Pundit must have been smoking that 'Godfather OG' when he formulated this video 

Because he's wrong. Role-playing games are about taking on the characteristics of another being. 'Character' involves mental/moral aspects of being. So - if I have less options regarding what that other being's characteristics will be, I'm limited in exactly who/what that being can/will be.

Comparison: various versions of D&D/WotC Game™ offer background characteristics which is fun. But, the gap between what those games offer and what a system like GURPS offers is expansive. Galactic. Even.

Let us consider another game: Football (not soccer). When they were just running around and kicking the ball it was cool, but when they gained the option to pass the ball the whole thing took off like a Marine on payday.

I know this idea is revolutionary, probably get me burned at the stake, but: MORE IS BETTER.

Shit, if less was better, Gary never would've done all the BECMI & AD&D splat. He knew what he was doing. And it shows how stupid WotC is since they haven't dumped a billion setting and kit books on the market. "D&D is under-monetized." Really? Wonder why.

Pundit only makes sense here if the world was still stuck playing Chainmail or OD&D. THEN, you could try to say "Oh yeah this really limited BS is the apex of gaming, people!"

Quote from: Brad on June 07, 2023, 09:57:00 AM

Quote from: Brad on June 06, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
I cannot wait to hear how bad randomizing character creation is from some of the usual suspects...

Quote from: Fheredin on June 06, 2023, 10:05:32 PM
The problem with rolling stat in order isn't that it infringes on player choice.

So? If a player wants to play a paladin and rolls too poorly, they don't get to choose a paladin. So what? My kids don't get to pick fucking candy for breakfast, either. Limiting player choice isn't inherently bad; it CAN be bad in some instances, but your arbitrary "limiting player choice is BAD!" is just pure garbage. Hell, why limit the players at all? If you're running a pseudo-medieval campaign and a player wants a SAWS and some 21st century body armor, why not? Surely limiting their choice to a list of melee weapons like swords and axes is BAD! Whatever...

Nope. Do you really need to use point-buy or some other system to assign attributes to successfully prompt roleplay? Nope. For some games randomized rolls are good, and for some games point-buy is good, and for some games it might be a combination of both, or neither. This one-true-way bullshit is exactly why your opinion is irrelevant.

Please finish reading the paragraph? There's only one more sentence.

QuoteThe problem with rolling stat in order isn't that it infringes on player choice. I think there are three motives players might have to play a roleplaying game: use the escapism fantasy to be able to make a choice and be something other than what you are IRL, remain your comfortable self in an unfamiliar circumstance, or to let the Heart of the Cards guide you into your character.

Wherever did I imply that one of these paths was better than the other? I understand that this isn't practical, but if I were to conceive of an "ideal" RPG, it would have options. Options for power-user point buys, options for pregenerated templates, options for RNG-generated characters, options to turn options off if that overwhelms you. Once the game designer hands the game off to the GM and players, it's no longer the game designer's baby; it's the player's beast of burden. They should have the freedom to do with it as they please, at least within the confines of what's reasonably possible.

Would I personally go through character creation with RNG? No. But I don't judge a player who disagrees with that assessment.

QuoteIt doesn't surprise me that you wrote this sentence, but I am surprised why it matters to you since I doubt for one second you play D&D at all. Considering it's a terrible game, right?

I have played D&D. Not a lot, mind you--probably only about 5-7 sessions--and I do have some fond memories of those games. The GM I last played D&D with had a gift for polishing turds into pieces of postmodern art. I took him an idea for a martial artist character who would grow into a master of disguise and he immediately went, "I know; how'd you like to be an emissary of Mask? Take this homebrew mask. When you put it on, it'll give you a random appearance, but when you take it off, you will never see that face again."

Still, one should not judge D&D for what a GM who has been running the system for 20ish years can do.

D&D isn't a "terrible" game. It's more mediocre and archaic. It leverages skilled players and GMs, but performs poorly at a table of beginners. Combat consumes too much time for what it is. The monster manual is brittle to metagaming, leading to petty intraparty squabbles as immersion competes with odds to achieve victory. A lot of the rules which worked fine 20 years ago are Chinese Water Torture today. It has never had a designer actually try to put it on a diet because the fanbase would have a Tasmanian Devil tantrum.

