|
Personally I like random rolling when it's that stupid kind where there's so many do-overs and choices that you might as well have picked an array. Like "Roll 6 sets of 4D6 drop lowest, arrange from first roll to last roll vertically in a grid that is 6x6. You may now choose any horizontal, vertical, or diagonal unbroken line of statistics, and reroll any one statistic that is 8 or less. Arrange these statistics as you like, then you may add 1 to one statistic by subtracting two from another statistic. Random!"
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:19 |
|
|
mastershakeman posted:That's assuming you're trying for balanced math, which honestly doesn't work if people make suboptimal choices on their characters like fighters with best number in charisma. If you have some sort of fixation on only playing good characters that can't be worse than the guy across the table's then fine, don't even let people choose their stats at all
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:That's assuming you're trying for balanced math, which honestly doesn't work if people make suboptimal choices on their characters like fighters with best number in charisma. If you have some sort of fixation on only playing good characters that can't be worse than the guy across the table's then fine, don't even let people choose their stats at all
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:That's assuming you're trying for balanced math, which honestly doesn't work if people make suboptimal choices on their characters like fighters with best number in charisma. If you have some sort of fixation on only playing good characters that can't be worse than the guy across the table's then fine, don't even let people choose their stats at all A fighter being suboptimal at fighting because he also wants to be good at talking (or thinking since intelligence is also a common dump stat) goes back to the confusing and unintuitive nature of the stats. It's a brain bug D&D ism. Why can't a fighter be good at history and also swing a sword and take a hit? Why can't a wizard have an impressive bench press while also being able to shoot fireballs? If anything the stats restrict role play because you're either choosing to be suboptimal at what your class is natively supposed to do (which hurts you and your party) or you are going the cookie cutter route where fighters and barbarians are drooling mouth breathers and wizards are Rhodes Scholars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
I've only played in one game with rolled stats. It was a nice break from point-buy, y'know? Instead of building a cookie-cutter barbarian and saying, "Okay, jack strength up to 18, drop charisma down to 8", I rolled, and... Oh. Huh. Strength 20, Charisma 6. Truly immersive and organic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:And of course it can be frustrating to play a suboptimal guy but it's made up for with exceptional characters showing up now and then. So if exceptional characters are the end goal to shoot for, why not let people play the exceptional characters regardless of dice and instead of forcing them to a) suffer through lovely characters they don't want, or b) suicide rush their crappy characters to get to an actual decent one? If someone REALLY wants to play a lovely character with lovely stats, then they should voluntarily lower their stats and not attempt to force their preference onto other people through the bludgeon of tradition. You can argue that lovely characters can provide a ~colorful and unique roleplaying experience~ but so can the actual decent character. Low stats don't intrinsically make for good roleplay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
I'm probably just confused because Master Shakesman keeps using "suboptimal" in a way that means "worse than the best," but what in practice comes out to be "worse than baseline." You can't tie ability scores to things like to-hit, defenses, and hit points, which are important parts of balancing encounter, and also tie them to skills in bizarre and unintuitive ways, which forces people to choose either completely sucking at what they should be able to do for "flavor," or just doing the standard D&D cookie cutter archetypes. Why can't a smart guy use his brains to bluff, a strong guy his presence to intimidate, or a Goddamn Cleric use his years of wisdom when practicing religion. And you certainly shouldn't have to worry about your random scores when there is an assumed baseline for stats for the purposes of encounter balance, like there allegedly is in 5e. Mecha Gojira fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:I'm probably just confused because Master Shakesman keeps using "suboptimal" in a way that means "worse than the best," but what in practice comes out to be "worse than baseline." 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
