TheRPGSite

I bought some six sided dice the other day at a thrift shop. Five of them for $3. They're big, chunky ones in bright colors. Sort of Playmobil style. Back in the days when we rolled dice for stats we always rolled 5d6 and tossed the lowest two. So being a good gamer the first thing I did was roll six D&D/PF stats. I got a 9, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17. A good set by any measure. Now I just need to build a character around them... So, what would you play with these rolls? Or roll your own and tell us what you picked.

Man...my group never did these funky rolling schemes. We have always done 3D6 down the line. I assume Pathfinder is like modern D&D where you get to place the stats? I'd run a Fighter with those stats.

If you're playing 5e, I'd go with a Variant Human Figher. You're starting with high enough DEX, CON, and STR that you can go the entire game without an ASI and just take feats.

If you want to have your brain boiled by crazy grade inflation dice rolling mechanics, look at the suggested methods in 1E Unearthed Arcana. It is basically a recipe book for cheating your ass off to a set of 18's and then saying you played by the rules.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1016784If you want to have your brain boiled by crazy grade inflation dice rolling mechanics, look at the suggested methods in 1E Unearthed Arcana. It is basically a recipe book for cheating your ass off to a set of 18's and then saying you played by the rules.

If everyone is playing by the same rules and the DM adjusts the difficulty accordingly, it literally doesn't do anything except mess with the variance of the distribution.

But, then again, it literally doesn't do anything. Those mostly 14-18s are just the new 8-12s.

Anyways, if it were 3.5 and core+psionics, I'd do a psychic warrior. 5 good stats means you can have all 3 physical stats decent while also having a decent Wisdom (and either Int of Cha, depending on your character concept).

Using that method you'll get alot of 12, 14 15, 16 rolls. Peaking on 14. 3-6 will allmost never be seen.

I just did a quick roll and got 17, 17, 15, 13, 10, 15

You can see how the spread skews with http://anydice.com/ (http://anydice.com/) and entering

 output [highest 3 of 5d6]

In 3e or PF with the stats you rolled you could really forge off about any direction strikes your fancy.

Would I play with an r5h3 method? Probably not. It tends to create characters with no real weaknesses, or at least vanishingly few. I prefer either r4h3 which still generates some bad rolls often enough. Or r3 and shuffle points as in O or BX D&D

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1016803If everyone is playing by the same rules and the DM adjusts the difficulty accordingly, it literally doesn't do anything except mess with the variance of the distribution.

But, then again, it literally doesn't do anything. Those mostly 14-18s are just the new 8-12s.

Anyways, if it were 3.5 and core+psionics, I'd do a psychic warrior. 5 good stats means you can have all 3 physical stats decent while also having a decent Wisdom (and either Int of Cha, depending on your character concept).

Well presumably it matters if the 3-18 bell curve actually represents something, such as the general spread of ability in the human population.

10d6, throw out the bottom 2, the top 2, and 3 in the middle.

Honestly, if somebody actually said they wanted to use some of these methods in my game I'd say "Fuck it, just put down any damn numbers you want if it's that fucking important to you."

Of course, I think the "stat bonus adds into every godsdamned thing you do" is one of the stupidest decisions in later editions of D&D precisely for the reason it leads to pants-shitting over stats.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;101681910d6, throw out the bottom 2, the top 2, and 3 in the middle.

Honestly, if somebody actually said they wanted to use some of these methods in my game I'd say "Fuck it, just put down any damn numbers you want if it's that fucking important to you."

Of course, I think the "stat bonus adds into every godsdamned thing you do" is one of the stupidest decisions in later editions of D&D precisely for the reason it leads to pants-shitting over stats.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2070[/ATTACH]

* bows * Thenkew, thenkew, we'll be here all week.  Try the lamb stew, it was great Tuesday.  Tip your servers, those kids work hard and tuition is going up.

Will used to complain about that and I didn't really understand until I started playing Pathfinder; if it's not one of your strong points, there's no point in even trying to do something.  If my fighter Hassan, with a CHA of 8, ever gets trapped alone in a place where he needs to talk his way out, he's hosed.  Not "it will be difficult for him" -- he's just toast.  Now, played for COMEDY that could be wonderful beyond belief, but if not, he is TOTALLY helpless in that situation.

It wasn't as bad in Star Wars d20 because you could burn Force points to get a bonus.  And I did, like a sumbitch.