QuoteI would never advocate randomized attributes for a game like Amber because the auction is what literally generates conflict within the game itself. It's a vital part of creating the environment that will ensure plenty of fun and mayhem. But for a B/X game? Roll those D6s.

That would be a good system reference, except this forum has an Erick Wujcik subforum. I'll give partial credit brownie points, anyway.

QuoteSo...use randomization, but use the kind I LIKE INSTEAD! YOU FOOL! I cannot tell if this is a troll or you are really this fucking stupid.

Insults cover for a lack of comprehension if and only if the other guy doesn't call the bluff.

Quote from: Fheredin on June 07, 2023, 09:31:18 PM

Quote from: Brad on June 07, 2023, 09:57:00 AM

Quote from: Brad on June 06, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
I cannot wait to hear how bad randomizing character creation is from some of the usual suspects...

Quote from: Fheredin on June 06, 2023, 10:05:32 PM
The problem with rolling stat in order isn't that it infringes on player choice.

So? If a player wants to play a paladin and rolls too poorly, they don't get to choose a paladin. So what? My kids don't get to pick fucking candy for breakfast, either. Limiting player choice isn't inherently bad; it CAN be bad in some instances, but your arbitrary "limiting player choice is BAD!" is just pure garbage. Hell, why limit the players at all? If you're running a pseudo-medieval campaign and a player wants a SAWS and some 21st century body armor, why not? Surely limiting their choice to a list of melee weapons like swords and axes is BAD! Whatever...

Nope. Do you really need to use point-buy or some other system to assign attributes to successfully prompt roleplay? Nope. For some games randomized rolls are good, and for some games point-buy is good, and for some games it might be a combination of both, or neither. This one-true-way bullshit is exactly why your opinion is irrelevant.

Please finish reading the paragraph? There's only one more sentence.

QuoteThe problem with rolling stat in order isn't that it infringes on player choice. I think there are three motives players might have to play a roleplaying game: use the escapism fantasy to be able to make a choice and be something other than what you are IRL, remain your comfortable self in an unfamiliar circumstance, or to let the Heart of the Cards guide you into your character.

Wherever did I imply that one of these paths was better than the other? I understand that this isn't practical, but if I were to conceive of an "ideal" RPG, it would have options. Options for power-user point buys, options for pregenerated templates, options for RNG-generated characters, options to turn options off if that overwhelms you. Once the game designer hands the game off to the GM and players, it's no longer the game designer's baby; it's the player's beast of burden. They should have the freedom to do with it as they please, at least within the confines of what's reasonably possible.

Would I personally go through character creation with RNG? No. But I don't judge a player who disagrees with that assessment.

QuoteIt doesn't surprise me that you wrote this sentence, but I am surprised why it matters to you since I doubt for one second you play D&D at all. Considering it's a terrible game, right?

I have played D&D. Not a lot, mind you--probably only about 5-7 sessions--and I do have some fond memories of those games. The GM I last played D&D with had a gift for polishing turds into pieces of postmodern art. I took him an idea for a martial artist character who would grow into a master of disguise and he immediately went, "I know; how'd you like to be an emissary of Mask? Take this homebrew mask. When you put it on, it'll give you a random appearance, but when you take it off, you will never see that face again."

Still, one should not judge D&D for what a GM who has been running the system for 20ish years can do.

D&D isn't a "terrible" game. It's more mediocre and archaic. It leverages skilled players and GMs, but performs poorly at a table of beginners. Combat consumes too much time for what it is. The monster manual is brittle to metagaming, leading to petty intraparty squabbles as immersion competes with odds to achieve victory. A lot of the rules which worked fine 20 years ago are Chinese Water Torture today. It has never had a designer actually try to put it on a diet because the fanbase would have a Tasmanian Devil tantrum.

QuoteI would never advocate randomized attributes for a game like Amber because the auction is what literally generates conflict within the game itself. It's a vital part of creating the environment that will ensure plenty of fun and mayhem. But for a B/X game? Roll those D6s.

That would be a good system reference, except this forum has an Erick Wujcik subforum. I'll give partial credit brownie points, anyway.

