

Roll 24d6, discard the six lowest, determine stats by combining dice in groups of three from the remaining dice.

was a lot of fun rolling that huge fist full of dice!


SomethingRandom wrote:
We roll for pointbuy.

Caharcter 1: 3d6 ⇒ (3, 1, 4) = 8

Character #1 gets an 8pt build. Go!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Feeling the love in this thread...


yukongil wrote:

we just did this for a Starfinder game and I loved it so much I'll probably use it from now on.

Roll 24d6, discard the six lowest, determine stats by combining dice in groups of three from the remaining dice.

was a lot of fun rolling that huge fist full of dice!

I might take a variation on this. (Assuming a 4 person party) Everyone rolls 6 dice and puts them in the community pool. Discard the lowest 6 out of the pool. Everyone then assigns 3 dice to the stats of their choice on their characters.

Shadow Lodge

Wicked Woodpecker of the West, that does sound like it would be fun to try if everyone was on board, but personally I wouldn't want it to be my usual stat generation method.

And looking at the stat arrays all together, I'd make the elf a zen archer (S 14 D 14 C 10 I 13 W 16 Ch 9), the dwarf the cleric (S 12 D 12 C 16 I 15 W 15 Ch 10; I'd want at least a Str or Dex 14 for a monk), and the tiefling a slayer (S 16 D 17 C 10 I 10 W 12 Ch 10; tankier than a rogue but can still handle traps and such). I'd also make the gnome the witch (S 12 D 9 C 16 I 17 W 12 Ch 11) and the halfling the wizard (S 7 D 8 C 8 I 16 W 15 Ch 12), since the witch probably needs the slightly higher stats more than the wizard does - they have a lot of single-target save-negates magic so they need the extra point of Int more, and have fewer magical defenses so they could use the high Con more.

So the tiefling slayer is the main frontliner, supplemented by the dwarf cleric (who could buff and flank). The gnome witch and halfling wizard can handle debuffing, control, and other magical support. The elven zen archer handles ranged damage. The slayer and zen archer could both scout, and the casters can split knowledge skills between them. Party's biggest weakness with that arrangement is probably a lack of social skills, since the best Charisma is the wizard with a 12. Could probably scrounge up some racial +2 bonuses to Diplomacy and Bluff, and make them class skills for the right characters using traits or the fey thoughts alternate racial trait.

SomethingRandom wrote:
We roll for pointbuy.

Not sure if joking, but this seems like the worst of both worlds to me. You get variable power levels for stats, the resulting arrays are not organic, and you still don't necessarily know whether you can make specific concept until you roll (since some concepts work better for different point buys).


Quote:
And looking at the stat arrays all together, I'd make the elf a zen archer (S 14 D 14 C 10 I 13 W 16 Ch 9), the dwarf the cleric (S 12 D 12 C 16 I 15 W 15 Ch 10; I'd want at least a Str or Dex 14 for a monk), and the tiefling a slayer (S 16 D 17 C 10 I 10 W 12 Ch 10; tankier than a rogue but can still handle traps and such). I'd also make the gnome the witch (S 12 D 9 C 16 I 17 W 12 Ch 11) and the halfling the wizard (S 7 D 8 C 8 I 16 W 15 Ch 12), since the witch probably needs the slightly higher stats more than the wizard does - they have a lot of single-target save-negates magic so they need the extra point of Int more, and have fewer magical defenses so they could use the high Con more.

Must say seems just fine.

I was wandering about making tiefling frontier, but that's maybe because I'm used to play with massive damage house rule where any strike with more damage than your raw Constitution is danger of serious condition, with Fortitude save must made, so 10 Con is a bit no, no.

I'd say it's fine from strikey side, but party both yours and mine lack tank...


Although I'm not used to PB so I cannot estimate really what's difference in points for various characters.

Assuming crude - everyone starts at 10, point per point:

Elf - 14
Dwarf - 18
Gnome - 15
Halfling - 4
Tiefling - 13.

So dwarf is quite far above halfling, but definitely it's not like halfling is a wimp. At least not as a spellcaster ;)


We encourage dumping stats. In our games we allow dumping down to 6, which gives another 2 points for other stats.


Weirdo wrote:
SomethingRandom wrote:
We roll for pointbuy.
Not sure if joking, but this seems like the worst of both worlds to me.

Would buying rolls with points be better?


Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:

Although I'm not used to PB so I cannot estimate really what's difference in points for various characters.

Assuming crude - everyone starts at 10, point per point:

Elf - 14
Dwarf - 18
Gnome - 15
Halfling - 4
Tiefling - 13.