Quote from: Ulairi;1016762Man...my group never did these funky rolling schemes. We have always done 3D6 down the line. I assume Pathfinder is like modern D&D where you get to place the stats? I'd run a Fighter with those stats.

Never really bothered what rules some D&D edition suggested. Since I began to play (my group was almost always the same) 80% of the time we rolled 7 x 3d6 and removed the worst result, this is how the original GM who introduced us to AD&D did it. The remaining 20% was usually 6 x 4d6 (remove worst dice in each roll) or using pregenerated characters, or point buy.

We did however always decide where we want the stats/numbers be placed, except a local RPG game M.A.G.U.S. where it was in the order from top to bottom whatever the result was.

For combat and saving throws I'm roll 5d20, keep the best 1.

At work we could ask our boss to just consider the most productive day we had this week when looking at pay rises. Don't look at the days we didn't come in, or came but just stared into space.

I did a 5d6 drop the lowest 2, or was it 4d6 re roll 1s.  Anyway it was high school 2nd ed.  We still got clobbered.  

With those rolls I would play What ever I wanted, I always do.

I think if I was writing my own version of D&D I'd probably just remove stats entirely.

I'm sick to death of them, no matter how they're derived.  You want your character to be smart?  Play him like he's smart.

Stats give you a guage of how good or not your character is. And wether or not someone else is better or worse. Handy in any sorts of contests or to determine limits like how far one can jump, etc.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1016837Will used to complain about that and I didn't really understand until I started playing Pathfinder; if it's not one of your strong points, there's no point in even trying to do something.  If my fighter Hassan, with a CHA of 8, ever gets trapped alone in a place where he needs to talk his way out, he's hosed.  Not "it will be difficult for him" -- he's just toast.  Now, played for COMEDY that could be wonderful beyond belief, but if not, he is TOTALLY helpless in that situation.

It wasn't as bad in Star Wars d20 because you could burn Force points to get a bonus.  And I did, like a sumbitch.

5e has nearly all the target numbers in the 10-20 range (eg saving vs a 20th level wizard with INT 20's spell is DC 19, saving vs a 1st level wizard with INT 13's spell is DC 11). I think this works much much better than the 3e approach, it means almost everyone has a chance to make the roll. Although I do find for Conanesque sword & sorcery it works even better if PCs add their Proficiency to all saves, so that even a WIS 9 level 20 PC rolls +5 on the wisdom save.

Not only are the targets lower, but it explicitly says the DM should call for a roll when he desires a random result. If the fighter has got to talk his way out of a place, and you deliver some good banter, you're not rolling! You were creative and entertained the table, why would I want to fuck that up with a bad rolll?

Quote from: Omega;1016919Stats give you a guage of how good or not your character is. And wether or not someone else is better or worse. Handy in any sorts of contests or to determine limits like how far one can jump, etc.

If you have skills you don't need stats.  If you don't have skills then stats are skills, just badly thought out ones that bunch a whole of arbitrary things together (Unless you're not going to roll - at which point you don't need stats). If you want certain classes to be better at certain things than use class as the mechanism - directly.

Typical D&D players, trying to win the game as usual.

Some of us like rolling up stats to see what kind of character it suggests to us.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1017031Some of us like rolling up stats to see what kind of character it suggests to us.

I find it works much better than having a player with preconceived notions of what his character will be. That tends to be a red flag that our ideas of a fun game will be incompatible, plus who wants a disgruntled player who didn't get to be the super hero of his mind's eye or, worse, a weak ref who caves to whiners.

Quote from: TJS;1016818Well presumably it matters if the 3-18 bell curve actually represents something, such as the general spread of ability in the human population.

I'm not particularly concerned with the stat generation system informing anything about the general human population. 99% of the 'people' in a game world have no need of stats. I do agree that I'd prefer a normal distribution simply because that could theoretically tell me how 'rare and special' one's character is. Thing is, once you include more than one normally distributed thing (2+ stats), or a 'roll up 3 character sheets and play the one you want,' nearly no one is going to able to (or at least bother to, as the number of threads with all of us lining up to explain how much stats education we've each forgotten indicates) suss out what a given stat distribution actually means.

