General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Gamers Online Now: 1,320
320 members and 1,000 guests
Most users ever online was 4,029, 8th April 2009 at 06:04 PM.
Disclaimer: I helped generate a portion of the material for this text, providing a few derro items and one of the monsters. However, I did buy my print copy of this book. My PDF was provided by... [Read More]
Disclaimer: I contributed a bit of material (Some monsters and one background option) for this book by virtue of working on _Halls of the Mountain King_. I was not otherwise directly involved in its... [Read More]
The first thing that grabs you about the Imperial Gazetteer is the cover. Malcolm McClinton has once again put together a gorgeous image that wraps around to the back. It's fantastic piece of art and... [Read More]
This is not the first Doctor Who RPG. The first one published was a system created by FASA back in the mid 1980s, which used a similar system to their Star Trek RPG. I used to run that game back in... [Read More]
If I wanted really random, I'd go with Warhammer and make 'em roll out their starting careers too.
I understand, if I wanted character creation via a static point based system, I'd play Hero 5th Edition (arguably the world's most flexible game system).
Cedric: personally, I am on the opinion that high variance in ability scores is a lot more fun than uniformity. I would rather play a character who has glaring flaws and great strengths than one who is average in all respect. That’s why I like to roll my 4d6 in order (although as in my initial post, I allow two series for player types, even if I almost always stick with my first when I am playing). 3d6 definitely has more variance, but I doubt anyone is using that method anymore...
__________________ "5. If they do not wish to take a few risks, their characters should stay home and become shopkeepers and farmers.
Then wish them luck!" -- Gary Gygax: Shrine of the Kuo-Toa
"Dragons are so Beowulf! Should DnD be in the business of selling 1200 year-olds back their childhood? Sheesh." -- gizmo33, on the power of nostalgia
ranger89: I disagree with your post. I can easily imagine a “roleplayer” type who dislikes random stats because he wants to play a specific character with specific strengths and weaknesses - likewise, it is possible for a powergamer to obsess less about raw stats and instead focuses on using them very effectively.
I'm not going to argue that point. The examples I listed in my first post reflect how players are in my gaming group. I'm sure there's a lot of variance out there. The point I was trying to make is that players will prefer one character creation system over another based on what they want to get out of the game. There isn't a right-or-wrong or better-or-worse side here. It seems that there have a been quite a few point-buy vs. dice roll threads in recent months that have broken down into "you're stupid"/"no, you're stupid" discussions (probably due to people like me posting snarky comments ). I didn't want to see that happen here.
Cedric: personally, I am on the opinion that high variance in ability scores is a lot more fun than uniformity. I would rather play a character who has glaring flaws and great strengths than one who is average in all respect. That’s why I like to roll my 4d6 in order (although as in my initial post, I allow two series for player types, even if I almost always stick with my first when I am playing). 3d6 definitely has more variance, but I doubt anyone is using that method anymore...
Yes, sometimes I use the Organic Method of stat generation. 4d6 (drop the lowest) in order, at the end you can swap any one stat's value with another. So if you wind up with 18 int and 12 strength and you want to be a fighter, just swap those.
"I have the worst luck at rolling dice so it's unfair to make me roll my ability scores."
(There is no statistical evidence that luck exists. [...])
That's not really the problem. The problem is that (in my experience) the average created by normal luck is a lot worse than you'd think based on the ability scores of characters that are actually played. Most GMs are a lot more forgiving about allowing rerolls than DMG guidelines would be (every rolled-stats campaign I've played in -- which has been pretty nearly every tabletop campaign -- either allowed 3+ sets of rolls to start with, or allowed 1s on the die to be re-rerolled), and most players are much more inclined to call a low roll "cocked" or "off the table". And when you've pretty much eliminated below-average (for 4d6, arrange to taste) characters by such methods, you also end up with a lot of extraordinary characters (40+-point buy) which tend to throw the game a little out of whack.
Interesting. In our group the powergamers would prefer rolling. I think tt is because it would give them a chance to get uber-characters which is denied in point-buy.
Or at least is denied in our point-buy of 28 points.
