Quote from: Daztur;1026165Two things I hate:
1. Roll and assign. Combines the worst of random and non-random chargen.
2. Point buy chargen that uses different systems for chargen than for advancement. So for example in WoD if you make a specialized starting PC and then pick up a random grab bag of skills later it's a lot cheaper to get the exact same final PC than if you start out generalized and then specialize later. That's annoying.

Anything else is fine. Lifepaths and utter randomness are probably my favorites, but being able to dive into the nitty gritty of point buy is fun in some games if it's set up well.

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1026179I'm with you there.  I hate that with the burning of 1,016 suns!  Especially WoD - which tells you that specializing at creation (which their system incentivises) means that you're having badwrongfun.

I get what you're saying about WoD (though I have no knowledge of it other that what you're saying).

However I have used an preferred using different systems for chargen and advancement, but in GURPS, which I expect is different enough that at least some of what you guys hate about that in WoD doesn't apply.

As usual, my preference is about wanting things to work like I feel makes the most sense. I want players to be able to pick or design their characters, and I think that what characters have been raised and trained to do should tend to be a big chunk of ability in whatever that is, and reflect that training, which will tend to be different from what they learn during play unless they re-enroll in training programs. And there's also the difference between people's intrinsic nature/gifts/talents/genius/aptitude etc and what can be learned and trained. And while during chargen I want to let players pick the sort of person they want to play, after chargen I don't want the players to be able to arbitrarily add things that don't reflect what's happened in the game world. Not really what you were talking about with WoD, except yes in my case it would make sense to specialize at chargen (so you can be someone with certain innate aptitude, get that upbringing, lifetime training (say as a knight) and appropriate status etc), and then you'll learn various bits of things later and get some knowledge in whatever that turns out to be during play. You could also create a dabbler from the start, though that might tend to be sub-optimal since you're less likely to gain many years of professional training in a new field during play. But unlike WoD I would encourage focusing on particular talents and training at the start so you'll actually be good at some things.

Quote from: Skarg;1027058I get what you're saying about WoD (though I have no knowledge of it other that what you're saying).

Mind you, it's been 20-25 years, but I think I still have it down:

At start, you just put pips in things. So your attributes start a 1 (of 5), and you have pools of pips to add. For example, the low allocation is 3 amongst 3 stats. So if you picked physical stats (strength, dexterity and stamina) as your low pool, you could put all 3 into one stat and start with 1,1,4; or divvy them up so that you had 2,2,2; or any other combo (although I chose the low pool to limit the # of combos).

Advancing them, however, you pay xp based on the current stat. If you wanted to get all 3 stats to level 4, with the 1,1,4 you would have to pay 1 ( to raise a 1 to a 2), plus 2 (to raise a 2 to a 3), and 3 (to raise a 3 to a 4) for each of two stats for a total of 6x2=12 points*. With the 2,2,2 situation you would pay 2 (to raise a 2 to a 3), and 3 (to raise a 3 to a 4) for each of three stats for a total of 5x3=15 points*. So same end result, different costs.
*all multiplied by some number because you are raising an attribute rather than a skill, etc. But I am simplifying the situation.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1027061Mind you, it's been 20-25 years, but I think I still have it down: ...

Thanks.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1027061Mind you, it's been 20-25 years, but I think I still have it down:

At start, you just put pips in things. So your attributes start a 1 (of 5), and you have pools of pips to add. For example, the low allocation is 3 amongst 3 stats. So if you picked physical stats (strength, dexterity and stamina) as your low pool, you could put all 3 into one stat and start with 1,1,4; or divvy them up so that you had 2,2,2; or any other combo (although I chose the low pool to limit the # of combos).

Advancing them, however, you pay xp based on the current stat. If you wanted to get all 3 stats to level 4, with the 1,1,4 you would have to pay 1 ( to raise a 1 to a 2), plus 2 (to raise a 2 to a 3), and 3 (to raise a 3 to a 4) for each of two stats for a total of 6x2=12 points*. With the 2,2,2 situation you would pay 2 (to raise a 2 to a 3), and 3 (to raise a 3 to a 4) for each of three stats for a total of 5x3=15 points*. So same end result, different costs.
*all multiplied by some number because you are raising an attribute rather than a skill, etc. But I am simplifying the situation.

