Quote from: Shasarak on June 28, 2021, 07:42:09 PM

Quote from: dkabq on June 28, 2021, 06:11:36 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 04:03:14 PM


It might have made sense in the 70s, but there are dozens of new ways to create characters invented over the decades: point buy, stat arrays, randomized stat arrays, point allocation, random point allocation, life paths, etc. The only reason to stick to random rolls for ability scores is nostalgia.

I respectfully disagree. Random rolls for PCs add variability to the PCs. And it precludes min/max-ing. And it provides opportunity for the player to develop their PC in terms of its deficiencies. For example, one of my DCC players has a Warrior with a STR 8 (i.e., -1 to-hit and damage in melee). He decided to have the PC focus on ranged attacks. Eventually we decided to convert the PC from a Warrior to a Ranger. Lots of roleplaying goodness from a crap stat.

But that's just me and how I like to run my game. YMMV.

Have you tried adding roleplaying for extra variability between PCs?

Yep yep. Some of my players are better at it than others, but they all make a good effort. Personally, I enjoy them playing down to their weaknesses as much as when they play up to their strengths, and I make a concerted effort to reward both. For example, one player has a Warrior (Maxxx) with:

STR = 12
AGL = 9
STA = 11
PER = 10
INT = 5
LUC = 7

Maxxx is played as the not-so-bright "muscle" of the same player's Wizard (Ambrose). He is also unlucky (-1 luck mod, in addition to his "lucky roll" of The Broken Star, which gives him +2 (higher is worse) on his fumble rolls). Maxxx is 100% devoted/loyal to Ambrose, despite Ambrose being kinda of an ass (ignorance is bliss). As such, Maxxx will, for better or worse, protect Ambrose with his life. So I gave Maxxx a +1d on his deed die when he is performing a selfless act of protection (e.g., jumping into 10' deep water, while in scale mail, to save Ambrose from being attacked by water snakes).

The player made the most of what Crom gave him, and I rewarded him for it. It is likely that Maxxx's luck will eventually run out and he will die in the service of Master Ambrose. But it is also likely to be a glorious and/or hilarious death.

Random rolled PCs work for me and my players. YMMV.

Quote from: Jam The MF on June 28, 2021, 08:54:17 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on June 28, 2021, 07:42:09 PM

Quote from: dkabq on June 28, 2021, 06:11:36 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 04:03:14 PM


It might have made sense in the 70s, but there are dozens of new ways to create characters invented over the decades: point buy, stat arrays, randomized stat arrays, point allocation, random point allocation, life paths, etc. The only reason to stick to random rolls for ability scores is nostalgia.

I respectfully disagree. Random rolls for PCs add variability to the PCs. And it precludes min/max-ing. And it provides opportunity for the player to develop their PC in terms of its deficiencies. For example, one of my DCC players has a Warrior with a STR 8 (i.e., -1 to-hit and damage in melee). He decided to have the PC focus on ranged attacks. Eventually we decided to convert the PC from a Warrior to a Ranger. Lots of roleplaying goodness from a crap stat.

But that's just me and how I like to run my game. YMMV.

Have you tried adding roleplaying for extra variability between PCs?

"Roleplaying?  Roleplaying?  We don't need no stinking roleplaying!!!".

Just badgers then?

Quote from: dkabq on June 28, 2021, 06:11:36 PMI respectfully disagree. Random rolls for PCs add variability to the PCs. And it precludes min/max-ing.

Half of the methods I mentioned include randomization methods. I even have my players randomly roll their race (as part of a background roll). So my argument has nothing to do with variability vs no variability. But about the expectation that some DMs seem to have that players who roll poorly should be forced to play such a character even when it's not in the player's (or party's) best interest for him to do so.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 28, 2021, 07:36:01 PMIs the "nostalgia" comment turning into the new Godwin?  Because you'll rarely lose a bet if you take the position that an argument made that "X is only done because of nostalgia" is not only wrong but obviously so.  It's an argument made from someone that in their own mind has already lost the argument.

I feel that I've lost the argument because no one has even attempted to address my core concern. If a game is setup to have races that are fairly balanced with one another and classes balanced with one another, how is the game improved if all that is thrown out the window when it comes to each character's ability scores? Why is it a good idea for one player's character to be significantly more powerful than another player's character simply due to a random roll?

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 10:21:19 PM

Quote from: dkabq on June 28, 2021, 06:11:36 PMI respectfully disagree. Random rolls for PCs add variability to the PCs. And it precludes min/max-ing.

Half of the methods I mentioned include randomization methods. I even have my players randomly roll their race. So my argument has nothing to do with variability vs no variability. But about the expectation that some DMs seem to have that players who roll poorly should be forced to play such a character even when it's not in the player's (or party's) best interest for him to do so.

It sounds like you are arguing against negative variability in chargin. Which if you are, is fine -- no wrongbadfun.