I'd have preferred stats stayed at 3d6, and just given a base +1-2 to whatever the stats modified if the power level needs to be raised, but I understand why letting players have bigger numbers (even if the effect was the same) is a good marketing idea, even if it screws up a mathematically elegant distribution.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;101681910d6, throw out the bottom 2, the top 2, and 3 in the middle.

Honestly, if somebody actually said they wanted to use some of these methods in my game I'd say "Fuck it, just put down any damn numbers you want if it's that fucking important to you."

Of course, I think the "stat bonus adds into every godsdamned thing you do" is one of the stupidest decisions in later editions of D&D precisely for the reason it leads to pants-shitting over stats.

Quote from: TJS;1016864I think if I was writing my own version of D&D I'd probably just remove stats entirely.

I'm sick to death of them, no matter how they're derived.  You want your character to be smart?  Play him like he's smart.

I think it's just on more choice with regards to how you want to structure a game. The way OD&D (w/o GH) did it, or we did in my first BECMI games (stats mostly good for the XP bonus and not much else, mechanically) helps solidify the character level as the primary arbiter of mechanical ability. Other game systems, particularly level-less ones like GURPS or Champions/Hero System, having meaningful stats that inform a highly-important skill system make a lot of sense. That's a long winded way of saying 'all ways are fine, just don't be surprised by what your method incentivizes.'

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1017031Some of us like rolling up stats to see what kind of character it suggests to us.

I enjoy the B/X recommendation where rolling vs. stats is an ad-hoc 'skill' resolution mechanic, but overall the attributes don't inform things like combat all that much (at least compared to OD&D+GH, AD&D, and 3e+).

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1017030Typical D&D players, trying to win the game as usual.

There is no right or wrong way to play the game if the group is having fun. Go wrongbadfun on some other thread.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1017031Some of us like rolling up stats to see what kind of character it suggests to us.

I loved that too, the rolling in order and making it work, seemed more real.  4D6 drop one, rolled in order, but can switch one.   Another way we did it was 3D6 nine times, keep six and arrange as wish.

My method is to roll 3d6 and keep only the 6's. ;)

Last time I started a session of D&D Basic, I started the game with the players in Zanzer's Dungeon... I told them they had been imprisoned and working the salt mines for three months and had already somewhat formed a bond of survival... Then I asked each of them to share why they'd been imprisoned... That went pretty well. Full credit to them.

Then I asked each of them to roll 3d6 in front of them and leave it on the table. I also rolled 3d6. Because all the players had certain classes they each wanted to play I let them decide among themselves to trade attributes or swap with what I had rolled. With their attributes being rolled together, I told them this process represented them working together to survive under the hard conditions of being underfed, dealing with their fellow prisoners, and the harsh work conditions of the mine. This started the game off right for us... And the game has just ended after 2+ years; second longest campaign I've ran.

I settle with 4d6 drop lowest. You end up with a fun character with almost always still some low stats for an interesting character.

I personally think 5d6 drop lowest will end up with some very high stats, especially after you add race bonuses etc.
I kind of agree if you want this, then as a DM, you might as well let players choose stat values and veto the results.

I'd leave it as is, straight down the line, (STR 9, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 15, WIS 16, CHA 17,) choose Vuman, up INT & CHA, pick up Grappler feat & Sleight of Hand skill, choose Fighter class, choose Soldier background for Athletics & Intimidate skills (the redundancy in Fighter skills, if selected, allows 2 open-ended bkrd skill selections for whatever I want,) and walk around in guard-standard issue padded armor wielding nets and clubs, maybe a blowgun. I'd take Perception & Persuasion for my free-choice bkrd skills.

Then I'll apply for police officer or something. This way I can wrestle suspected perps into restrained submissions, but not that well. I'll constantly Intimidate by yelling out, "Respect Mah Authoritah!" as they resist. More importantly I can plant stuff on them during with Sleight of Hand. Finally my Persuasion comes in to make sure my version of the story remains the prevailing one.

I'd probably level into Battlemaster, because I'd want to use my blowgun or net to trigger Battlemaster maneuvers that grant extra SD damage. Doesn't matter much about the ranged property, I can just improvise weapon them as needed. If possible, I want to net them and then use my club on them.

She's a LEO you'd like to have a beer with! :D

3d6 straight, or GTFO.

We have used straight 3D6, 4D6 best 3, 5D6 best three and various other combinations.