QuoteSo...use randomization, but use the kind I LIKE INSTEAD! YOU FOOL! I cannot tell if this is a troll or you are really this fucking stupid.

Insults cover for a lack of comprehension if and only if the other guy doesn't call the bluff.

LOL

Far be it for me to get in the middle of your pissing match.

I see randomly generated stats as kind of like organic and GMO-free food. There are people who swear it's good and amazing and awesome, and they have all kinds of reasons why everyone should totally do it, yet for some reason during lockdowns when we had food shortages and supply chain issues, all the organic stuff was still on the shelves.

Randomly generated stats are awesome. They're the best thing ever to happen in RPGs, and everyone should totally do it all the time, every game, every character, and fuck you, you didn't roll a 17 charisma so you can't play a paladin. It's really too bad nobody wants to play that way.

Quote from: Corolinth on June 08, 2023, 11:27:03 AM
Randomly generated stats are awesome. They're the best thing ever to happen in RPGs, and everyone should totally do it all the time, every game, every character, and fuck you, you didn't roll a 17 charisma so you can't play a paladin. It's really too bad nobody wants to play that way.

No one ever said that, fucktard.

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 11:35:39 AM

Quote from: Corolinth on June 08, 2023, 11:27:03 AM
Randomly generated stats are awesome. They're the best thing ever to happen in RPGs, and everyone should totally do it all the time, every game, every character, and fuck you, you didn't roll a 17 charisma so you can't play a paladin. It's really too bad nobody wants to play that way.

No one ever said that, fucktard.

It's a measure of someone's argument how much they need to strawman in order to make it...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 08, 2023, 12:31:39 PM
It's a measure of someone's argument how much they need to strawman in order to make it...

This whole line of argumentation is just tiresome...it's like it is IMPOSSIBLE for random character generation to possibly anything other than Supreme Unfun. I literally said multiple times non-random character generation methods are appropriate for certain games, but unless I concede non-random is the ONLY way to make characters, I'm just too stupid to understand proper game design.

I would really like to see the stone tablets brought down from the mountain that codify the One True Way these clowns keep obliquely referring to because that'd make this whole thing moot.

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 01:52:56 PM
I would really like to see the stone tablets brought down from the mountain that codify the One True Way these clowns keep obliquely referring to because that'd make this whole thing moot.

That limits can be good for imagination is a learned appreciation.  In order to learn it, it is almost necessary to have personally experienced a good limit in action, seen the result, and then tied the result to the limit.  Not everyone gets those experiences.  Some that do don't make the connection.  In fairness, it's not always an obvious connection.

What you are doing is akin to this:  Consider trying to explain that some green vegetables are tasty to a person who would like asparagus and raw spinach leaves if they tried them, but so far has only tried green bean, broccoli, English peas, and that truly awful limp, canned spinach--and virulently hated all of them to the point that they have now internalized the "fact" that green vegetables are icky.  And vegetable taste is a whole less complicated to recognize than RPG tastes.

You are trying to reason someone out of an emotional response.

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 01:52:56 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 08, 2023, 12:31:39 PM
It's a measure of someone's argument how much they need to strawman in order to make it...

This whole line of argumentation is just tiresome...it's like it is IMPOSSIBLE for random character generation to possibly anything other than Supreme Unfun. I literally said multiple times non-random character generation methods are appropriate for certain games, but unless I concede non-random is the ONLY way to make characters, I'm just too stupid to understand proper game design.

I would really like to see the stone tablets brought down from the mountain that codify the One True Way these clowns keep obliquely referring to because that'd make this whole thing moot.

The most interesting part of the claims here is that no one has made any of these arguments either. Yet you did make claims could be construed the way that @Corolinth implied right here while raging at @Fheredin's post...

Quote from: Brad on June 07, 2023, 09:57:00 AM

Quote from: Brad on June 06, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
I cannot wait to hear how bad randomizing character creation is from some of the usual suspects...

Quote from: Fheredin on June 06, 2023, 10:05:32 PM
The problem with rolling stat in order isn't that it infringes on player choice.