As for player's or party's best interest, I suppose it all depends on how you define best interest. Moreover, I would argue that what is important is the best interest of the game. Which at my table includes players doing their best with poorly rolled PCs. From the first session, my players have known that PCs *will* die, due to poor choices or bad luck. Express your laments, then grab 3d6 and roll...

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 10:25:54 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 28, 2021, 07:36:01 PMIs the "nostalgia" comment turning into the new Godwin?  Because you'll rarely lose a bet if you take the position that an argument made that "X is only done because of nostalgia" is not only wrong but obviously so.  It's an argument made from someone that in their own mind has already lost the argument.

I feel that I've lost the argument because no one has even attempted to address my core concern. If a game is setup to have races that are fairly balanced with one another and classes balanced with one another, how is the game improved if all that is thrown out the window when it comes to each character's ability scores? Why is it a good idea for one player's character to be significantly more powerful than another player's character simply due to a random roll?

You did lose the argument, by doing the RPG equivalent of Godwinning.

But to address your point, it provides a lot more variability. If you're playing an 18/00 strength fighter and everyone else in the party has normal stats, you really stand out. You're special in a real way, beyond just simple niche protection or roleplaying. You're reacting against this, because you're taking the short term view. You're asking yourself why this player gets to be special, but not the rest of the group. But this is a very deliberate design feature in old school games, not a flaw. The reason you're having a hard time seeing it because you're starting with a different set of assumptions.

Consider the milieu in which OD&D was developed: Gygax ran a table where dozens of players rotated in and out, where players regularity switched between characters, and mortality was high, especially at low levels. In other words, if you roll a ranger with an 18 Con and start with a massive 24 hp, that's really cool. But you might roll terribly for hit points at later levels. Your buddy might find a sword of sharpness, and make you feel inferior. You might get level drained, and have to play catch up to the rest of the party. You might die. You might be a replacement for a character who died, and while 24 hp is nice for 1st level, it's less impressive when the rest of the party is 5th level. You also don't play the ranger all the time. You only bring the character out for level-appropriate adventures. Also, the character might not click. You might find the magic-user with no unique mechanical traits to be a lot more fun to play.

The point is there is a vast variety in all those games, even the ones with relatively few character creation options. Power level is just one of many axes, and good stats are just a part of that. And it is balanced, because everyone has the same chance of rolling such a character. And since you play so many characters, and switch back and forth, everyone will play such a character, at some point. You sometimes feel special, and sometimes don't. It's balanced, but it's balanced over time, not right now. You never feel like everyone is always forced to be equal.

If you expect to play the same character for years on end with no interruptions, then yes, you can make an argument for more consistent balance. But in an environment like I just described, it's another fun way to make everyone different.

You don't have to play that way, or like it, but you should be able to understand why other people appreciate it. And that they appreciate for real, rational reasons. Nostalgia is always a bad assumption, because many of these games were tightly designed (even if they were a mess in places) and were playtested to a degree you'd never see today. And since the advent of the OSR, they've been thoroughly and analyzed for why they work, and under what circumstances. But the environment for they were designed, and where they excel, is often alien to modern players. It requires getting in a different mindset. Which is hard, because examining our own subconscious assumptions is very difficult.

Nostalgia may be a factor for dilettantes who want to revisit something temporarily, but the people who play these games all the time do so because they're fun.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 10:25:54 PMIf a game is setup to have races that are fairly balanced with one another and classes balanced with one another, how is the game improved if all that is thrown out the window when it comes to each character's ability scores?

This implies that "game balance" is a necessary or desirable approach. It is not.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 10:25:54 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 28, 2021, 07:36:01 PMIs the "nostalgia" comment turning into the new Godwin?  Because you'll rarely lose a bet if you take the position that an argument made that "X is only done because of nostalgia" is not only wrong but obviously so.  It's an argument made from someone that in their own mind has already lost the argument.

I feel that I've lost the argument because no one has even attempted to address my core concern. If a game is setup to have races that are fairly balanced with one another and classes balanced with one another, how is the game improved if all that is thrown out the window when it comes to each character's ability scores? Why is it a good idea for one player's character to be significantly more powerful than another player's character simply due to a random roll?

That is an interesting point that you raise. My take is that as far as DCC is concerned, classes are not fairly balanced. Put a Warrior toe-to-toe with Thief, and the Thief is toast. On the other hand, put them both in an urban adventure where climbing shear surfaces, picking locks, and detecting/disarming traps determine survival, then the Warrior is taking the dirt nap. Or take a social situation, where the players coming up with a cunning plan could what matter more than the DC checks.

Moreover, I do not believe that player power in terms of stats (or abilities) is all that important in the overall game. Having a AGL 18 isn't going to make you the leader of the thieves guild. And the PCs are not going to take the same "advancement" paths. Yes, there are those that will strive for martial or magical prowess. But I have a group of PCs that are trying for material and political advancement. Another player wants his Cleric to become a lich, at which point he plans to hand over him over to me to be an NPC. That's assuming he doesn't run afoul of his god before then and have to hand him over sooner.