My preferred method for RQ/D100 games now is 4D6 best 3 (or 3d6 best 2 + 6 for INT/SIZ) rolled a number of times, then pick which roll you want for which characteristic.

It avoids the crappy situation where you rolled STR 5 and want to play a fighter.

If rolling, I definitely like it straight down the line - assigning stats is a form of PC building and I think is best done with everyone on a level playing field, array or point buy. For D&D I prefer best 3 of 4d6 so PCs tend to be above average, assuming 10-11 is human average.

I use random point-buy. It works fantastically well for 5e. Do RAW point-buy, except distribute points using this process:

Roll 1d6
1 = STR
2 = DEX
3 = CON
4 = INT
5 = WIS
6 = CHA

Now roll another d6. Spend enough points to increase the score by that much. This system is guaranteed to produce a playable array and not produce any situation where someone has an absurdly overpowered array.

Interesting variant, fearsomepirate. But wouldn't a d8 make more sense (as a d8-1 function). That way it covers the entire spread between stats 8 and 15 in point buy.

I used Stat Array with d6 random placement. Kinda fun, as it always provides a stat 8 weakness. But your method offers new alternatives.

This way, the only way to get to 15 is to hit the same stat at least twice. But it's very unlikely that you'll never hit anything twice. BTW, just rolled:

STR 12/DEX 15/CON 10/INT 15/WIS 8/CHA 11

One variant I have been considering is letting you put 2 points in CON if you're down to 4 or less points and still have 8 CON.

In my experience, the more random character creation is, the more unique characters become; the less artificial and the less likely to just be extensions of the player's  most shallow features.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1018409In my experience, the more random character creation is, the more unique characters become; the less artificial and the less likely to just be extensions of the player's  most shallow features.

And the less likely a player is to get to play what they actually want to play. We've been over this. You like games to reflect the same random aspects of the real world. Born  with crap genes? Too bad! Whereas I think that a player gets to do one things, play their character. And that character should be *exactly* what they want to play. I was trying to have a lark with this thread. A bit of fun. Thanks for the bucket of ice water.

Rolling dice straight down the attribute list still makes a character worth playing. Not a special needs character that players have hatred for. Crap role-players will always go for the Mary Sue character for reasons.

Is there a way to delete a thread? Because I do not want my thread turned into a 'wrongbadfun' pile-on. Thanks.

I prefer randomized stats because it pushes players out of min-maxing habits.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018474Is there a way to delete a thread? Because I do not want my thread turned into a 'wrongbadfun' pile-on. Thanks.

I am sorry, but that too is wrong. The accepted colloquial phrase is "badwrongfun," not "wrongbadfun." (And "wrongfunbad" is way out, possibly even jejune). You should know better; try harder next time. ;)

(Nah, I don't care. Just taking the piss outta you is all. :D )

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018474Is there a way to delete a thread? Because I do not want my thread turned into a 'wrongbadfun' pile-on. Thanks.

Pray to your Goddess Oprah.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1018537Pray to your Goddess Oprah.

What the fuck are you blathering about?

Did y'all get a free car?! :eek:

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018474Is there a way to delete a thread? Because I do not want my thread turned into a 'wrongbadfun' pile-on. Thanks.

The comment I made about agreeing with just choose stats rather than roll 5d6 was genuine, not a piss-take.
Once you're rolling 5d6 take the highest 3, the odds of getting crazy high stats is pretty high.
I'm not even saying that's bad, but if you allow that, then if it were me I'd just say..  Look, let's cut to the chase. Just choose your stats and let me take a look to see if it's acceptable.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1018409In my experience, the more random character creation is, the more unique characters become; the less artificial and the less likely to just be extensions of the player's  most shallow features.

Yeah, pretty much...I am not a fan of the players who want to play essentially the same character over and over again, or who choose a character based on what they think will be most advantageous in-game. Randomization helps alleviate a lot of that.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018474Is there a way to delete a thread? Because I do not want my thread turned into a 'wrongbadfun' pile-on. Thanks.

Or you could just stop reading the responses if you can't handle people disagreeing with your preferences.

Quote from: danskmacabre;1018613if it were me I'd just say..  Look, let's cut to the chase. Just choose your stats and let me take a look to see if it's acceptable.

