It seems better to me to roll 3d6 6 times and then pick which goes where. Otherwise you are forced to play certain classes whether you want to or not.
|
This works fine for those original d&d adventures, where you were expected go through a small stack of characters each game, games were only meant to last a few sessions at most, and the fun was in seeing how far you got before dying horribly. Pathfinder just doesn't handle it very well though. I definitely wouldn't use it for anything that was meant to be more than a one shot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This works fine for those original d&d adventures, where you were expected go through a small stack of characters each game, games were only meant to last a few sessions at most, and the fun was in seeing how far you got before dying horribly. Pathfinder just doesn't handle it very well though. I definitely wouldn't use it for anything that was meant to be more than a one shot.
Even in the original D+d adventures, stats just didn't matter as much other than for your class minimums, max spell level for a couple casters, and if you got REALLY lucky or unlucky (17+ or <7)
It seems better to me to roll 3d6 6 times and then pick which goes where. Otherwise you are forced to play certain classes whether you want to or not.
I think this is the point of the exercise. You have to see how you can use your system mastery to turn an existing (possibly terrible) stat block into something functional.
Something I thought of that might spice things up without changing the theme overly is to roll 7 stats and drop 1, but you then take the remaining 6 in the order you rolled them.
Eg:
5+5+3=13
5+4+6=15
6+1+4=11
1+6+6=13
5+3+5=13
1+3+4= 8
(Wow amazing stats 0_o I really just rolled them)
So the obvious thing to do would be to drop the 8, but that leaves you with STR-11, DEX-13, CON-15, INT-11, WIS-13, CHA-13. It's not a bad character but your highest stat is CON, which isn't really the main stat for most characters. You could use this for a Dwarf Cleric or an Elf Rogue, but you're not really making use of your highest stat.
Alternatively you could drop the first roll (11) and move all your stats up one, for a STR-13, DEX-15, CON-11, INT-13, WIS-13, CHA-8. This character has lower stats overall, but has a high DEX and reasonable STR/INT/WIS, meaning you could make a decent ranged character like an Eldritch Archer or some-such.
This method would still keep most of the restrictions, and would give a potential reason to dump one of your good rolls in order to move the stats into a position you favour (also the example might have worked better if I hand't rolled so well =P ).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
15
15
7
9
13
15
Wanted to play a paladin going in and can't believe the dice rolled so well in favor.
Looks like a Summoner to me. Either you replace your crappy physical scores via Synthesist, or you stay safely behind, possibly invisible and/or flying, while your Eidolon grabs all the attention.
7, 10, 6, 12, 8, 10. Openly stating my plan to fight suicidally did get a reroll.
Looks like a Summoner to me.
3d6 ⇒ (5, 6, 6) = 17 Str
3d6 ⇒ (2, 2, 3) = 7 Dex
3d6 ⇒ (5, 1, 3) = 9 Con
3d6 ⇒ (5, 3, 3) = 11 Int
3d6 ⇒ (2, 3, 3) = 8 Wis
3d6 ⇒ (3, 4, 4) = 11 Cha
Guess I could play a dwarf fighter, maybe.
Looks like a Summoner to me.
1+1+3= 5 STR
3+6+3= 12 DEX
2+1+2= 5 CON
5+6+3= 14 INT
2+2+2= 6 WIS
4+3+3= 10 CHALooks like an Elf Wizard to me (the CON's already bad enough that the penalty won't matter).
Looks like a Summoner to me.
...
I'm sensing a pattern here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I played in a 3d6-in-order game, it was also Core-only. No Summoners!
(This makes Druid the default choice for terrible stats, as an Animal Companion is always at least somewhat effective, Wild-Shape provides a fair amount of utility, and if you're lucky enough to have the Wisdom to cast spells, you can summon too. This may or may not constitute Power Gaming; I haven't looked up the definition lately.)
Can you wait till after you roll to pick your race?
Can you wait till after you roll to pick your race?
yes, this is always the case.
Can you wait till after you roll to pick your race?
You expect to be able to pick your race? Roll for stats, roll for race, then randomise gender and class. That's Real Roleplaying!
This is a roleplaying game, not a rollplaying game. If you can’t properly roleplay what you want* because of rolls, then something is horribly wrong** with the method used to create characters.
*Out of what is available in your game, of course.
**That’s how I feel about it. Your opinion may vary.
This argument is reductive.