In fact, I would argue that player creativity is more important than the stats of his PCs.

YMMV.

Props to Pat for that well thought out post.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on June 28, 2021, 11:06:41 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on June 28, 2021, 10:25:54 PMIf a game is setup to have races that are fairly balanced with one another and classes balanced with one another, how is the game improved if all that is thrown out the window when it comes to each character's ability scores?

This implies that "game balance" is a necessary or desirable approach. It is not.

It's not necessary - but all else being equal it is definitely desirable.

Quote from: Pat on June 28, 2021, 10:58:46 PM
The point is there is a vast variety in all those games, even the ones with relatively few character creation options. Power level is just one of many axes, and good stats are just a part of that. And it is balanced, because everyone has the same chance of rolling such a character. And since you play so many characters, and switch back and forth, everyone will play such a character, at some point. You sometimes feel special, and sometimes don't. It's balanced, but it's balanced over time, not right now. You never feel like everyone is always forced to be equal.

Balanced over time is probably the worst way to try and balance something except for Balanced after having to kill a million boars.

Quote from: Shasarak on June 28, 2021, 11:29:41 PM

Quote from: Pat on June 28, 2021, 10:58:46 PM
The point is there is a vast variety in all those games, even the ones with relatively few character creation options. Power level is just one of many axes, and good stats are just a part of that. And it is balanced, because everyone has the same chance of rolling such a character. And since you play so many characters, and switch back and forth, everyone will play such a character, at some point. You sometimes feel special, and sometimes don't. It's balanced, but it's balanced over time, not right now. You never feel like everyone is always forced to be equal.

Balanced over time is probably the worst way to try and balance something except for Balanced after having to kill a million boars.

So you're saying it's better than 100,000 tons of bacon.

Yum.

Quote from: Pat on June 28, 2021, 11:39:15 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on June 28, 2021, 11:29:41 PM

Quote from: Pat on June 28, 2021, 10:58:46 PM
The point is there is a vast variety in all those games, even the ones with relatively few character creation options. Power level is just one of many axes, and good stats are just a part of that. And it is balanced, because everyone has the same chance of rolling such a character. And since you play so many characters, and switch back and forth, everyone will play such a character, at some point. You sometimes feel special, and sometimes don't. It's balanced, but it's balanced over time, not right now. You never feel like everyone is always forced to be equal.

Balanced over time is probably the worst way to try and balance something except for Balanced after having to kill a million boars.

So you're saying it's better than 100,000 tons of bacon.

Yum.

Worse then that its maginary bacon.

Quote from: Shasarak on June 28, 2021, 11:29:41 PM

Quote from: Pat on June 28, 2021, 10:58:46 PM
The point is there is a vast variety in all those games, even the ones with relatively few character creation options. Power level is just one of many axes, and good stats are just a part of that. And it is balanced, because everyone has the same chance of rolling such a character. And since you play so many characters, and switch back and forth, everyone will play such a character, at some point. You sometimes feel special, and sometimes don't. It's balanced, but it's balanced over time, not right now. You never feel like everyone is always forced to be equal.

Balanced over time is probably the worst way to try and balance something except for Balanced after having to kill a million boars.

Agreed. My experience is more than half of campaigns fall apart after fewer than six levels gained so if you start at level one those who have to wait for their time to shine never get it and if you start at higher levels the window for those balanced around the early game is either already closed or in the process of doing so rapidly.

Balance over time is awful... and so is having to play something you have zero interest in because your rolled stats in order don't let you play something you're actually interested in. I have limited free time, I'm not going to waste it playing something I don't enjoy just so a GM can have the power trip of demanding I play a randomly generated character. I'll just find another GM playing a game more to my tastes.

Quote from: Chris24601 on June 28, 2021, 11:44:22 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on June 28, 2021, 11:29:41 PM

Quote from: Pat on June 28, 2021, 10:58:46 PM
The point is there is a vast variety in all those games, even the ones with relatively few character creation options. Power level is just one of many axes, and good stats are just a part of that. And it is balanced, because everyone has the same chance of rolling such a character. And since you play so many characters, and switch back and forth, everyone will play such a character, at some point. You sometimes feel special, and sometimes don't. It's balanced, but it's balanced over time, not right now. You never feel like everyone is always forced to be equal.

Balanced over time is probably the worst way to try and balance something except for Balanced after having to kill a million boars.

Agreed. My experience is more than half of campaigns fall apart after fewer than six levels gained so if you start at level one those who have to wait for their time to shine never get it and if you start at higher levels the window for those balanced around the early game is either already closed or in the process of doing so rapidly.

Balance over time is awful... and so is having to play something you have zero interest in because your rolled stats in order don't let you play something you're actually interested in. I have limited free time, I'm not going to waste it playing something I don't enjoy just so a GM can have the power trip of demanding I play a randomly generated character. I'll just find another GM playing a game more to my tastes.

You're objectively wrong because you're stating your preference as an objective fact.

You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to anyone else's, though.