Quote from: zend0g on December 14, 2021, 12:07:29 AM
In our games, we would roll 3d6 36 times. Six rows of six columns and then pick the best line.

Cyberpunk Red actually does something similar. A 10x10 table of dice results and stat values.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 13, 2021, 10:12:12 PM

Quote from: Omega on December 13, 2021, 08:39:35 PM
Bumping up your stats probably got its inception in AD&D as that introduced alot of ways to improve your stats if one could lay hands on them. Tomes and Wishes are the two main ones.

Which is totally different from building stat increases into character leveling. Which is why low stats were not as crippling in a game with decent magic item finds, and made magic items totally different from their feel in the later editions...

I'm divided on this. One thing I disliked about AD&D was how characters accumulated giant piles of magic items - which runs counter to the declared source material. Conan and Aragorn didn't go around with giant bags full of items.

On the other hand, a positive feature of this was that characters grew because of their adventures - because magic items reflect what they've done. Like maybe a fighter got a Girdle of Giant Strength from Against the Giants - which relates their power to their adventures. If power gain is solely by leveling up, then a character's abilities can be entirely predictable from the start - particularly in D&D. Other systems like Hero System and GURPS have lots of potential for min-maxing and powergaming, but at least character development isn't predictable.

Quote from: LunamancerRoll 3d6 in order, and by in order I mean Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con, Chr.

You sick fuck.

QuoteI'm currently GMing Stars Without number, and use, the 3D6 straight down method, and allow players to replace any one stat with a 14. In SWN, the mods for attributes are very low, (3=-2, 4-7 = -1, 14=17 = +1, 18=+2) so Stats arent as swingy as D&D.

I must admit. If influence of basic attributes over effectiveness is so low, I'd probably ditch them altogether.
For me they should be extremely important.

QuoteI've often wondered why use tricks to create above average stats for PCs, when you could assign below average stats for NPCs and balance it that way. It seems like unnecessary faff that applies an exception for every case.

For me because loooking at admitedly very game-y D&D like attributes I still watch them with simmulationist eye and consider 3d6 as natural curve of variety within human species.
As D&D is game of heroes among average people, and not game of average people in surprisingly shitty world, giving bonus to creation seems more natural than nerfing all humanity.

QuoteMagic items have lost a chunk of their utility and flair, because what good is an item that raises your str to 19 if you're already getting a 20 by fourth level (because if you're playing a class where str is vital, you're boosting str.  If not, then you don't gain much from a str magic item).

That's why 3,5 has usually bonuses to attribute not rising it up to certain level.
So there is always some bonus.

But TBH both old school and post-3 method of magical-objecting are... kinda meh for me.

QuoteI'm divided on this. One thing I disliked about AD&D was how characters accumulated giant piles of magic items - which runs counter to the declared source material. Conan and Aragorn didn't go around with giant bags full of items.

I think problem with 3.5 is - while making characters more umph than before, it also subverted them but making them dependent of magical items as norm.
So this option to rise to being strong like Conan on your own sort of felt apart.

3.x, 4th, and 5th ed characters are quite manageable if you use point buy or standard array(15,14,13,12,10,8), as no starting stat can be higher than a 15 (17 with a racial bonus), or lower than an 8. 

With 4d6 drop lowest arrange, I definitely had more starting over-15s, and at least one Orc Paladin with Int 6. It was fun.

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 14, 2021, 03:32:15 PM
With 4d6 drop lowest arrange, I definitely had more starting over-15s, and at least one Orc Paladin with Int 6. It was fun.

He might not be able to read the hymnals, but he probably has a great bass singing voice.

Lot of time was spend by friendly cleric of Jergal to teach our pally how to read.

And all terrible munchkiny Stat Advances from 3,5? He put them into Int.

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 14, 2021, 03:55:18 PM
Lot of time was spend by friendly cleric of Jergal to teach our pally how to read.

And all terrible munchkiny Stat Advances from 3,5? He put them into Int.

If he had a solid Strength and Charisma, and a 14 Wisdom, he was good to go.

Cannot remember his Wis, but he was Charismatic Hulk indeed.

Quote from: Wrath of God on December 14, 2021, 04:27:44 PM
Cannot remember his Wis, but he was Charismatic Hulk indeed.

3E/3.5E pallys only needed a 14 Wisdom to access all their spell levels, and most of the spells were buffs/heals of some sort. They were kinda multiple-attribute dependent, but not near as much as monks. Your big needs were Strength and Charisma, then Constitution. 14 Wisdom max, with Int and Dex being your dump stats. Tough but manageable.

So yeah, I could EASILY see this working both crunch and roleplay wise.

As a GM, I am not married to either approach. Depends on the campaign. They have their upsides and downsides. As a player I do prefer when things are straight down, simply because it forces me to make different types of characters (whereas when I pick I would tend to lean towards the same cluster of character types).

