Quote from: Mistwell;685527Well, I entirely disagree with that.  It is not built that way, that is not a design goal of 5e, that idea was raised directly by Mearls and he said they are trying to stay away from that.  So, I strongly disagree.



This sounds like a 3e quote.  In fact, it was, from Monte Cook.  I have seen no such quote on 5e, and they've repudiated that idea.

So, I gotta ask, WHERE did you read that about 5e?

I'm talking about 4e. 5th edition isn't done yet, I have no comment on its system yet.

Quote from: TristramEvans;685535I'm talking about 4e. 5th edition isn't done yet, I have no comment on its system yet.

But you were responding to a quote about 5e....aw nevermind!

I'm going to ignore 3 pages of tangents, and suggest that if the OP likes to just go with a concept they should try Fantasy Craft. The rules will be familiar enough if you're already familiar with how 3.x plays, but the math behind it is much better. Some options are better than others, sure, but the difference between an optimized and unoptimized FC character is far less than that of the same thing in D&D 3.x. You're not going to break the system and need to be reined in if you optimize, and you're not going to gimp yourself by accident if you don't since there are few(if any) trap options. It's just really nice to know I can go from concept to completed character and know my guy will be useful in most situations without having to do a bunch of research to keep up with the other players.

Quote from: Mistwell;685538But you were responding to a quote about 5e....aw nevermind!

Lol, ok that may hv bn my mistake. But that's my current estimation of 4th edition. I'm firmly in the"wait and see, without high expectations" crowd on Next

Quote from: Sacrosanct;685268Seeing as how the method I described is method one in the DMG that's been around since 1979, and there is no point buy method, I would say it's you that is in some sort of tiny, insular gaming circle.

Hrm.  Because it didn't occur to you that someone who used a point-buy method of character generation just might, possibly, conceivably, not be playing D&D? Go figure.

Quote from: Phillip;685439I see an advantage, relative to the approach in WotC's D&D editions, in points systems such as Champions and GURPS. One can write up anything by the books and get a points total, but what attention one pays to that is a matter of choice. By contrast, the assessment value of the 'build' rules in WotC-D&D and similar systems is limited to a comparatively small universe of possibilities. This is because so many assumptions, so much of the rationales and maths behind the newer rules, is hidden rather than stated explicitly and discretely (as in the Champions style).

A persistent criticism of GURPS is the amount of time it allegedly takes to make a character.  This has always been a crock.  It certainly takes a lot of time to make a character if you're a ditherer who just has to weigh every conceivable option, skill and number.  Those who come in with a strong concept and build to that concept can do it in just a few minutes, if that much.

Well, what I was getting at is that with GURPS or Hero System you can do the writeup first, then add up points later if you want.

With WotC-D&D, if you don't follow specific constraints from the start, then it's anyone's guess what 'level' the result counts as.

Quote from: jedimastert;684992Could this have been caused by the disparity between that picture you posted and how older games actually generated PCs?

I mean if the lady in the picture is dreaming up a butt-kicking warrior in shining armor, and then has to roll 3d6 for stats straight down the row (or even 4d6 drop the lowest), there is no guarantee that she will be able to play what she envisions.

Precisely, if you're using such a randomised approach, dreaming up a character first is a pretty stupid thing to do.

The funniest thing about the digression about "boob plate" from the first picture is this:



All they've done is mimic a real kind of stylised armour, but for women. Yes, practically stupid, but muscle cuirass sometimes had nipples and belly buttons on it, for fuck's sake.

Quote from: Ravenswing;685606A persistent criticism of GURPS is the amount of time it allegedly takes to make a character.  This has always been a crock.  It certainly takes a lot of time to make a character if you're a ditherer who just has to weigh every conceivable option, skill and number.  Those who come in with a strong concept and build to that concept can do it in just a few minutes, if that much.

Few people come in with a strong concept. Even if they do, as they sit at the game table creating characters with others, they start talking about making sure some party-useful skill isn't missing, and someone groans at their choice of Disadvantage, and so on - so it slows down. Should a player not dither and weigh, they soon find gaps in their character in play when the GM says, "you don't have the skill for that" (with any system with 200+ skills, this annoying moment is inevitable). They then retire their character and dither and weigh over the next one.

The way a game can be run and the way a game usually turns out are two different things. If they weren't, D&D would have died in 1974.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;685557I'm going to ignore 3 pages of tangents, and suggest that if the OP likes to just go with a concept they should try Fantasy Craft. The rules will be familiar enough if you're already familiar with how 3.x plays, but the math behind it is much better.

:eek:

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;685616Few people come in with a strong concept. Even if they do, as they sit at the game table creating characters with others, they start talking about making sure some party-useful skill isn't missing, and someone groans at their choice of Disadvantage, and so on - so it slows down. Should a player not dither and weigh, they soon find gaps in their character in play when the GM says, "you don't have the skill for that" (with any system with 200+ skills, this annoying moment is inevitable). They then retire their character and dither and weigh over the next one.

The way a game can be run and the way a game usually turns out are two different things. If they weren't, D&D would have died in 1974.

Players are more dependant on 'skills' these days.

I played 1E dnd for many, many years without the concept of specific skills being relevant. Game worked just fine with no skills.

But a few years ago when I ran some 1E gamma world, the players were having convulsions because there were no 'skills'

Kinda annoying actually.

Quote from: Bill;685623Players are more dependant on 'skills' these days.

I played 1E dnd for many, many years without the concept of specific skills being relevant. Game worked just fine with no skills.

But a few years ago when I ran some 1E gamma world, the players were having convulsions because there were no 'skills'

Kinda annoying actually.

Players of D&D, you meant to say. Skills were around in RPGs at least as early as 1977, year of Traveller.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;685621:eek:

FantasyCraft is a rather imposing tome, sure.
...he's still got a point. It does seem superior to 3e.

Quote from: Rincewind1;685625Players of D&D, you meant to say. Skills were around in RPGs at least as early as 1977, year of Traveller.

Yes, but a ton of people pretty much only played dnd.

I found traveller after I had played dnd for years.

Quote from: Bill;685623Players are more dependant on 'skills' these days.

I played 1E dnd for many, many years without the concept of specific skills being relevant. Game worked just fine with no skills.

But a few years ago when I ran some 1E gamma world, the players were having convulsions because there were no 'skills'

Kinda annoying actually.

I agree. The 1st/2nd (Chaosium) ed. RuneQuest rule book had a basic skills list that mostly replicated a set of factors formalized in other ways in the 1E AD&D PHB, some of the remainder getting AD&D treatment in Unearthed Arcana. The "skill system" added flexibility to character development, but did not radically alter the mode of play.

Quote from: Bill;685629Yes, but a ton of people pretty much only played dnd.

I found traveller after I had played dnd for years.

Same for me.  I first heard about Traveller from a friend back in the mid-90s when he was cleaning out some stuff from his apartment and found a few old Traveller magazines.