So dwarf is quite far above halfling, but definitely it's not like halfling is a wimp. At least not as a spellcaster ;)

The starting point is indeed 10, but it's not 1 point for a +1, it's:

7 -4
8 -2
9 -1
10 0
11 1
12 2
13 3
14 5
15 7
16 10
17 13
18 17

If the arrays are before racial modifiers, then their PB values are:
Elf - 22
Dwarf - 28
Gnome - 27
Halfling - 11
Tiefling - 25

In any case, the halfling is clearly much worse off than the others.


And still as a wizard of a team, he can not really play so worse in a game.


Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:

And still as a wizard of a team, he can not really play so worse in a game.

With 8 DEX and 8 CON, he'd better hide at low levels.


hide behind the gnome...


4d6, Reroll 1's, if you don't particularly like what you roll you can re roll if I feel like you can justify it.

It isn't hard to play the game and not be a jackass about it. And if you need to do point buy to make sure your players aren't being crappy perhaps you should find new players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KujakuDM wrote:
It isn't hard to play the game and not be a jackass about it.

True.

KujakuDM wrote:
And if you need to do point buy to make sure your players aren't being crappy perhaps you should find new players.

We need it to ensure similar power levels between characters and putting players in control of their stats. Jackasses are going to be jackasses regardless of the stat generation method.


My group used to roll 3 sets of the 4d6 method but now we use the highest point buy


My very first character we rolled 3D6, in order. I hadn't planned on playing a Dex character, but I had a 9 strength and a 18 dexterity, so that's what happened.

Now, I definitely prefer point buy. It seems the most fair, without the chance of poor rolls. Or great rolls for that matter. I've seen people Yahtzee 6's and walk away with 18's in 4 out of 6 stats, nothing below a 14. While the person after them never rolled double digits. Too much depends on stats to leave it to the dice.

All the drop the lowest stuff, or community stat dice pool whatever nonsense is a waste of time, in my opinion. If that's your thing, more power to you. I will use point buy and we will be playing while your table is counting dots.


KujakuDM wrote:

4d6, Reroll 1's, if you don't particularly like what you roll you can re roll if I feel like you can justify it.

It isn't hard to play the game and not be a jackass about it. And if you need to do point buy to make sure your players aren't being crappy perhaps you should find new players.

Um! Just so I can understand where you are coming from with this, but what is being jackass-y about wanting a semblance of parity? or a greater sense of control? or any of the other equally valid reasons for preferring point buy. or even for that matter about wanting a more organic approach, etc, for the rollers.

How about the GMs who prefer point buy? there are a couple of valid reasons for that, such as finding it easier to balance encounters (arguable, but you can't exactly say they are wrong if that is their experience).

I have never had a not-civil discussion about whether or not to roll.
I think expressing a preference - even to the extent of not playing - is not in itself jackassery.


Point buy is preferred.

Stat array is 2nd

I don't like rolling, and I usually roll well because someone always gets shafted.

The only way I'd do rolling as a GM is if everyone rolls, and people get to choose which person's rolled stats they like to use.


dragonhunterq wrote:
KujakuDM wrote:

4d6, Reroll 1's, if you don't particularly like what you roll you can re roll if I feel like you can justify it.

It isn't hard to play the game and not be a jackass about it. And if you need to do point buy to make sure your players aren't being crappy perhaps you should find new players.

Um! Just so I can understand where you are coming from with this, but what is being jackass-y about wanting a semblance of parity? or a greater sense of control? or any of the other equally valid reasons for preferring point buy. or even for that matter about wanting a more organic approach, etc, for the rollers.

How about the GMs who prefer point buy? there are a couple of valid reasons for that, such as finding it easier to balance encounters (arguable, but you can't exactly say they are wrong if that is their experience).

I have never had a not-civil discussion about whether or not to roll.
I think expressing a preference - even to the extent of not playing - is not in itself jackassery.

I doubt he has anything valid with that attitude.

One can easily say if you can't find a GM who will allow you to do point buy without being crappy about it find a new GM.

I'm not saying GM's who like rolling are crappy. I'm just pointing out how to him how his statement comes across when it's switched around. I'm sure that if someone spoke about him that way he wouldn't like it.

Shadow Lodge

Yeah, I definitely don't think that point buy is about preventing people from being jerks.