Yes it’s a role playing game.
With literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands of pages telling you how your stats interact with the rest of the world
There is a basic assumption for what those stats will look baked into all of those rules.
You can say you’re a badass archer who has hunted in the woods since they were a child, but if you can’t hit the broadside of a barn and get lost at 10 ft into the forest then you can’t effectively roleplay that character. Because the rolls literally dictate what your character does.
If you play pathfinder by sitting in a room talking in character with your friends and literally never roll a dice to decide if you character succeeds or fails, then you have a point. If not then I don’t think you do.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This argument is reductive.
(...)
If you play pathfinder by sitting in a room talking in character with your friends and literally never roll a dice to decide if you character succeeds or fails, then you have a point. If not then I don’t think you do.
I think you're actually wrong here.
Because Pathfinder is not merely any kind of roleplaying game, but it's specifically "a tabletop fantasy game in which the players take on the roles of heroes" CRB pg. 8, and "your character can become a master swordsman who has never lost a duel, or a skilled thief capable of stealing the crown from atop the king’s head. You can play a pious cleric wielding the power of the gods, or unravel the mysteries of magic as an enigmatic sorcerer." CRB pg. 5. Furthermore, "From the sly rogue to the stalwart paladin, the Pathfinder RPG allows you to make the character you want to play." CRB pg. 14
If your method of character generation does not allow you to become a "master swordsman" or "skilled thief", it goes against the very basic concept of the game. The game even explicitly tells you "When generating a character, start with your character’s concept." CRB pg. 14, something I think we all agree doesn't work for rolling in order.
Of course your concept has to be within reasonable limits, both from a power viewpoint (a Mary Sue isn't really a hero), and flavor wise (it's a sword-and-sorcery game, as shown by the examples). You can't expect to be able to play Son Goku, but you should be able to play something smilar to Legolas. If you aren't, it's not really Pathfinder you're playing, but more a "losely based on" game.
Interestingly, the same argument also works against severely limiting books because the CRB actually fails to deliver in many regards.
|
Interestingly, the same argument also works against severely limiting books because the CRB actually fails to deliver in many regards.
While I agreed with your primary point I disagree with this.
All of the examples you give very much can be made with only the Core Rulebook.
Now, a wider set of characters can certainly be made with all the splat books. But most (if not all) of the typical fantasy tropes can be made by the CRB and, even with ALL the splat books, not every conceivable fantasy character can be made.
About the only commonish fantasy trope that can't really be made with the CRB is a functional non paladin mounted warrior. But quickly glancing at all the rest of the classes I see nothing else that can't be made with the CRB (albeit less well than with all the splat books).
Gunslingers and alchemists, maybe. But I don't think either are a classic trope.
Once saw a guy roll 5 18s and 1 17 using 3d6.
I as DM: "Ummm....yeah. Could you hand me those dice for testing?"
Personally, I prefer the point buy system. If only to avoid crazy disparities between player characters. Level playing field to start and all that.
For strictly 3D6 stat rolling, I've had success with either of the following variants, which mitigate the largest player-fear for that method: 2 or more awful rolls that hamstring a character (at least in their eyes).
Variant #1
After the die results are recorded, a player can raise a stat 1 point (or more), by reducing a HIGHER value stat by the same amount.
It's important to take from a stat that is higher, which incrementally averages them out (rather than letting a player boost a high stat even higher, by dumping another).
Variant #2
One of the 3 dice is not rolled, and is assumed to be a 6. (Roll 2d6+6).
This give a range of 8-18, with a bell curve average of 13.
It's admittedly a buff from the 10-11 average on a straight 3d6 roll. But since player characters (usually) are to be the heroes of the campaign, I don't see harm if they start out a little smarter-faster-stronger than the average peasant.
No matter the method; my opinion on whether the numbers are "in order", or "arranged", depends on the expected game/campaign.
**For shorter adventures or one-shots, it's fine to require "in-order". Players may be guided/forced to play race/class more suited to the rolls, and try something new they might not have otherwise.
**If a long term campaign is planned, then most players likely have an idea of the type of character they want to play. Given this will be a long-term investment, I would allow arranging as desired, to fit their preferred character concept
This argument is reductive.
(...)
If you play pathfinder by sitting in a room talking in character with your friends and literally never roll a dice to decide if you character succeeds or fails, then you have a point. If not then I don’t think you do.