People like rolling stats for the same reason people like gambling. There's a reason something like 9/10 "here's why rolling stats are good" story ends with "...And then I rolled like three 18's!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:And of course it can be frustrating to play a suboptimal guy but it's made up for with exceptional characters showing up now and then. This is exactly the point people are making but from the opposite side. Like, you're not somehow mathematically guarenteed to get to play the exceptional guy. Most people play one game for like... a six months to a year. It is entirely possible that people will only play a single game of DnD in their lifetimes. How exactly does it 'balance out' for the guy who will play a lovely rogue for three weeks and quit DnD forever? EDIT: Also, if the suggestion is "people who roll high stats should tank those stats for flavor, e.g. fighters with 18 Charisma" then we're already not having the proper discussion because you're arguing that the only way to level the playing field is to throw the high, rolled stats in the trash once they're achieved. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:People like rolling stats for the same reason people like gambling. There's a reason something like 9/10 "here's why rolling stats are good" story ends with "...And then I rolled like three 18's!" Rolling stats made a lot more sense in 1e where you'd be recycling characters constantly anyway, and 90% of the time monsters attaceked the guy with highest charisma.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:That's assuming you're trying for balanced math, which honestly doesn't work if people make suboptimal choices on their characters like fighters with best number in charisma. If you have some sort of fixation on only playing good characters that can't be worse than the guy across the table's then fine, don't even let people choose their stats at all It's like if someone on the other side was telling you "well since your character's abilities represent their decisions and lifestyle before play, if you decide to determine those randomly, then fine, don't even let people choose their character's decisions at all. Play a game where you must roll a die to see what your character decides to do before you roll to see how well they do it. And of course it can be frustrating to roll a suboptimal decision but it's made up for with exceptional decisions being rolled now and then." Imagine how you would feel if someone was unironically making that argument at you. That is how some of us feel reading your post. I mean maybe, just maybe, we like having the ability to make choices about our characters but also want our characters to be good? And using point buy or an array achieves those goals simultaneously, so long as we're not stupid about it. And if we want to be stupid and make a bad character, we have only ourselves to blame. That's still better than being forced into it by the DM insisting I have to suck it up and deal with my crappy rolls. Like, I am all on board with playing games without ability scores at all, but I don't think that using point buy is the same as not having them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
Assuming classes were balanced, a "fun"and fair method has everyone roll their stats by whatever method (3d6, 4d6 drop lowest, average of 6d6 times 3, etc) and then put them into one big list. Then everyone communally picks out stats from that communal list. This makes it so everyone's stats is balanced with each other's
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Assuming classes were balanced, a "fun"and fair method has everyone roll their stats by whatever method (3d6, 4d6 drop lowest, average of 6d6 times 3, etc) and then put them into one big list. Then everyone communally picks out stats from that communal list. This makes it so everyone's stats is balanced with each other's Splicer posted:I know I've said this before, but the only good random roll is everyone rolls, then anyone can copy any set of stats rolled by anyone. All the social benefits of rolling with 
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Assuming you make up a system that's not actually random, then what you're pretending is random stat generation is actually awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
I meant that if only one person rolled an 18, then there'll be only one stat of 18 in the entire party
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:This makes it so everyone's stats is balanced with each other's Xelkelvos posted:I meant that if only one person rolled an 18, then there'll be only one stat of 18 in the entire party Isn't this at least a little contradictory?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
A pool for the entire group with numbers that can only be used by one player each is a horrible idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Xelkelvos posted:Assuming classes were balanced, a "fun"and fair method has everyone roll their stats by whatever method (3d6, 4d6 drop lowest, average of 6d6 times 3, etc) and then put them into one big list. Then everyone communally picks out stats from that communal list. This makes it so everyone's stats is balanced with each other's This seems worse than "everyone rolls up a set of 6, then everyone agrees to use the same set"
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