It's not jerky players that reduce your fun when your stats don't support your character concept. And while jerks can make it worse in a situation in which one player's lowest ability score is the same as another player's highest ability score, it can be an unpleasant situation with the best of groups depending on what your motivations for playing are. Personally I get at least some enjoyment of Pathfinder out of feeling like I'm doing cool stuff and acting as a vaulable part of the team, and that's harder if I'm objectively weaker than other party members.

Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:
Quote:
And looking at the stat arrays all together, I'd make the elf a zen archer (S 14 D 14 C 10 I 13 W 16 Ch 9), the dwarf the cleric (S 12 D 12 C 16 I 15 W 15 Ch 10; I'd want at least a Str or Dex 14 for a monk), and the tiefling a slayer (S 16 D 17 C 10 I 10 W 12 Ch 10; tankier than a rogue but can still handle traps and such). I'd also make the gnome the witch (S 12 D 9 C 16 I 17 W 12 Ch 11) and the halfling the wizard (S 7 D 8 C 8 I 16 W 15 Ch 12), since the witch probably needs the slightly higher stats more than the wizard does - they have a lot of single-target save-negates magic so they need the extra point of Int more, and have fewer magical defenses so they could use the high Con more.

Must say seems just fine.

I was wandering about making tiefling frontier, but that's maybe because I'm used to play with massive damage house rule where any strike with more damage than your raw Constitution is danger of serious condition, with Fortitude save must made, so 10 Con is a bit no, no.

I'd say it's fine from strikey side, but party both yours and mine lack tank...

Well yes, that houserule would make it much harder to be a frontliner in general, especially if you roll stats in order and can't make sure you have a good Con.

Without the houserule it's still considered tempting fate to have a Con below 10 for any character, with a 12-14 considered advisable for most builds, particularly frontliners. Unfortunately with this rolling method, only the dwarf and the gnome has a Con above 10, and neither of them has the Str or Dex to be a good melee striker - the active role almost always bundled with builds that are also passively tanky.

That said, as a cleric the dwarf gets medium armour and shield proficiency. With scale mail and a light shield, he could have a level 1 AC of 17 (5 armour, 1 Dex, 1 shield), and 11-12 HP. That's solid.

And slayers are actually pretty tanky. While their skills and sneak attack are rogue-like, they are more like rangers in combat abilities - they get d10 HP and medium armour and shield proficiency. The tiefling could potentially grab a chain shirt and a heavy shield for a level 1 AC of 19 (4 armour, 2 shield, 3 dex) - or 20 if they take the scaled skin racial trait for +1 natural armour. They'll put a point in Dex at level 4 for an extra +1. If they use slayer talents to take the Weapon and Shield combat style they could grab improved shield bash (lvl 1), shield slam (lvl 2 or 4 talent), TWF (level 3), and shield master (lvl 6 talent). Not quite as tanky as a barbarian or paladin but not bad at all, especially given that their flanking partner can also take some punishment.

The Halfling is still in a bad spot - he's got a darn rough first 4 levels or so. Might even recommend making him a silksworn occultist instead of a wizard, for the d8 HP and good base Fort save. Actually, that would also help with the social skills with an extra 2 skill points/level and Diplomacy, Bluff, and Disguise as class skills.

Of course, for purposes of this discussion I should point out that just because it's possible to build a balanced party using this method doesn't mean that everyone would be interested in playing the resulting characters.

SomethingRandom wrote:
Weirdo wrote:
SomethingRandom wrote:
We roll for pointbuy.
Not sure if joking, but this seems like the worst of both worlds to me.
Would buying rolls with points be better?

Marginally? That sounds like the "assign 24 d6s to your ability scores" method. It still can give unbalanced arrays and is probably more likely to give rolls that don't fit your concept than the 4d6 drop lowest assign wherever, but at least you get a pretty organic feeling set of stats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

Even characters with a 20 point difference in PBE might literally have only two stats different by one point each. That's how dumb point buy is. You really won't notice the difference at the table, except if someone gets to actually play their f*cking MAD class for once.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh my. The passion.

If you allow rerolls or drop the lowest fluff for rolling stats with dice, you are eliminating the entire randomness of using dice. They are a gamble, you either roll 3D6, in order, and enjoy the thrill of the gamble... Or you might as well not roll for stats at all.

I rolled 4D6 but it came out 1,2,3,4... Drop the lowest, yay, you have a 9, but you wanted higher, so you put it into a community pot, and, and, and... And you've just literally made rolling dice pointless, that's why we have the point buy system.

It doesn't have to be balanced or fair,it's just not rolling dice with failsafes built in to eliminate the chance of bad dice rolls. You can roll low dice. If you don't like rolling low as a possibility, don't roll dice.