Maybe powergamers prefer point-buy in groups that go with 32 or 38 or 40+ point buy. It wouldn't surprise me if the number of power-gamers (however the term is defined in various groups) that prefer point-buy would decrease as the points increase. But in our group the power-gamers want to roll the dice.
My experience with point buy as well. The point buy I use will gaurantee you a slightly above average character but no 17's or 18's unless you really sacrifice somewhere else. It's an option, you can point buy or roll. That said, everyone wants to roll and I've found rolling usually gives results the players like better.
However, if your players really want point buy why not let them use it? With a reasonable number of points, e.g. 28, it won't unbalance the game nor make the characters more powerful than you seem to want.
The bottom line here, IMHO, is player choice within the agreed upon constraints of the level of power in your game. Agree on a point buy, 24, 28, 30, whatever you as GM think and put out the option. If you force rolls, what's to stop someone from just suiciding characters until they get a set of rolls the like?
Of course, if the GM does decide to use it, I'll shut up and play, it's not like I'm going to take my toys and go home, I just want to make it clear before hand that I don't like point buy.
That's fair. As long as a player "shuts up and plays" after logging an inital complaint, that's cool. We all have differing opinions. So long as the players understand that in the end the DMs method wins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cedric
I think it promotes static, cookie cutter, min-maxed character design.
I think this is a hard point for the point-buyers to argue - and I am a point buyer. Look at a game with point buy and the vast majority will have all even stats and descending order or importance. Of course there are a few exceptions - the dwarven cleric with an abysmal charisma being one of my favorite! But for the most part point buy methods lean to cookie cutter characters. But ... see my next comment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cedric
Of course, 3.0 and 3.5 encourage you to map out your entire character progression to 20th level and beyond before you ever swing your sword or cast your first spell. If you are using point buy, its easier to map your character progression all the way. More predictable.
I do not think the system is what is to blame. Take driving a porsche in the middle of Montana or some other flat area where you can see for what seems like hundereds of miles. The gas pedal is right under your feet, there isn't a soul on the road ... do you end up going 140 mph just to see what it feels like? If you don't it isn't the car's fault. If you do, it isn't the cars fault. The human mind is what's to blame.
3.0 and 3.5 make no such advances. I've read through plenty of books and I don't recall seeing a paragraph on planning your character out to even the next level. Sure, they do suggest that you have a concept in mind and you make wise choices to allow the future to have possibilities. But that just makes sense.
Likewise with cookie cutter characters. Point Buy may lean towards cookie cutter characters, but that isn't the fault of the system, its the fault of the human mind making the character. Don't crucify a good system because we play with greedy, selfish minds!
Personally, I feel that character generation is like Roleplaying. It is a process that needs to be taught to be done well. People who take out their first character ever want everything to go perfectly because it's their fantasy! But after you've played 10 fantasies you realize that being perfect isn't what it is all cracked up to be. What does Agent Smith say to Morpheus in the original Matrix? Something along the lines of the fact that Human beings define their existance in misery, living in it, and struggling to overcome it. [That's the gist, not an actual quote] Learning to want to play characters with flaws needs to be taught!
I don't need randomly rolled dice to force me to learn how to play a character with a flaw. I use point buy method all the time and play characters with even two stats at an 8 just because it demonstrates their imperfection - or lack of skill. I don't need a set of dice to force me to do that.
ULTIMATE POINT FOR THOSE WHO QUIT READING!
The system is only a system. Both rolling and point buy are valid and can be used to create fun, balanced characters. Our arguments should not be based on exalting one system over the other, it should be looking upon those who manipulate the system with criticism!
__________________ Most recent products published:
Complete Control - Turn your 3.x game into a game without multiclassing, or classes for that matter! Make your character exactly how you want it.
Complete Gear - Eliminate item issues in your gaming. NPCs can have any gear without impacting game balance. Magic Marts don't need to even exist!
Interesting. In our group the powergamers would prefer rolling. I think tt is because it would give them a chance to get uber-characters which is denied in point-buy.
Or at least is denied in our point-buy of 28 points.
