Let's hear what Tequila has to say. I know that even Socrates in his Dialogues just made up the shit the other guy said, I mean it's a lot easier arguing against someone if you've made up his arguments, too. But Socrates was a bit of a cunt, really. Let's not do that.

Why does PC-PC balance matter, Tequila?

I don't think I've ever come across a player who obsesses over being awesome every round. I'm willing to bet that's projection.

Only time I've ever seen people actually upset about their stats at character creation, is because of feelings of the character being nigh on useless, and not being able to contribute to the party in any meaningful way. If you've rolled a character who isn't even going to be remotely competent, what's the point of playing in the first place? It just amounts to dog fucking.

The OP hardly seems designed to stir up the levels of nerdrage we've experienced in this thread.

Quote from: Voros;955147The OP hardly seems designed to stir up the levels of nerdrage we've experienced in this thread.

It doesn't take much when you're dealing with such important matters as how you like to generate your imaginary elves.

Quote from: Voros;955147The OP hardly seems designed to stir up the levels of nerdrage we've experienced in this thread.

Oh, it was very cleverly worded to create exactly this effect.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;955152Oh, it was very cleverly worded to create exactly this effect.

If the water is already full of hungry sharks it doesn't take much chum...

Quote from: Thegn Ansgar;955144I don't think I've ever come across a player who obsesses over being awesome every round. I'm willing to bet that's projection.

Ive seen it on rare occasion. Others have over the years mentioned it. So yeah its happening. But how much? I dont know? As mentioned in other threads... I can tell you there were people trying to fix the "empty spaces" in stat bonus progression in 5e because +1 every other point was not enough for them. I wish I was making this up.

As for wanting to be awesome every round. Yup. Seen that too on mercifully only very rare occasion. Seen complaints of it on-line too in various shapes and sizes.

Quote from: Nexus;955025Though I'd imagine in the most boxy of Sandboxes, there will be some degree of threat management and placement. Just explicit setting "level ups" as the characters progress or fenced off zones like some MMOs. Its a world do what you want but its not totally random. If you want your Noobie Adventurers to take on Lichicus Maximus on Day One, got for it. The Tower of Ultimate Despair is right over there. But he's not going to arbitrarily cross their paths while they're clearing out a nest of goblins in the city sewers on pure happenstance despite such an event being theoretically possible in a "real world". *

*Of course, some body probably does play that way.

Of course!

All of my encounter tables have one or more entries along the lines of "roll again on [adjacent area's] encounter table".  So, if Lichicus Maximus is available as a wandering encounter in his lair, there's a one-in-several-billions chance that he could be dropping in on the city's sewer-goblins for an earnest discussion about their last three months' rent payments.

Quote from: Nexus;955052And then they're...melted snowflakes...

Whoa...

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;955129So is playing Russian Roulette where everyone has 1/6 of being shot.  That doesn't mean that I want to play it.

How about point-buy Russian roulette?

Quote from: Omega;955155Ive seen it on rare occasion. Others have over the years mentioned it. So yeah its happening. But how much? I dont know? As mentioned in other threads... I can tell you there were people trying to fix the "empty spaces" in stat bonus progression in 5e because +1 every other point was not enough for them. I wish I was making this up.

As for wanting to be awesome every round. Yup. Seen that too on mercifully only very rare occasion. Seen complaints of it on-line too in various shapes and sizes.

That specific example seems to be the exact opposite of the people wanting to change the system because they don't get to be special every round. It seems like they just don't like empty spaces from a 'so why is this here?' perspective. I've had, when explaining BECMI or 5e to a new player, them say, "so, if this 3-18 stat doesn't do anything except inform this other chart that goes from [either -3 to +3 or -4 to +4], why don't we just write down the +2 down and forget the 3-18 result?"

Thing is, they're not wrong about that. I'm not afraid of the answer, "it's mostly just a legacy system, "  but they are, in fact, right. There are rare instances where the initial score matters (such as wishes or whatever raising the score), and in my BECMI I tend to use attribute checks for task resolution (but not the RC skill system), but for the most part, they are right.

You've mentioned this one before, with roughly the same 'I wish I was making this up.' So I have to ask, what about this particular example is so ridiculous to you that you pull it out as a favorite example regarding other people wanting something different in the system?

Not a fan of point buy. I like to start with a "blank slate" and random rolls and then see what I get and where I can take that character. The opposite approach is to start with a character in mind from the beginning, rather than a blank slate. If I already have a character in mind, I'd rather just assign the stats that best fit that character. The way I see it, the main draw of point buy is to make starting PCs "balanced," which I'm not terribly concerned about in the games I play, and which comes with its own set of problems (starting PCs built with point buy often have the same basic array of "ideal" stats for their class, et cetera).

Quote from: Omega;955155Ive seen it on rare occasion. Others have over the years mentioned it. So yeah its happening. But how much? I dont know? As mentioned in other threads... I can tell you there were people trying to fix the "empty spaces" in stat bonus progression in 5e because +1 every other point was not enough for them. I wish I was making this up.

As for wanting to be awesome every round. Yup. Seen that too on mercifully only very rare occasion. Seen complaints of it on-line too in various shapes and sizes.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but it reeks of projection on the parts of those who say it does with such vehemence. I'm not implying that you have done so of course.

Quote from: Tequila Sunrise;955127No doubt point buy doesn’t magically make everything in a game fair.

Amen. I think I'm really buying into the argument that point buy rewards system mastery more than anything else.  For the record, I'm  "pro" whatever a table agrees to use. But, as I am just now starting a 5E group in earnest (after passing on it multiple times), I've had to consider this very question. I'm going with the traditional 4d6, drop lowest, assign. When I put that out to the players yesterday (in preparation for tonight's world tweaking session), not a peep back, including the one who prefers point buy (which he uses in the games he GMs). Nothing is perfect, of course, but I think this method, which I've used since ye olden days of wine, roses, honey and corn muffins, works pretty well, on the whole. Some randomness from the rolls, so you can't plan out the "uber build"
 (yet). Should provide enough of a range for "competent" characters. Some player control over what goes where. And we might get some outlier numbers to provide some "RP" interest (although my players' RPing is hardly ever based off the numbers, but more on the concept).

That said, we'll see what happens tonight if someone rolls a 5...

Quote from: Willie the Duck;955165"it's mostly just a legacy system, "
There are rare instances where the initial score matters (such as wishes or whatever raising the score),

Let's see if I get this straight:
Some people are arguing that random rolls isn't unfair, because .... it barely has any impact?!
Also, Gronan claim that it is funny?
No, no, no, no, no.
Nonsense.
Sure, I grasp that it can be fun, when there is no direct importance in something that is supposedly required, you frequently fill it with fun instead.
That is a known psychological effect, albeit subconscious, as the thing itself perhaps isn't that funny.
Or perhaps it is funny, and that is removed as soon as it gets too important.

So why have a game with stats that are redundant?

Also, If the stats are redundant, then that is not any game where this discussion is very important now, is it?
Essentially, at least 2/3, probably more, of this thread is totally unimportant for the TOPIC!
Sheesh.

I am fine with both, but I do think in terms of balance, random is better over the long haul while point by tends to open the door to min-maxing more. With random, you can end up with a better character through luck (but everyone has the same chances of getting high stats). With Point Buy its easier to find the better options and combos and make a point of taking them. Still point buy allows for greater customization. So it largely boils down to the group and the game for me.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;955132So if you get bad rolls the DM shoots you? And I thought I was a hardcore DM!

This is one of the arguments some people sometimes have used against "realism" in RPGs...