Otherwise just say your character starts with 20's in everything if you are so afraid of having a low roll. Adding more dice and dropping the lowest or rerolling 1's is literally cheating the entire point of rolling in the first place.

You want to gamble, 3D6, in order.

If you don't want to gamble, point buy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

Even characters with a 20 point difference in PBE might literally have only two stats different by one point each. That's how dumb point buy is. You really won't notice the difference at the table, except if someone gets to actually play their f*cking MAD class for once.

I disagree with you at a fundamental level. Rolling is inherently less balanced than point buy and it is noticeable. for every MAD character made playable with rolling there are a hundred that are borderline unplayable and thousands more die before they are born because of all the re-rolls (the fact many people feel the need to include re-rolls should put you on notice that may be a problem).

If no-one ever noticed the difference at the table there would never have been a need to come up with point buy - we'd still all be obliviously rolling stats quite happily. So people do notice and it is a problem for some.

I'll repeat that: If it was never noticed at the table point buy would not be needed. People only look for an answer when a question is raised.

Shadow Lodge

master_marshmallow wrote:

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

It's not perfect, but it's more balanced than rolling one character whose lowest stat is a 14 and another whose highest stat is a 13, as happened in the most recent campaign I joined.


master_marshmallow wrote:

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

Even characters with a 20 point difference in PBE might literally have only two stats different by one point each. That's how dumb point buy is. You really won't notice the difference at the table, except if someone gets to actually play their f*cking MAD class for once.

Could you please show me an example of this? I don’t think I understand what you are saying here. Are you saying one array has, for example, a 0pt value and the other has a 20pt value and the actual stats are the same except for two that differ by one integer each?


born_of_fire wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

Even characters with a 20 point difference in PBE might literally have only two stats different by one point each. That's how dumb point buy is. You really won't notice the difference at the table, except if someone gets to actually play their f*cking MAD class for once.

Could you please show me an example of this? I don’t think I understand what you are saying here. Are you saying one array has, for example, a 0pt value and the other has a 20pt value and the actual stats are the same except for two that differ by one integer each?

Scroll up.

If we're going to compare PBEs, you have to look at the actual stats and the impact they have on the characters.

The jump from a 17 to an 18 is 4 points. 4.
Someone who has two stats that are 18s and a 12 in place of a 10 is by no margin overpowered compared to the guy wth two 17s and a 10.

Also I never said 'rolling is better'
This ought be evident from the fact that I use different rolling methods.

Stop strawmanning me, and understand that point buy is preference, and has no effect on balance.

Balance is a lie. Starting characters out with the same resources is not balance, they aren't even designed to have the same starting resources.

And to be fair, someone rocking 5 (13)'s and a (14) might be worse than someone with 2 (7)'s a (15) and an (11). Depends on the classes.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's adorable how many variant methods of rolling dice people use just to totally eliminate any chance of rolling low. Roll extra dice and drop the lowest. Reroll 1's. Community pots. Bunch of sissies.

If you are addicted to rolling dice, buy the ticket, take the ride, 3D6, in a row.

If you're too afraid to actually take a gamble by rolling dice, then use the point buy system.

So many different ways to cheat probability have been brought up by a lot of people who sound like they want to roll dice but actually don't want to gamble with random probability. Pathetic.

Scarab Sages

Just change the way the dice stats are arrayed.

Ive been doing rolled stats like this.

A charector chooses 2 stats he wants to be his main stats. this is pre racial. It starts at 10 and they roll 2d4 and they reroll 1's.(only if you cant stand having a twelve.)

They choose 2 normal regular stats, their base score starts at ten and they roll 1d6 and add to that total.

Finally they choose two weak stats.. those start at 14 but they roll 1d6 and SUBTRACT that from the 14.

You are looking at 14 to 18 for two stats, 11 to 16 for two stats, and 13 to 8 for two stats and your odds of having better numbers is higher for the stats you want to hopefully be your best.


VoodistMonk wrote:

It's adorable how many variant methods of rolling dice people use just to totally eliminate any chance of rolling low. Roll extra dice and drop the lowest. Reroll 1's. Community pots. Bunch of sissies.

If you are addicted to rolling dice, buy the ticket, take the ride, 3D6, in a row.

If you're too afraid to actually take a gamble by rolling dice, then use the point buy system.

So many different ways to cheat probability have been brought up by a lot of people who sound like they want to roll dice but actually don't want to gamble with random probability. Pathetic.