I agree. Our resident power gamer was most unhappy when I did a point buy for our WLD campaign. I was getting comments of "So you think PC's are average people doing heroic things?". This was with a 28 point buy.
This is the same player who, with rolling 4d6 and dropping lowest but with no rules in place for having to take any one set of numbers, will fill up a paper front and back with sets of stats. I mean really whats the point? You might as well just pick the numbers you want.
I generally dislike point buy for the main reason that I tend to have very good luck with dice in character generation. The most recent character I did with 4d6 drop the lowest, one re-roll if needed: 17, 17, 15, 14, 14, 13, 12 (I'm human, so no stat adjustments; the lowest roll was an 8 which was re-rolled into a 13). That's like a 55 point buy character. I don't usually roll quite that well, but I can count on at least a couple 15's and nothing less than average.
I doubt I'd much like a campaign that didn't have a very high end point buy (32 or 36 is what we've usually used when we've done point buy) unless the concept was that we are very average people lifted into extraordinary circumstances.
This is the same player who, with rolling 4d6 and dropping lowest but with no rules in place for having to take any one set of numbers, will fill up a paper front and back with sets of stats. I mean really whats the point? You might as well just pick the numbers you want.
rv
I do agree with you here. If my players want a "reroll" button, they need to go back to their computers. You roll for stats once, unless I say otherwise.
Now, I've been pretty forgiving in the past. If someone has had a CLEAR character concept, I've adjusted their stats after they've rolled so they could feasibly play it...or I've allowed rerolls, etc.
But no, no filling up stacks of paper with 4d6 six times until you get the 18, 18, 17, 15, 14, 12 you were hoping to get.
Wow! So might you need seven stats! I'm impressed!
I've only skimmed the thread, but I'm surprised that I haven't noticed anyone saying they let their players choose.
I'd be happy to let my players use whatever method they like. In fact, they always roll, which I find kind of annoying because I prefer point buy. But it really doesn't matter to me. Oh, and I also don't supervise their rolls. I trust them, or at the very least, like to think I can trust them. Sometimes it's like you're a paladin in a party with an evil person, and you just gotta make sure not to use detect evil on him for the sake of party cohesion.
I use point buy now (25 points), but I don't think it is a big deal. Rolling is fun too, in a different way. In the past I've made up my mind about all sorts of character backgrounds, personalities, classes, and feats just from looking at what I rolled. It's interesting.
Some of those complaints about rolling are just whining, but some are valid concerns, IMO.
Overall, I think point buy works better, if you don't give them too many points. My problem with rolling is that I don't want one player to have a big advantage at low levels over the others, and rolling seems to do that sometimes.
Another reason for using it is that it makes character generation away from the gaming table more fair. I am convinced that my players do not cheat, but sometimes they are not so certain about each other, and requiring them to use point buy prevents any suspicions from arising in the first place. The game is about rolling dice, but for my campaign we don't roll them away from the table. As some would say, locks keep honest people honest. Having them roll in front of the DM slows down character generation, and isn't always possible.
Finally, I do think of player characters as special, and would prefer that they be exceptional. Players only get one character to control; it should be one that they like.
I've only skimmed the thread, but I'm surprised that I haven't noticed anyone saying they let their players choose.
i think that is Crothian's normal stance
__________________ Story Hour
OMG! The SKY IS FALLING! --JoeGKushner
Myself, I plan to masturbate less -- der_kluge
I know that I've never really liked d20. I think it was designed by a bunch of hacks --- Monte Cook
I am sickened beyond belief. The half-orc wizard is obviously the best possible PC, and I only had to read 10 pages of the book to figure it out. D&D is dead to me! -- Mike Mearls
FWIW, I'm on the design team and I pretty much find WoW as fun and interesting as banging my head against a brick wall. -- Mike Mearls
you happen to say that 4E reminds you of the reasons you decided against a career as a special-Ed teacher--noted rpg author Darrin Drader
3.0 and 3.5 make no such advances. I've read through plenty of books and I don't recall seeing a paragraph on planning your character out to even the next level. Sure, they do suggest that you have a concept in mind and you make wise choices to allow the future to have possibilities. But that just makes sense.