Everyone rolls 39d6 and cheers or laughs appropriately for high or low results. Then throw those results out and make your ability scores with point-buy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Okay, so I'm reading through OD&D to see what stats actually did back then and why it was okay to just do 3d6-in-order: * STR does nothing except determine if, as a Fighter, you will get an exp bonus (your Prime Requisite) * INT determines how many additional languages you know, as well as "will also affect referees' decisions as to whether or not certain action would be taken". It's the Prime Requisite for Magic-Users. * WIS is the Prime Requisite for Clerics * CON gives you +1 HP per hit die if it's 15 or higher, or -1 HP per hit die if it's 6 or lower. You have a 9.26% chance of either result happening. * DEX gives you +1 to-hit on missile attacks if it's 13 or higher, or -1 to-hit on missile attacks if it's 8 or lower. You have a 32.4% chance of either result happening. * CHA determines how many Hirelings you can have, and gives you a bonus on Loyalty rolls for them. So comparing a character with an average roll of 10 on everything to a character with 18s in everything: * The all-18s character would gain 10% more exp * The all-18s character would know 8 more languages * The all-18s character would have 1 more HP per hit die (mind you, in OD&D every class used d6 for their hit dice) * The all-18s character would have +1 to-hit on missile attacks * The all-18s character would be able to hire 12 Hirelings compared to the average character's 4, and get a +4 bonus on 2d6 Loyalty rolls Finally, it's worth noting that OD&D didn't yet even have the "roll d20/3d6 and get under your stat to succeed" skill check, so unless your DM uses a low INT score to gently caress with what you can and cannot state your character as doing, everything else outside of combat came down to your houserules or raw roleplaying/narration. By the time you get to AD&D, stats matter a lot more, but by then Gygax writes in no less than 4 different ways to roll your stats besides 3d6-in-order. It's actually BECMI D&D that's the odd man out because that's the one STR starts to grant +1 to +3 to-hit and damage and all that other stuff, but the books still suggest just raw 3d6-in-order. So setting aside the whole issue of "characters were supposed to be quick to roll up because their lives were cheaper than XCOM rookies", random stat generation worked because stats didn't actually matter all that much. It's a misinterpretation of history for random stat generation to still be an acceptable practice in an age where you get a +1 for every even number, or for the random algorithm to be as rudimentary as 4d6-drop-lowest. EDIT: Okay, I get that random rolling can be a useful tool for pulling a character concept out of your rear end when nothing comes to mind, but it doesn't have to be related to stat generation! * Roll a d6 to determine which of your 6 stats will be the highest and lowest, but still allocating the actual numbers to be within the confines of a standard array or a point-buy system. * Roll a d12 to determine what your class is * Randomly pick one out of the 13 backgrounds in 5e PHB for a base concept: "I'm a Hermit, what class would go well with that?" * Use the tables inside the backgrounds to flesh it out even further: "I was a pilgrim in search of a person, place, or relic of spiritual significance" "I am working on a grand philosophical theory and love sharing my ideas." "Power. Solitude and contemplation are paths toward mystical or magical power. (Evil)" "I’m still seeking the enlightenment I pursued in my seclusion, and it still eludes me." "I am dogmatic in my thoughts and philosophy." That seems like a workable concept for a Sorcerer or a Cleric. * Any other combination of the above: I roll a 1 on a d6 so I'll use point-buy to assign a 15 to STR. And then I got a Noble as a background. Battle Master Fighter or Oath of Devotion Paladin it is. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Apr 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Also permanenet stat boosts were drat common in early editions, and a lot of items just flat-out set your stat to a certain value.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:People like rolling stats for the same reason people like gambling. There's a reason something like 9/10 "here's why rolling stats are good" story ends with "...And then I rolled like three 18's!" I legitimately did this once and it's what convinced that DM to start using pointbuy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
I was going to say "You should use point buy because the game is balanced around statlines from a pointbuy system." But then I realized that involved the use of the phrase "the game is balanced" and I felt silly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:I was going to say "You should use point buy because the game is balanced around statlines from a pointbuy system." This is basically the crux of it. Martial classes are still pretty M.A.D. and casters kinda aren't as much; if you play a Martial and roll high stats, you'll have an easier time, but with a caster it's just gravy/piling on. Backgrounds have the same problem for narrative agency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
Random rolling is great if you choose to write WIZARD on your character sheet so you can win the game. All you need to do is roll one stat 16 or higher and you're golden. Too bad if you're some sort of scrub melee character and need 3+ high stats to be mildly effective (except Rogue maybe)
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
starkebn posted:Random rolling is great if you choose to write WIZARD on your character sheet so you can win the game. All you need to do is roll one stat 16 or higher and you're golden. Too bad if you're some sort of scrub melee character and need 3+ high stats to be mildly effective (except Rogue maybe) Finesse weapons are a boon for weapon-users, what with DEX being the god- stat. Barbarians still get hosed, because they have to attack "using Strength."