Community stats aren't about avoid a bad stat, it's about not having some players with massively superior stats over others.

And that's because yes, it generally does make the game less enjoyable for the player with poor stats. And the game is about having fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
born_of_fire wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:

Omfg Point Buy is not balanced.

Stop saying it's balanced.

It gives the players control and lets them make a character without someone there to arbitrate dice rolls.

That's it. It's not better, not more balanced, and not intended by the design of the math.

It's totally fair to prefer it, but stop spreading this bullsh*t myth about balance.

Even characters with a 20 point difference in PBE might literally have only two stats different by one point each. That's how dumb point buy is. You really won't notice the difference at the table, except if someone gets to actually play their f*cking MAD class for once.

Could you please show me an example of this? I don’t think I understand what you are saying here. Are you saying one array has, for example, a 0pt value and the other has a 20pt value and the actual stats are the same except for two that differ by one integer each?

Scroll up.

If we're going to compare PBEs, you have to look at the actual stats and the impact they have on the characters.

The jump from a 17 to an 18 is 4 points. 4.
Someone who has two stats that are 18s and a 12 in place of a 10 is by no margin overpowered compared to the guy wth two 17s and a 10.

Also I never said 'rolling is better'
This ought be evident from the fact that I use different rolling methods.

Stop strawmanning me, and understand that point buy is preference, and has no effect on balance.

Balance is a lie. Starting characters out with the same resources is not balance, they aren't even designed to have the same starting resources.

And to be fair, someone rocking 5 (13)'s and a (14) might be worse than someone with 2 (7)'s a (15) and an (11). Depends on the classes.

When did I say anything about your opinion of rolling? When did I say anything about balance? When have I claimed point buy is anything other than my preference?

I asked you to clarify a statement in which you claimed something was literally so. The problem is that “Even characters with a 20 point difference in PBE might literally have only two stats different by one point each” does not seem to be true. There are no point buy arrays with such slight difference in stats that result in a 20pt buy value difference—2 18’s vs. 2 17’s results in a 12 point difference. I ask again again if I have misunderstood you. You have the opportunity to correct me if this is the case.

OTOH, it’s fine if you were simply exaggerating. I hardly deserve to be accused of using logical fallacies, making claims I have not or maligned in any other way for questioning your hyperbole though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
VoodistMonk wrote:

Bunch of sissies.

So many different ways to cheat probability have been brought up by a lot of people who sound like they want to roll dice but actually don't want to gamble with random probability. Pathetic.

I always find petty insults and flame baiting to be the most mature way to make my point.


Khudzlin wrote:
KujakuDM wrote:
It isn't hard to play the game and not be a jackass about it.

True.

KujakuDM wrote:
And if you need to do point buy to make sure your players aren't being crappy perhaps you should find new players.
We need it to ensure similar power levels between characters and putting players in control of their stats. Jackasses are going to be jackasses regardless of the stat generation method.

Don't play with Jackasses that care about stat disparity to the point where it effects their ability to have fun.


dragonhunterq wrote:

I have never had a not-civil discussion about whether or not to roll.
I think expressing a preference - even to the extent of not playing - is not in itself jackassery.

Neither have I. I just prefer roll. Though I would say that party balance is less from stats and more on class selection.


IMO its the same basically. Roll and assign best stats to where you want them to go. Its the same thing that happens with point buy, you put your best stats where you need them and dump where you dont. There is no noticabke difference other than you might get lucky.


wraithstrike wrote:
dragonhunterq wrote:
KujakuDM wrote:

4d6, Reroll 1's, if you don't particularly like what you roll you can re roll if I feel like you can justify it.

It isn't hard to play the game and not be a jackass about it. And if you need to do point buy to make sure your players aren't being crappy perhaps you should find new players.

Um! Just so I can understand where you are coming from with this, but what is being jackass-y about wanting a semblance of parity? or a greater sense of control? or any of the other equally valid reasons for preferring point buy. or even for that matter about wanting a more organic approach, etc, for the rollers.

How about the GMs who prefer point buy? there are a couple of valid reasons for that, such as finding it easier to balance encounters (arguable, but you can't exactly say they are wrong if that is their experience).

I have never had a not-civil discussion about whether or not to roll.
I think expressing a preference - even to the extent of not playing - is not in itself jackassery.

I doubt he has anything valid with that attitude.

One can easily say if you can't find a GM who will allow you to do point buy without being crappy about it find a new GM.

I'm not saying GM's who like rolling are crappy. I'm just pointing out how to him how his statement comes across when it's switched around. I'm sure that if someone spoke about him that way he wouldn't like it.