With the onslaught of available choices in terms of Feats, Prestige Classes, Class Abilities, etc...it is very rare these days that I see a 3.x character grow organically based on what has occurred in game. More often than not the character's entire progression is rigidly planned before hand so the player can make sure they qualify for XX Presige Class or YY Feat Chain by # level.
Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with this...I tend to fall for it myself ot a certain degree. But somewhere in the back of my mind, I don't care for it.
There should be room for a chararcter to grow organically based on what's actually happened in game.
Of course, in large part due to this, I limit my players to one 10 level prestige class and one 5 level prestige class.
I understand, if I wanted character creation via a static point based system, I'd play Hero 5th Edition (arguably the world's most flexible game system).
Don't forget GURPS!
Or Mutants & Masterminds!
Or BESM/TristatX!
Lots of good options out there.
But I take the breaks that my game group prefers. (Of course I try to take as much randomness out as possible for no rolling for hit points either. If hit dice are an indicator of how tough a character class is, randomly rolling those hit points seems to work directly against that theory.)
I play with people who will plan their characters up though 15th or 20th level. But then they'll play three sessions and totally revise their plan.
Sort of reminds me of real life, where people make complicated plans for education, careers, relationships, and so on, and then may or may not change them based on what's happening in their lives. I certainly wouldn't call that inorganic.
__________________ In California? Enjoy gaming? Then you don't want to miss PolyCon.
In the Dark Sun game I plan to start next year, players will roll their stats, but without the safety-net reroll. The world of athas is harsh, and there's little room for concepts like fairness or forgiveness, so a random roll with no room for mistakes is highly appropriate.
If the world of Dark Sun is so harsh and unforgiving, how would a character with low stats survive as an adventurer? Historically, tougher settings like Dark Sun and Oriental Adventures have suggested the favorable ability score generation methods.
With the onslaught of available choices in terms of Feats, Prestige Classes, Class Abilities, etc...it is very rare these days that I see a 3.x character grow organically based on what has occurred in game.
<snip>
There should be room for a chararcter to grow organically based on what's actually happened in game.
Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you at all. My assertion is that it isn't the tool's fault, so don't blame the tool.
I'm sure that you've heard the expression "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Like it or hate it, it is true. A gun is not going to stand up and demand that it be used to kill someone. A person picks up the gun and uses it for their own purpose.
So, I would assert that "3.x doesn't plan characters out to 20th level, people do." Sure, the tool (3.x) makes it easy to do this. But the book never stands up and demands to be used in this manner. The people do that.
My point above is that teaching people to roleplay is an art. Teaching people to design organic characters is an art. In a word where greed and immediate gratification are two of the largest motivators for life ... if we want people to do something different they need to be taught how and shown why it is a better system. It isn't about trashing the system and limiting choices. It is about teaching people how to play with an organic mind. It is about teaching people to resist the lure of the Dark Side and roleplay rather than rollplay and plan out to the 20th level.
From a DM's perspective, I dislike people who honestly plan out to the 20th level - with no chance of deviation. I don't mind people looking ahead and saying that they've got a few options and avenues they'd like to go down. But when a player says "this character is going to be a W/X with levels Y/Z" then I wonder why I should even game before that point? If they already know what's going to happen, why play through it? In that case it isn't about interacting with the world and being changed by it while you change it as well. That kind of gaming is about the numbers.
I agree with you in principle. I disagree that it is the systems fault. The system is a tool and cannot help how people use/abuse it. Focus on changing how people approach the game and you'll be much happier than limiting choices. Teaching people how to approach the game organically allows them to limit their choices naturally without having to be the power-weilding DM.
__________________ Most recent products published:
Complete Control - Turn your 3.x game into a game without multiclassing, or classes for that matter! Make your character exactly how you want it.
Complete Gear - Eliminate item issues in your gaming. NPCs can have any gear without impacting game balance. Magic Marts don't need to even exist!
Last edited by Nonlethal Force; 18th September 2006 at 05:37 PM..
Reason: Missed a closing quote mark.
Gamers Online Now: 1,320
). I didn't want to see that happen here.
Linear Mode