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Also permanenet stat boosts were drat common in early editions, and a lot of items just flat-out set your stat to a certain value. Yeah no. Permanent stat boost items EXISTED, but when they were actual boosts to your base score, they were one-use-only and rare as gently caress. Using a Wish would only add +1 up until, I believe, 15 or 17, then beyond that you only got 1/10th of a stat increment per Wish, and since using Wish actively shortened your lifetime... it wasn't quite spammable. There were a couple of items that would set your base Strength or other stats, but again, rare as gently caress, keep in mind that for a mage to make a permanent magic item, he'd have to permanently sacrifice points of Constitution. So one wizard couldn't just be a magical factory, but might only create one or two non-potion, non-scroll items over an entire lifetime, assuming he ever got the levels to enchant items and cast Permanence. Nah, permanent stat boosts were rare as poo poo until 3.x where you got a +1 every few levels and where magical items could be bought for gold and crafted with relatively little effort. Unless your GM just rolled a magical item out of the tables in the back of the DMG every time you finished a fight, then sure, you might've been knee-deep in the drat things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Everyone ended up running the same modules, and they almost always had at least a chance at some boost or replacement. Not neccasarily a magic book, but things like the power armor from exp barrier peaks, or a table like THE MAGIC FOUNTAIN Die Roll - Effect of Drink 1 - Character subtracts one from all ability scores. 2 - Character loses one hit point. Subtract this hit point from the character's total: the loss is not a wound! 3 - Character is paralyzed for 2-20 (2d10) hours. 4 - Character gains two hit points. 5 - Character adds one to prime requisite score. 6 - Character adds two to dexterity score. 7 - Character adds two each to strength and scores. 8 - Character adds one to each ability score. That's one of the modules which was supposed to be an intro to new players and gms about how things generally worked (same series as keep on the borderlands). Heck, in 1e every time two potions were in effect you had a 1% chance of getting one of them permanently (counterbalanced by a chance of instant death).
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
It's where the old "Gygax as a designer" and "Gygax as a DM" divide comes into play. Gygax the designer said magic items need to be rare and stat boosting double so. Gygax the DM stated his group loved to raise their stats, so he gave them plenty of opportunities to do so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
I played a game with rolled stats. People rolled mediocre to poor, except for me, who rolled 2 18s, a 17, 2 16s and a 12. That's really not a good outcome. I had to fight pretty hard not to constantly outshine everyone, especially since a couple of the players were pretty new. The campaign had a lot of issues, really, but realizing that my character was just mathematically superior to everyone else's didn't make me feel good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
Yeah, I was hoping that NEXT would do away with ability scores/attributes since D&D never did anything great with them. Since we're in the AoE Fetus thread, how does NEXT compare to 3.P when it comes to Ability Score dependence?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
My very first character was a barbarian with one 18 and five 16's.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
Random ability scores and rolled HP netted me an Oozemaster with more HP than the Barbarian. Including raging.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
GrizzlyCow posted:Yeah, I was hoping that NEXT would do away with ability scores/attributes since D&D never did anything great with them. Pretty similarly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
We had a very short campaign we did once. It was 4th edition and I was playing as a minotaur Warden. We rolled for stats and I had two 18s in the roll, so with the minotaur stat boost I had 20s in Strength and Con at level 1. Wardens have a lot of abilities that are based on Strength and Con together. I think I had something crazy like a 23 AC at level 1. It was really broken.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Random ability scores and rolled HP netted me an Oozemaster with more HP than the Barbarian. Including raging. What is an Oozemaster?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:What is an Oozemaster?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
I forgot about that prc, always looked like a fun gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:19 |
|
|
I liked how 4e's Gamma World handled random rolls. You get 18 in your primary origin's stat. 16 in your secondary origin's stat. Then you random roll everything else. If both origins share the same stat, then you get 20 in that stat and random roll everything else. But random rolling in that game works too because Gamma World characters are supposed to be disposable. I would NEVER force random rolls in a serious campaign. gently caress that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 04:18
|
|