I remember a class where the professor let his students choose their own grade at the end of the semester. They all chose A, if not A+ for themself. And he allowed it.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1018603Did y'all get a free car?! :eek:

Yes actually. My father gave me his old car when he upgraded. A 2014 Toyota Corolla with 15K miles on it.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018679Yes actually. My father gave me his old car when he upgraded. A 2014 Toyota Corolla with 15K miles on it.

Nice!

It seems like I'm an anomaly here. I didn't ever plan to drive, my mother wants to have me inherit her car and one of my sisters tries to persuade me to get a license, but I have 8 dioptre glasses/eyes currently (still getting worse, might become blind), dead bits/strains of tissue fly before my sight as black snow, and I just don't think it would be safe for myself and others with me driving on the roads.

That is weird. People trying to make blind people drive cars.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1018696That is weird. People trying to make blind people drive cars.

I'm not blind... yet. I have glasses which would normally be very thick, but costed extra for making the layers as thin as possible so from looking at me one can't notice how bad my eye sight is. My own family however should know it better. As mentioned above the whole day long for me it's like a slight black snowing, both inside and outside the house due to dead bits/strands of eye tissue. I heard usually these floating pieces occur for people over 65 years old, I'm only 34 however, and my sight gets worse, that's why I don't rule out the chance of going fully blind with time.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018679Yes actually. My father gave me his old car when he upgraded. A 2014 Toyota Corolla with 15K miles on it.

Blesséd be to the Oprah! :)

Quote from: joriandrake;1018688It seems like I'm an anomaly here.

I can't drive either. We're European, it's normal! :p

Quote from: S'mon;1018809I can't drive either. We're European, it's normal! :p

Ha! At least we don't have to worry or argue on which side of the road we should drive =)

Quote from: Tetsubo;1018458And the less likely a player is to get to play what they actually want to play. We've been over this. You like games to reflect the same random aspects of the real world. Born  with crap genes? Too bad! Whereas I think that a player gets to do one things, play their character. And that character should be *exactly* what they want to play. I was trying to have a lark with this thread. A bit of fun. Thanks for the bucket of ice water.

Except that's not the product of decades of my experience as a GM. In my experience, players routinely live up to the challenge of taking randomness and making out of it a character that they will enjoy, often more than if they had just gotten what they thought they wanted right from the start. Many of the most memorable characters in my campaigns have been characters that started out looking like they didn't have great prospects, or characters that were very different from what a player would usually have chosen in the first place.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1019157Except that's not the product of decades of my experience as a GM. In my experience, players routinely live up to the challenge of taking randomness and making out of it a character that they will enjoy, often more than if they had just gotten what they thought they wanted right from the start. Many of the most memorable characters in my campaigns have been characters that started out looking like they didn't have great prospects, or characters that were very different from what a player would usually have chosen in the first place.

Yep. And it's more fun for everyone that way. But as I noted elsewhere, many people lack imagination and just want the same sandwich every time they eat and the same character every time they roleplay.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1019157Except that's not the product of decades of my experience as a GM. In my experience, players routinely live up to the challenge of taking randomness and making out of it a character that they will enjoy, often more than if they had just gotten what they thought they wanted right from the start. Many of the most memorable characters in my campaigns have been characters that started out looking like they didn't have great prospects, or characters that were very different from what a player would usually have chosen in the first place.

Awesome. I am genuinely and sincerely happy for you. But in *my* experience no one I know wants that. They want to play the character concept they have already. And you just reinforced why I want this thread deleted. But since that doesn't seem possible I'm out. You folks go ahead and have all the 'badwrongfun' pile-ons you want.

Oh hey, you wrote 'badwrongfun' correctly this time! :p You are listening! :)

Quote from: Tetsubo;1016761I got a 9, 14, 14, 15, 16, 17. A good set by any measure. Now I just need to build a character around them... So, what would you play with these rolls?

STR 9 DE 14 CO 14 IN 15 WI 16 CH 17... I'm seeing a Mata Hari or Jane Bond type seductress/assassin, competent in combat (good DEX & CON) but really dominant in social situations - very smart, insightful & charming. I like 5e Rogues so I reckon I'd go Rogue (Assassin).

Quote from: S'mon;1019513STR 9 DE 14 CO 14 IN 15 WI 16 CH 17... I'm seeing a Mata Hari or Jane Bond type seductress/assassin, competent in combat (good DEX & CON) but really dominant in social situations - very smart, insightful & charming. I like 5e Rogues so I reckon I'd go Rogue (Assassin).