So? If a player wants to play a paladin and rolls too poorly, they don't get to choose a paladin. So what? My kids don't get to pick fucking candy for breakfast, either. Limiting player choice isn't inherently bad; it CAN be bad in some instances, but your arbitrary "limiting player choice is BAD!" is just pure garbage. Hell, why limit the players at all? If you're running a pseudo-medieval campaign and a player wants a SAWS and some 21st century body armor, why not? Surely limiting their choice to a list of melee weapons like swords and axes is BAD! Whatever...

...but are pretending that OTHER people are just arguing a strawman while you're thrashing arguments no one's ever made (even in the sample post quoted above, since I'm not sure Fheredin was talking about any of that stuff. You just had a hard on for him since the "The Biggest Mistake in RPG Design" thread), and were already prepared to do so since your first post in this thread...

Quote from: Brad on June 06, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
I cannot wait to hear how bad randomizing character creation is from some of the usual suspects...

...which makes me wonder how much you're actually reading what people actually posted, as opposed to reading into it what you want to read there. And the answer to your last implicit query (if I understand it correctly)...

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 01:52:56 PMI would really like to see the stone tablets brought down from the mountain that codify the One True Way these clowns keep obliquely referring to because that'd make this whole thing moot.

...was Pundit's video, where he declared his preferred methods as superior.

Quote from: VisionStorm on June 08, 2023, 03:36:43 PM

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 01:52:56 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 08, 2023, 12:31:39 PM
It's a measure of someone's argument how much they need to strawman in order to make it...

This whole line of argumentation is just tiresome...it's like it is IMPOSSIBLE for random character generation to possibly anything other than Supreme Unfun. I literally said multiple times non-random character generation methods are appropriate for certain games, but unless I concede non-random is the ONLY way to make characters, I'm just too stupid to understand proper game design.

I would really like to see the stone tablets brought down from the mountain that codify the One True Way these clowns keep obliquely referring to because that'd make this whole thing moot.

The most interesting part of the claims here is that no one has made any of these arguments either. Yet you did make claims could be construed the way that @Corolinth implied right here while raging at @Fheredin's post...

Quote from: Brad on June 07, 2023, 09:57:00 AM

Quote from: Brad on June 06, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
I cannot wait to hear how bad randomizing character creation is from some of the usual suspects...

Quote from: Fheredin on June 06, 2023, 10:05:32 PM
The problem with rolling stat in order isn't that it infringes on player choice.

So? If a player wants to play a paladin and rolls too poorly, they don't get to choose a paladin. So what? My kids don't get to pick fucking candy for breakfast, either. Limiting player choice isn't inherently bad; it CAN be bad in some instances, but your arbitrary "limiting player choice is BAD!" is just pure garbage. Hell, why limit the players at all? If you're running a pseudo-medieval campaign and a player wants a SAWS and some 21st century body armor, why not? Surely limiting their choice to a list of melee weapons like swords and axes is BAD! Whatever...

...but are pretending that OTHER people are just arguing a strawman while you're thrashing arguments no one's ever made (even in the sample post quoted above, since I'm not sure Fheredin was talking about any of that stuff. You just had a hard on for him since the "The Biggest Mistake in RPG Design" thread), and were already prepared to do so since your first post in this thread...

Quote from: Brad on June 06, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
I cannot wait to hear how bad randomizing character creation is from some of the usual suspects...

...which makes me wonder how much you're actually reading what people actually posted, as opposed to reading into it what you want to read there. And the answer to your last implicit query (if I understand it correctly)...

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 01:52:56 PMI would really like to see the stone tablets brought down from the mountain that codify the One True Way these clowns keep obliquely referring to because that'd make this whole thing moot.

...was Pundit's video, where he declared his preferred methods as superior.

Sure, whatever.

And thus two threads in a row have degenerated into Brad posting GIFs and one-liners which make ChatGPT look like a genius...while calling everyone else stupid.



If you're going to troll me, put your back into it.

In the meantime, I have to say I'm pretty content with how this thread turned out. Character creation for Selection was one of the things I have struggled with for a while, and this thread reminded me of that old Savage Worlds trick of handing out a random Edge. It's not true RNG-built character...it's a bit of suggestion phrased as a gift. I quite like that.

