Stat build assumptions in D&D.

grubman · May 14, 2007, 06:47:34 AM

Quote from: BalbinusFor the recent Cyclopedia game we rolled straight 3d6, we could reroll if the character was utterly tedious or utterly sucked, but otherwise stuck with what we got pretty much.

Thus leading to my character being notably nimble for a mage, but not especially healthy.

Last time I allowed the players to roll 3 sets of 3d6 rolls, with the dice for each stat falling where they did. Then let them pick the set that they liked best. It allowed them a little more choice in their character, but avoided super-stats. I think it worked well keeping things real.

Balbinus · May 14, 2007, 06:55:22 AM

Quote from: grubmanLast time I allowed the players to roll 3 sets of 3d6 rolls, with the dice for each stat falling where they did. Then let them pick the set that they liked best. It allowed them a little more choice in their character, but avoided super-stats. I think it worked well keeping things real.

Hm, we were allowed to put them where we wanted, I'd forgotten that as I didn't really bother changing mine.

Abyssal Maw · May 14, 2007, 07:00:21 AM

I can't recall if we used 28-point buy or 32-point buy for my current campaign. I think one player went all out and had an 18 in one stat.. and ended up with a 6 in another.

I'd rather have that kind of disparity than just averageness, really.

grubman · May 14, 2007, 07:03:40 AM

Quote from: BalbinusHm, we were allowed to put them where we wanted, I'd forgotten that as I didn't really bother changing mine.

I did that for some time, but I found with the other technique you come up with some more interesting combinations (not to mention, a character with Charisma or Constitution as his highest stat).

My first important character (in the day) was a Thief with a 12 Dex...and that was his highest score.

Settembrini · May 14, 2007, 07:06:58 AM

Never forget the attribute shuffling allowed in the Cyclopedia! You can max out STR or DEX on a regular basis, but the price you pay...

RedFox · May 14, 2007, 09:14:04 AM

When mrlost runs games, he either gives everyone all 16's across the board, or lets us use a 50 point-buy.

I fiddle and experiment with methods, and still haven't settled on one. I always allow players to take the elite (read: shitty) array, however.

Sosthenes · May 14, 2007, 10:28:21 AM

Wow. It seems there's a whole bunch of players who won't like their characters unless they start as the best of the best. So, am I right in the assumption that no one starts their players at level 1, either?

Balbinus · May 14, 2007, 10:34:57 AM

Quote from: SosthenesWow. It seems there's a whole bunch of players who won't like their characters unless they start as the best of the best. So, am I right in the assumption that no one starts their players at level 1, either?

I doubt it, many people want to play heroes of great potential or just to have an edge, I'm not sure it maps to not wanting to start at 1st level.

Spike · May 14, 2007, 11:50:27 AM

I start people at level one, or the equivilent.

I'm thinking of changing that however. Characters tend to be way to fragile in some systems at the default start...

... the other answer is to play other games.

James McMurray · May 14, 2007, 11:59:58 AM

For 3.x we use point buy. For Hackmaster we roll them in order. Different game styles demand different starting points.

As a side note in reply to something that was said earlier: if I had a player who I felt needed to roll their stats in front of me, they wouldn't be a player for long.

For the second side topic: we start at level 1, level 5, level 7, or whatever the DM wants us to start at. For instance, if the guy running the game just bought a cool campaign that starts at 7th we'll roll up 7th level characters unless he wants to run a prologue. Of course, in Hackmaster you start at 1st, even if you die and the rest of the party is 7th.

Nicephorus · May 14, 2007, 12:35:44 PM

Quote from: SosthenesWow. It seems there's a whole bunch of players who won't like their characters unless they start as the best of the best.

I think there is something to that. I think some people like having the wish fulfillment aspect present so much that they can't really get into it if they aren't a cut above the norm.

Abyssal Maw · May 14, 2007, 01:05:47 PM

I always start everyone at level one.

obryn · May 14, 2007, 01:10:22 PM

Quote from: SosthenesWow. It seems there's a whole bunch of players who won't like their characters unless they start as the best of the best. So, am I right in the assumption that no one starts their players at level 1, either?

It depends on the game. Generally, though, I start at level 3 or 4 for D&Dish games, since it's rough to work out a semi-complex character concept at 1st level. I wouldn't at all call this "best of the best."

I don't like huge stat bloat. I think anywhere from 25 to 31 attribute points is pretty reasonable. Get much above that, and it gets increasingly difficult to estimate decent challenges. I'm using 29 for a game I'm running right now, and it's working wonderfully.

For me as a GM and for most of my players, about level 3 is when things get interesting, too - when the characters have some neat abilities, several options, and so on.

-O

Spike · May 14, 2007, 01:38:54 PM

I do think this is a valid and accurate depiction of most of D&D fandome. I've heard people point to 14-15 level stats as 'your weak stats' with a serious mein.

I know people who have 're-rolled' stats in Baldur's gate 900 times to get that 'playable character'.

Part of addressing this has shown up in my nascent 'design' threads in other section. The assumption is that you start at 'brad pitt' and go up... or down.

Sosthenes · May 14, 2007, 01:47:02 PM

Quote from: SpikeI do think this is a valid and accurate depiction of most of D&D fandome. I've heard people point to 14-15 level stats as 'your weak stats' with a serious mein.

For 3E, you might be right. I've almost never encountered this stat inflation before, where we took our 6 con an were happy with it, godammit... One of the major culprits is that it's more easy to get a bonus now, so everybody wants in on the game. It might sound paradox, but when you had to have an even higher stat to get a bonus, people were more content with their average ones.

And BTW, my favorite stat generation method for OGL games: Conan. 8+1d10, +1 to _every_ stat every four levels, plus the usual raise.