Assuming it's in order, you've got a 17 Charisma.  Play a fucking Paladin!  Drain some Wisdom down to get your STR up high enough for an XP bonus.  With that INT score you'll have several languages you can take.


Assuming it's OD&D, which is the Only D&D.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1019251Awesome. I am genuinely and sincerely happy for you. But in *my* experience no one I know wants that. They want to play the character concept they have already. And you just reinforced why I want this thread deleted. But since that doesn't seem possible I'm out. You folks go ahead and have all the 'badwrongfun' pile-ons you want.

Aww, did Pundy give your dinkie a sad?

In the 45 years I've been playing RPGs, I have had very few encounters with people who weren't willing to just ride with the dice.  There are so many different games out there that if you don't like random roll games... don't play them!  TFT dates back to 1977 or so, and it's as simple a character generation as OD&D.

The few times I HAVE encountered it, the players were also problematic in terms of complaining about ANYTHING that didn't go their way; they wanted to ALWAYS succeed at EVERYTHING they attempted.  And oh Jesus, if their character got killed!

So my experience has made this a real danger signal for me.  YMMV.

Quote from: RPGPundit;10179763d6 straight, or GTFO.

Holla

It's amazing how easy it is to sell people on this if you don't run your game like a chowderhead. "No, you don't have to roll to tie your shoes. What did Pathfinder do to you?!"

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1019522The few times I HAVE encountered it, the players were also problematic in terms of complaining about ANYTHING that didn't go their way; they wanted to ALWAYS succeed at EVERYTHING they attempted.  And oh Jesus, if their character got killed!

I see plenty of games where DMs kowtow to players at their table that are sore losers.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1019519Assuming it's in order, you've got a 17 Charisma.  Play a fucking Paladin!  Drain some Wisdom down to get your STR up high enough for an XP bonus.  With that INT score you'll have several languages you can take.


Assuming it's OD&D, which is the Only D&D.

OD&D with that splatbook Greyhawk supplement, right? :p

Quote from: S'mon;1019556OD&D with that splatbook Greyhawk supplement, right? :p

Well, he did indicate that they should play a paladin, so I'm guessing yes. And it's also SIWCDCh, so the rolls actually make Str 9, Int 14, Wis 14, Con 15, Dex 16, and Cha 17. :p

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1019522In the 45 years I've been playing RPGs, I have had very few encounters with people who weren't willing to just ride with the dice.  There are so many different games out there that if you don't like random roll games... don't play them!  TFT dates back to 1977 or so, and it's as simple a character generation as OD&D.

Tetsubo has indicated that he plays Pathfinder. I don't remember if there's an official rules for point buy stats, but I know it is done. So he has a non-random roll game, and he's undoubtedly playing it. So, once again, we have a non-problem here.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1019251And you just reinforced why I want this thread deleted. But since that doesn't seem possible I'm out. You folks go ahead and have all the 'badwrongfun' pile-ons you want.

First of all, I don't know any forum where it is the norm to allow the OP to request a thread to be deleted simply because they do not like the direction the conversation went.
Second, I think you would find it advantageous to read all responses on subjects like this to have an invisible "It is my opinion that (and mostly pertaining to my own gaming style)..."

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1019619I don't know any forum where it is the norm to allow the OP to request a thread to be deleted simply because they do not like the direction the conversation went.

3rd-wave forumism.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1019251But in *my* experience no one I know wants that. They want to play the character concept they have already.

It's because they know they can. If I know I am joining a game where I can design a character down to their shoelaces, then I'll come up with a detailed character concept. If I know I am joining a game that's random, then I'll just go with it.

Obviously, if you promise them a point-buy game and then make them random roll, they'll be pissed off. And vice versa.

It's about expectations, son. You'll find people are fairly open to trying out a variety of playstyles. I mean, even Pundit plays a storygame.

Groups should roll stats how they like and what best fits the game-style they are playing.

Yeah, we don't delete threads when they don't go the way the author intended.

Quote from: Ras Algethi;1019720Groups should roll stats how they like and what best fits the game-style they are playing.

Yep, totally agree with that.

Sure, if they want to play easy-mode, that's their right.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1021088Sure, if they want to play easy-mode, that's their right.