Quote from: Fheredin on June 08, 2023, 06:04:04 PM
And thus two threads in a row have degenerated into Brad posting GIFs and one-liners which make ChatGPT look like a genius...while calling everyone else stupid.



If you're going to troll me, put your back into it.

In the meantime, I have to say I'm pretty content with how this thread turned out. Character creation for Selection was one of the things I have struggled with for a while, and this thread reminded me of that old Savage Worlds trick of handing out a random Edge. It's not true RNG-built character...it's a bit of suggestion phrased as a gift. I quite like that.

Here's a "big brain" word for you: cockwomble. As in, you are one.

Also I apologize to anyone who actually has a remote sense of self awareness and need to remind myself that arguing with mentally retarded monkeys is stupid. Alas, I was drunk.

Quote from: Brad on June 08, 2023, 07:33:55 PM

Here's a "big brain" word for you: cockwomble. As in, you are one.

Also I apologize to anyone who actually has a remote sense of self awareness and need to remind myself that arguing with mentally retarded monkeys is stupid. Alas, I was drunk.

Drunk? You were drunk for six hours on a week day? On a time difference which either means you were day-drinking or which put you somewhere between Turkiye and India?

Might I suggest alcoholics anonymous?

Quote from: Fheredin on June 07, 2023, 09:31:18 PM
D&D isn't a "terrible" game. It's more mediocre and archaic. It leverages skilled players and GMs, but performs poorly at a table of beginners. Combat consumes too much time for what it is. The monster manual is brittle to metagaming, leading to petty intraparty squabbles as immersion competes with odds to achieve victory. A lot of the rules which worked fine 20 years ago are Chinese Water Torture today. It has never had a designer actually try to put it on a diet because the fanbase would have a Tasmanian Devil tantrum.

20 years ago, you must be thinking 3rd Edition? I'm working on a "3E lite" project. Which rules would you discard? I have my own list, based on personal preferences and the wisdom of the forum. 

Quote from: Aglondir on June 08, 2023, 09:52:27 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on June 07, 2023, 09:31:18 PM
D&D isn't a "terrible" game. It's more mediocre and archaic. It leverages skilled players and GMs, but performs poorly at a table of beginners. Combat consumes too much time for what it is. The monster manual is brittle to metagaming, leading to petty intraparty squabbles as immersion competes with odds to achieve victory. A lot of the rules which worked fine 20 years ago are Chinese Water Torture today. It has never had a designer actually try to put it on a diet because the fanbase would have a Tasmanian Devil tantrum.

20 years ago, you must be thinking 3rd Edition? I'm working on a "3E lite" project. Which rules would you discard? I have my own list, based on personal preferences and the wisdom of the forum.

3.5 is the version of D&D I have most familiarity with.

Really, take my opinions with a grain of salt. D&D is not a system I have spent a lot of time with and my advice would cut VERY deeply into the system, enough that you would have to make sweeping changes. What I would make  is arguably no longer D&D, and it would probably be easier to build from scratch than to build with the D&D foundation.

The core problem with D&D is that it takes absolutely no regard for the time it takes to implement a mechanic at the table. Ttable time is the biggest opportunity cost there is, so every saving throw and missed attack and confirmed crit roll which didn't need to happen burns time which players could have spent roleplaying out of combat or in another encounter. This is why all editions of D&D are at least somewhat slow. With this in mind, I would discard most saving throws in favor of forfeiting actions. You wouldn't be "on fire" and need to roll to save, you would have "tier 3 fire" and need to spend a major action to clear it or a minor action to reduce it to tier 2 fire. Because this both gets rid of the saving roll and the player loses actions to reduce or remove the effects, the system's speed will notably increase. I would say that saving throws should be for spectacular and memorable events, like death saves. If it doesn't make sense to penalize the actor at least a minor action just to make the save, it doesn't make sense to make a saving roll.

I make no secret I absolutely revile having both ability scores and modifiers, but I really don't know what to do about that because WotC baked both of them into the game so deeply. If the game used ability scores properly you wouldn't need modifiers at all and vice versa.

But the bottom line I have is to just not let players play with dice needlessly because it burns up too much time.