For new players I have found that spending some time playing what the rolls dictate to them open up horizons such that then when they have more control (even complete control), the characters are more varied and interesting.  How far you would want to push this dynamic and how long in the face of a player not getting what they want is another thing.  There is also the aspect that even longtime players can get into a rut.

For that reason, I like a mix over time, where sometimes almost nothing is under the players control and other times it is complete control and other times somewhere in between.  YMMV.

It's a little like trying new foods, and someone telling you, "try it, you'll like it."  Some people need a jostling out of a rut.  Few appreciate it. Some people take the jostling too far and aren't very thoughtful as to when and how they poke, with the result that even people that need it, resent it. 

Quote from: Jam The MF on December 08, 2021, 11:45:07 PM
Just curious what the membership prefers.

Arrange, always. I want my players to play the kind of PCs they want to play. I want, as a player, to play the kind of PC I want to play.

Like a lot of people I used the time honored method of 4d6 drop lowest, 7 times, drop lowest, and arrange. And that worked fine until Hasbro decided that Humans get +1 to everything just because, and make Ability Score Improvement a standard part of the game.

In my current campaign, my fighter started with a rolled 15 DEX, being a human she starts at 16, and two rounds of ASI gets her to 20 DEX at 6th Level, with +5 to hit and Improved Critical. Add in Action Surge, and two +2 Shortswords (according to the DMg, appropriate for 5th Level+), and she can have 5 attacks in the first round of combat at +10 hit/+7 dmg. Doesn't this seem a little overpowered?

Recently, I found the 3d6 reroll 1s method, and I liked it enough to adapt it. https://www.scrollforinitiative.com/2021/01/11/fixing-4d6-drop-lowest/

In my Tapestry RPG System, attributes are determined by either 8d3, 6d4, or 4d6 reroll 1s, which give a range of 6-24 median 15 or 8-24 median 16. Conflict resolution is by d30, rather than d20, but otherwise similar to D&D.

Players roll 9 times (there are 9 attributes), and arrange as desired to build the PC they want to play within the bounds of the rolls. The thing is, because the bell curves of these methods are steeper than 3d6, there will be fewer outliers, on either the low or high ends, most stats will be between 11 and 21. And Humans get no bonuses. Other playable races get bonuses offset by penalities. There are no classes, everything is skill-based with a skill point buy-in.

In a d20 System game, a PC can have an 18 stat at 1st Level, which is only two levels below the max resolution roll of 20. In my d30 System, a PC can have a 24 stat at Level 1, and that's still 6 under the highest resolution roll of 30. It gives a little more granularity (3.33% steps v. 5% steps), and a little more breathing room, without going bonkers,

Quote3E/3.5E pallys only needed a 14 Wisdom to access all their spell levels, and most of the spells were buffs/heals of some sort. They were kinda multiple-attribute dependent, but not near as much as monks. Your big needs were Strength and Charisma, then Constitution. 14 Wisdom max, with Int and Dex being your dump stats. Tough but manageable.

I played mostly by Pathfinder rules, but I switched pally's spells from Cha to Wis like in 3,5, like monk I sort of like it as MAC, and I like his spells flavoured more like cleric prayers unlike his other abilities (though honestly I'd de-spell both Palls and Rangers if I were designing D&D like game).

(Then honestly I kinda like idea that any good state will be always real improvement, and really bad disadvantage, and even aside of class demands, bad stat will hinder anyone, anytime.)

QuoteAs a GM, I am not married to either approach. Depends on the campaign. They have their upsides and downsides. As a player I do prefer when things are straight down, simply because it forces me to make different types of characters (whereas when I pick I would tend to lean towards the same cluster of character types).

Yeah, I even randomize characters in non-randomizable games. I played PBTA-like Warhammer hack, so I rolled WHF 4e character translated it's profession to game's playbook, and kept proportions between stats to fit with point-attributed nature of game. I get Entertainer with weak Fellowship and excellent Strenght and Craft (Craft was separate attribute).

Some really fine concepts I achieved through random rolls and it was in some ways way more fun than crafting character yourself.
Just ride the waves of Kali Yuga, and milk any cow Fate shall sent you to it's fullest.

QuotePlayers roll 9 times (there are 9 attributes), and arrange as desired to build the PC they want to play within the bounds of the rolls.

May I know what attributes?

Quote from: jhkim on December 14, 2021, 01:16:15 PM
I'm divided on this. One thing I disliked about AD&D was how characters accumulated giant piles of magic items - which runs counter to the declared source material. Conan and Aragorn didn't go around with giant bags full of items.

The party got a fair few items in Lord of the Rings. Not least the one ring. But they also had other magic rings, daggers, swords, and a staff, a mithril coat, cloaks, gems and vials, a horn, two Palantir, magic potions, Lembas, boats, a rope, healing herbs, the white tree, seeds, and maybe more that I'm forgetting.