You're a game designer. You know that's not true. Up the stats, DM just ups the challenge. All it does is skew distributions and make high stats meaningless.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1021123You're a game designer. You know that's not true. Up the stats, DM just ups the challenge. All it does is skew distributions and make high stats meaningless.

Unless they don't because the games that do use things like Challenge Levels to craft their level-appropriate encounters usually base on something like Total Level, not stats.  Artificially boosted stats there can create Easy Mode.

Even if the GM does adjust the challenge level, that's not going to be meaningless unless he also adjusts the exp level.  If you have super-charged PCs and the GM throws super-charged foes at them, what you're going to get is crazyass fights and meteoric rise through the levels in most versions of D&D.  Not exactly a meaningless change.

With the slower advancement of something like AD&D it can still take a while to go through the levels.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1021130Even if the GM does adjust the challenge level, that's not going to be meaningless unless he also adjusts the exp level.  If you have super-charged PCs and the GM throws super-charged foes at them, what you're going to get is crazyass fights and meteoric rise through the levels in most versions of D&D.  Not exactly a meaningless change.

Oh, yes, it is going to have consequences. It'll throw off math and (as mentioned) skew distributions, and advancement rates if xp is based off beating specific encounter strengths. No doubt. What it will not do is make things easier. Just like we discovered in the 5e thread, where the jack-in-the-box effect just increases the chance that the deadly encounter is a TPK instead of a loss of one character. There are few ways to make any TTRPG truly easy, except by having the GM actually go easy on the PCs.

Yeah, in a lot of cases the GM doesn't up the threat level.  Certainly that wouldn't be the standard in old-school games.

No, but presumably the PCs will do so themselves, just as if they were a higher level.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1021088Sure, if they want to play easy-mode, that's their right.

No, it's not.

Some players think easy-mode only means leveling up quick or gaining more XP than usual. Easy mode is simply just easy-mode. Try it. Then stop when it becomes boring.

My players certain prefer hard mode.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1022006My players certain prefer hard mode.

So they play with a good DM?

Wait?  The OP was right!  This is an imaginary dick measuring contest.  On the Internet!

"hard mode," hurr hurr hurr...

The 4e Gamma World had a good solution. You get an 18, you get a 16 and your roll 3D6 for the others.

Players were happy with their 18s.

I was happy with the high mortality combat.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1022031So they play with a good DM?

Have I mentioned I got a waiting list?

I'm starting a new L&D campaign this week, and I had to turn several people away because we were full up within 24 hours.

Quote from: Headless;1022307Wait?  The OP was right!  This is an imaginary dick measuring contest.  On the Internet!

It's always someone else's conversation that is a "pissing contest" or "dick measuring contest" or whatever belittling language or patronising language is de jour .

Especially when one is uninvolved, uniinvested or simply uninterested, right?

Well pouring scorn on some other person's conversation on *gasp* the internet is hardly the noblest of pursuits, now is it?

I think that was a joke based off "hard mode."

If not... eh, we all get grumpy from time to time.  Mostly we just ignore each others' bouts of liverishness.

Quote from: Tetsubo;1019251Awesome. I am genuinely and sincerely happy for you. But in *my* experience no one I know wants that. They want to play the character concept they have already. And you just reinforced why I want this thread deleted. But since that doesn't seem possible I'm out. You folks go ahead and have all the 'badwrongfun' pile-ons you want.

Why not just play GURPS or any other point based games and let them do that then?

I think it's lame when players won't play with the way the dice fall. Nobody knows what a character is going to be until they play it. I've had players not be excited for the character they rolled but ended up loving the character once they started playing it.

Quote from: Mike the Mage;1022846It's always someone else's conversation that is a "pissing contest" or "dick measuring contest" or whatever belittling language or patronising language is de jour .

I'm happy to have a pissing contest, so long as it's acknowledged that how far you can piss is determined by random roll, not point-buy.

3d6 down the line.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1022930I'm happy to have a pissing contest, so long as it's acknowledged that how far you can piss is determined by random roll, not point-buy.

3d6 down the line.

I do prefer 3d6 down the line myself, too. But I was a bit less competitive about beating a dead horse into paté. :) I like Tetsubo (even if he is a gaming heretic! /violent ululation :mad: ), and feel his playful post here was worth some playful ribbing. However it seems like a scrum was started when I wasn't looking. :p