If point buy is a deal breaker for you then yeah find a new gm. I run games with rolled stats. Been doing so for decades. Same group too.

I've done both types of chargen. In my experience there is no noticeable difference other than one is strictly about spending points and the other has some luck involved. If you can't handle one do the other. I prefer to possibly have a character with a bad stat or two by chance.

Man I never even specifically called anyone a jackass but some of you are treating like it's a dogmatic challenge.

It's a game. Relax.


Also. No gaming is better than bad gaming. Whatever bad gaming is to you life is too short to be stuck doing it.


which is why I gave up on organized play, too administrative and REALLY too restrictive points for the character creation... I wasn't really having fun, except that time when my cleric of Sarenrae one shotted the BBEG of the scenario (a wraith) with a natural 20 on a turning roll.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
KujakuDM wrote:
I've done both types of chargen. In my experience there is no noticeable difference other than one is strictly about spending points and the other has some luck involved.

Heh. I guess.

Also being alive is no different from being dead except for having a pulse, breathing and so forth.


Quote:

You want to gamble, 3D6, in order.

If you don't want to gamble, point buy.

I bet you also believe pinneapple has no place on pizza, huh?

Quote:

It's adorable how many variant methods of rolling dice people use just to totally eliminate any chance of rolling low. Roll extra dice and drop the lowest. Reroll 1's. Community pots. Bunch of sissies.

If you are addicted to rolling dice, buy the ticket, take the ride, 3D6, in a row.

If you're too afraid to actually take a gamble by rolling dice, then use the point buy system.

So many different ways to cheat probability have been brought up by a lot of people who sound like they want to roll dice but actually don't want to gamble with random probability. Pathetic.

Look dude. Not everyone have to be Full Chaotic or Full Lawful.

You can be True Neutral Dice Druid, and mix both - when there is some randomness, to extent but also tweaked probabilities.

Also you want true randomness ruffian?
Roll D20 in order for any stat.
All points taken. You rolled 1 on Strength and you are Halfling... sorry you died. Now you play as ghost with no Strenght. That's what true chaos is!


And to prove it: this is my five NPC's but rolled with really random, not this average, weak Gygaxian method, d20, in a row.

ELF:

S 1
D 19
C 15
I 12
W 11
Ch 20

He could be great sorcerer, if he was strong enough to use somatic components of spells.

Dwarf

S 11
D 3
C 6
I 15
W 11
Ch 0

A wizard, whose experiments with illusions went to far and now he is unphantomable for anyone. Rest of a team thinks they were cursed by gods with randomly appearing spells. Thankfully - he is also intangible for any enemies.

Gnome

S 6
D 6
C 11
I 4
W 16
Ch 3

Weak and stupid, nevertheless she found favour of Shub-Niggurath, Ia! Ia!

Halfling

S 8
D 10
C 6
I 20
W 4
Ch 12

Powerful wizard. He could recognize weird condition of his dwarven colleague if he wasn't too blind to notice there are any spells from nowhere

Tiefling

S 9
D 13
C 16
I 7
W 3
Ch 4

I assume some kind of... bowbarian... right?


Steve Geddes wrote:
KujakuDM wrote:
I've done both types of chargen. In my experience there is no noticeable difference other than one is strictly about spending points and the other has some luck involved.

Heh. I guess.

Also being alive is no different from being dead except for having a pulse, breathing and so forth.

So based on your statement rolling for your area is the same as being dead?

????????

If you are trying to disprove my statement you really should use an analogy that works. Opposed to whatever randomly comes into your head.

For the record. Rolling and assigning your highest to important stats and lowest to least important stats is the exact same thing as putting points into your most important and not putting them in your least importand. You just don't risk having outliers.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
KujakuDM wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
KujakuDM wrote:
I've done both types of chargen. In my experience there is no noticeable difference other than one is strictly about spending points and the other has some luck involved.

Heh. I guess.

Also being alive is no different from being dead except for having a pulse, breathing and so forth.

So based on your statement rolling for your area is the same as being dead?

????????

If you are trying to disprove my statement you really should use an analogy that works. Opposed to whatever randomly comes into your head.

I’m not arguing with you (and it wasn’t an analogy).

Your sentence was funny. “These things are exactly the same except for...the key differences.”


Fair. Regardless the end point is the same. You out your best numbers in your star you care about and your worst in the others. One just gives you the chance if having outliers in the bell curve.

201 to 250 of 281 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What's your favorite method of stat generation? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.