Two thoughts on this; one in accord and one opposed.

First, in my own home games I switched over to point buy via XP for my World of Darkness games. So instead of 7/5/3; 13/9/5; 6 spheres/3 disciplines; 15 freebies... they got 500 XP to spend on improving the base concept. The results were pretty close to a standard starting character but it removed the disparity between starting array allocations and XP costs.

Second... that said, there is such a thing as crippling overspecialization in that method and in the example 1,1,4 vs. 2,2,2 array. If the GM makes a point of targeting your weaknesses instead of your strengths that glass cannon with a 1 Str, 4 Dex, 1 Stamina might not live long enough to take advantage of its XP savings.

For example; Throw the PC's in a room with a gas leak that requires a Stamina check difficulty 6 to avoid damage (double damage on a botch) and a means of escape that takes one minute (20 rounds) to open... Stamina 2 will pass that 9 rounds out of 10 and might take 2-3 health levels of damage before they escape, but Stamina 1 has a 50% chance of failing every round and a 10% chance of taking double damage meaning they'll likely be dead by round 15).

Yes that's a dick move but WoD kinda encouraged their GM's to pull things like that when someone min-maxed like that.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1027046It's hard to explain why anyone would ever want to play 3D6 in order or the like to someone who didn't start with it.

Hmmm....I suppose that might be true.

It seems pretty obvious to me that random generation is intended to be play the hand you drew while point by is buy/build what you want. The two methods appeal to two different desires. Point buy almost always assumes everyone gets the same starting number of points, which I suppose appeals to those who want everyone to start out equal, or theoretically equal. And of course you don't really get to build what you want in most point buy systems since you don't start out with enough points to build what you really want, only enough points to build a first step towards what you want. But at least with point buy if it really matters to you that your PC starts out as a wizard, a really strong warrior, an agile starship pilot, a dwarf, a Jedi, or something else specific than point buy is one way to get there.

Something I never did, but would have enjoyed had it occurred to me early in college, was something I heard rumors of later:  Use a point-buy system, particularly GURPs or Hero, to embed the setting constraints in a fantasy game about as limited as AD&D as far as options. Then let people build random characters from that.  Basically, this harnesses all the power-gaming, point-crunching expertise in the group towards defining the setting parameters.  Once done, you surrender control to what you've all agreed.  By the time I heard of the idea, I was no longer around a bunch of number crunchers with time on their hands.

We did do a one-shot game where we built some specific Fantasy Hero powers on index cards, sorted by point totals, and then dealt them out to make semi-random characters for a one-shot game.  There were some ground rules that I don't fully remember for trading cards before the game started.  Only problem with that was that making the cards as a group, then seeing what we got, then constructing a concept for the character--was all more fun than the resulting sessions was.  We really should have had the session a week later, to give the GM time to make something appropriate to that extremely esoteric party.

Steven could you elaborate on what you mean? I think you are talking about something beyond simply creating setting specific packages or templates or whatever HERO and GURPS calls such things, but I'm not sure what beyond that you intend. Did you mean that people would number crunch something like a multi-level progression for a set of fighter, MU, thief, cleric, paladin, etc. analogues so that rather than using the underlying point buy for character creation and for improvement the starting points and the path and levels would be point calculated and then accessed via some kind of non-point buy XP system? Or did you mean something else entirely?

I've never had any trouble with people who started with a different D&D system going with 3d6 in order.  The usual comment is "Cool!  Old school!"

No, I lie.  One person didn't like it.

In 46 years.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1027128I've never had any trouble with people who started with a different D&D system going with 3d6 in order.  The usual comment is "Cool!  Old school!"

No, I lie.  One person didn't like it.

In 46 years.

Lucky you.  But you anecdotes are not fact.  Maybe not even majority.  Learns to accept that.