I think you're actually wrong here.
Because Pathfinder is not merely any kind of roleplaying game, but it's specifically "a tabletop fantasy game in which the players take on the roles of heroes" CRB pg. 8, and "your character can become a master swordsman who has never lost a duel, or a skilled thief capable of stealing the crown from atop the king’s head. You can play a pious cleric wielding the power of the gods, or unravel the mysteries of magic as an enigmatic sorcerer." CRB pg. 5. Furthermore, "From the sly rogue to the stalwart paladin, the Pathfinder RPG allows you to make the character you want to play." CRB pg. 14
If your method of character generation does not allow you to become a "master swordsman" or "skilled thief", it goes against the very basic concept of the game. The game even explicitly tells you "When generating a character, start with your character’s concept." CRB pg. 14, something I think we all agree doesn't work for rolling in order.
Of course your concept has to be within reasonable limits, both from a power viewpoint (a Mary Sue isn't really a hero), and flavor wise (it's a sword-and-sorcery game, as shown by the examples). You can't expect to be able to play Son Goku, but you should be able to play something smilar to Legolas. If you aren't, it's not really Pathfinder you're playing, but more a "losely based on" game.
Interestingly, the same argument also works against severely limiting books because the CRB actually fails to deliver in many regards.
As soon as you start playing the master swordsman who never lost a duel and actually having to roll dice a problem will arise.
It’s all very well and good to start with a concept and work out, lovely, that’s the idea, but if your concept is to be a competent hero and your highest stat is 9 then something is going to seem off.
What’s the rest of the party supposed to do in character when the master swordsman who never lost a duel can’t actually hit anything they fight in a duel? They’re going to very quickly see said swordsman was either lying, delusional, or duelling 12 year olds.
How are you supposed to reconcile that?
Yes it’s roleplay not rollplay
But you will have to roll dice to play this game.
I suppose you could never roll anymore dice after character creation, but there are games that do that better than pathfinder and isn’t what it’s intended for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s all very well and good to start with a concept and work out, lovely, that’s the idea, but if your concept is to be a competent hero and your highest stat is 9 then something is going to seem off.
OK, I'm confused here. You seem to be disagreeing with me, but you basically say the same things. My entire point was that a character creation method that results in "your highest stat is 9" is bad exactly because you need to make rolls.
If you make crappy choices, that's your fault, but if decide to play a "master swordsman who never lost a duel", and the character generation method makes it so that you can only produce a character who "can’t actually hit anything they fight in a duel", that house rule breaks the core promise of the game, and thus the resulting game is not really Pathfinder.
Sure, it would require very large amounts of optimization to reliably win fair duels, i.e. CR+4, but that's not how the game is supposed to be played ("The value of APL +3 should be a fairly hard limit for difficult encounters", GMG pg. 41). Real life actually matches that - those boxers with a 56-5 win ratio don't get those from constantly doing 50:50 fights.
@pauljathome: Two words: Martial artist. You cannot make a competent martial arts style character with but the CRB. I'd also argue that you can't make a competent "backstab" type character.
Of course, the whole issue is tangential to the thread topic.
It’s all very well and good to start with a concept and work out, lovely, that’s the idea, but if your concept is to be a competent hero and your highest stat is 9 then something is going to seem off.OK, I'm confused here. You seem to be disagreeing with me, but you basically say the same things. My entire point was that a character creation method that results in "your highest stat is 9" is bad exactly because you need to make rolls.
If you make crappy choices, that's your fault, but if decide to play a "master swordsman who never lost a duel", and the character generation method makes it so that you can only produce a character who "can’t actually hit anything they fight in a duel", that house rule breaks the core promise of the game, and thus the resulting game is not really Pathfinder.
Sure, it would require very large amounts of optimization to reliably win fair duels, i.e. CR+4, but that's not how the game is supposed to be played ("The value of APL +3 should be a fairly hard limit for difficult encounters", GMG pg. 41). Real life actually matches that - those boxers with a 56-5 win ratio don't get those from constantly doing 50:50 fights.
@pauljathome: Two words: Martial artist. You cannot make a competent martial arts style character with but the CRB. I'd also argue that you can't make a competent "backstab" type character.
Of course, the whole issue is tangential to the thread topic.
I think we agree with eachother and something got lost in translation