Quote from: Bren;1027119Steven could you elaborate on what you mean? I think you are talking about something beyond simply creating setting specific packages or templates or whatever HERO and GURPS calls such things, but I'm not sure what beyond that you intend. Did you mean that people would number crunch something like a multi-level progression for a set of fighter, MU, thief, cleric, paladin, etc. analogues so that rather than using the underlying point buy for character creation and for improvement the starting points and the path and levels would be point calculated and then accessed via some kind of non-point buy XP system? Or did you mean something else entirely?

You've got the general idea, with the number crunch for levels thing, though also extending to creatures, magic items, etc.  As I understand it, it was popular with a group or three where the idea was a shared world, with multiple GMs.  Part of the concept was that embedding the decisions into GURPs or Hero was a way to record their collective decisions.  It was also, I think, in the case I directly talked to a player about, a situation where the group really enjoyed the number crunching and really enjoyed having a custom world, but did not like doing that after the game started.  Setting up the parameters of the game was one kind of fun.  Then when they got done with that, they wanted to have something a lot more like D&D in play style, but using the widgets they had made.  

Though I only heard about this second hand.  So I may have a twisted view of the whole thing.

Thanks for clarifying.

Intellectually I can understand the idea, but aesthetically and emotionally I don't get the appeal.* One of the advantages of most point-based systems is that they are both more versatile and more granular than level-based systems. The down side tends to be the front end complexity of fiddling with buying stuff with the points. What they wanted to do sounds like the worst of both systems rather than the best of both. To me, that is.

* I could see how in the early days of RPGs that method might be appealing as a way of designing computer-based RPGs.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1027136Lucky you.  But you anecdotes are not fact.  Maybe not even majority.  Learns to accept that.

What's that got to do with "It's hard to explain why anyone would ever want to play 3D6 in order or the like to someone who didn't start with it."

Not everything I say is about you.  Learn to accept that.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1027158What's that got to do with "It's hard to explain why anyone would ever want to play 3D6 in order or the like to someone who didn't start with it."

Not everything I say is about you.  Learn to accept that.

I have no problem with any of the character creation systems listed.  Yes, I have preferences, but I don't limit myself to them.  I like trying new things, learning new systems, even at my age.  Learning has always been cool to me.

And, luckily for you, there are a ton of different systems out there.

And, luckily for me, nobody is forcing me to use any of them.

Isn't that nice?

Also, as I said above, time is a bigger constraint than anything else.  Making a Hero System character is my idea of Hell.  Other people probably like it.

Quote from: Chris24601;1027093Second... that said, there is such a thing as crippling overspecialization in that method and in the example 1,1,4 vs. 2,2,2 array. If the GM makes a point of targeting your weaknesses instead of your strengths that glass cannon with a 1 Str, 4 Dex, 1 Stamina might not live long enough to take advantage of its XP savings.

For example; Throw the PC's in a room with a gas leak that requires a Stamina check difficulty 6 to avoid damage (double damage on a botch) and a means of escape that takes one minute (20 rounds) to open... Stamina 2 will pass that 9 rounds out of 10 and might take 2-3 health levels of damage before they escape, but Stamina 1 has a 50% chance of failing every round and a 10% chance of taking double damage meaning they'll likely be dead by round 15).

Yes that's a dick move but WoD kinda encouraged their GM's to pull things like that when someone min-maxed like that.

I kinda touched on that before.

QuoteI always wondered if that was poorly thought-through design, or a secret trap. Trap in that yes by total character points spent, putting 5s in a few skills/attributes/everything else and then picking up the others later might make sense, but there might not be a later if you start out with a 0-1 in a given ability.

I think, on some level, that is a real thing. If the overall attitude from WW at the time those rules were invented didn't seem to scream 'rules barely matter, we're here to make interesting characters and interesting stories' (ignoring the fact that there was very little support of that playstyle), then I might even think it was deliberate. However, this just makes people have characters that die/fail. If this were D&D 3e or other games where system mastery was considered part of the games' charm, I might think that was intended. I would think that WoD as it was marketed would be the wrong medium for secret trap options.