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.
I've started running two nostalgic games as 4e shows up everywhere. One is a 1e AD&D game, the other is a 4e Gamma World game.
One of the big differences between the older games and games of now is random character generation. You're expected to roll attributes (and, in GW, mutations) randomly, and accept what the dice give you. There are pros and cons with this.
On the plus side, the player is given an interesting challenge. How do you play and thrive with the character as given? With random generation, you get something you wouldn't expect, and it shapes how you succeed in the game. It stretches your creativity, makes you think in innovative ways instead of falling into old habits, and forces you to try new things. Although you can end up with an imbalanced character through the luck of the draw, you aren't guaranteed of one through your skills at gaming the system. Finally, there's some verisimilitude. We as people don't get to choose what sort of gifts we start out into the world with, and this gives us one more chance to learn how to accept what we're given in a nice sandbox.
However, there are plenty of advantages given with choosing everything. You get to play what you want. You can be sure that you're as balanced as your peers (as long as you all get the same chances at the same loopholes). You'll start with what you want, when you want it. If you want to try out a new class, a new path, a new whatever, you don't have to wait for the right chance, you can do it right away.
I prefer non-random or nearly non-random. I want to be able to choose what character I am going to play, and not be at the mercy of some die rolls.
My favorite system in the non-random/random is the Dying Earth RPG. You can choose all of your stats (with a bit of point buy in areas). However, you can choose to roll stats and you get a slight building point bonus for doing so. You can choose to roll some and not others. The best of both worlds.
__________________ David A. Blizzard
"The only constant I am sure of is this accelerating rate of change" - Downside Up by Peter Gabriel
I'm also a crafter; I usually have a character idea in my head and I want him to come out as I see him within the context of the ruleset. Rolling up scores was fun, but most of the time I saw weak scores handwaved anyway, so I stopped worrying and adopted standardized (point-buy) systems for ability scores.
While a one-shot "roll 4d6, drop lowest" game might be fun, any game I think I'm going to play over the long haul will feature few if any random elements to char-gen. Leave the dice to the actual gaming, not the pre-show.
I voted: “I like some parts random, but certain aspects of the character must always be choosable.”
Although, even in those cases I’ll sometimes random roll the choices I get to make as well.
I’ve been really impressed by classic Traveller. Chargen is very random, yet if I try to make a pilot or a doctor more times than not I actually get what I was going for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InVinoVeritas
With random generation, you get something you wouldn't expect, and it shapes how you succeed in the game.
In my groups the numbers on your character sheet usually don’t count as much as your decisions. I’ve seen characters who would be discarded as “hopeless” by many players do very well indeed.
Quote:
You get to play what you want.
Ah, but I find that often to not be the case. The lack of dice rolls doesn’t mean the system supports creating the character I want to create with the number of points I’ve been given.
Quote:
You can be sure that you're as balanced as your peers (as long as you all get the same chances at the same loopholes).
My experience is the opposite. It is nigh impossible to correctly sum up the value of a mechanical ability in a single number. Especially since one of the many variables involved is the GM. If we all build the exact same character, we’ll be balanced. If we create different character with the same number of points, we won’t be balanced.
That’s not to say it makes a game unplayable. I can enjoy a good point-buy system. I just recognize that they aren’t really any better balanced than completely random systems.
And random systems have the advantage of doing a better job of making things rare. You put a point value on something, and either every character can buy it or no character can. A high-but-not-too-high point value might make something rare but might not.
In fact, in a random system you can make available to starting characters things that—in a point buy system—would be priced out of the budget of starting characters.
__________________ (^_^)
Anything I type is only my opinion unless explicitly stated otherwise, which should go without saying. Please assume that I've left out a smiley after every sentence. Thank you.
I voted: “I like some parts random, but certain aspects of the character must always be choosable.”
Although, even in those cases I’ll sometimes random roll the choices I get to make as well.
I’ve been really impressed by classic Traveller. Chargen is very random, yet if I try to make a pilot or a doctor more times than not I actually get what I was going for.
In my groups the numbers on your character sheet usually don’t count as much as your decisions. I’ve seen characters who would be discarded as “hopeless” by many players do very well indeed.
Ah, but I find that often to not be the case. The lack of dice rolls doesn’t mean the system supports creating the character I want to create with the number of points I’ve been given.
My experience is the opposite. It is nigh impossible to correctly sum up the value of a mechanical ability in a single number. Especially since one of the many variables involved is the GM. If we all build the exact same character, we’ll be balanced. If we create different character with the same number of points, we won’t be balanced.
That’s not to say it makes a game unplayable. I can enjoy a good point-buy system. I just recognize that they aren’t really any better balanced than completely random systems.
And random systems have the advantage of doing a better job of making things rare. You put a point value on something, and either every character can buy it or no character can. A high-but-not-too-high point value might make something rare but might not.
In fact, in a random system you can make available to starting characters things that—in a point buy system—would be priced out of the budget of starting characters.
I agree with a lot of this, but I generally prefer point buy. The reason is simple enough. Back in the day I was hooked by the "Play a Mighty Warrior, Powerful Wizard etc." type advertising, but found all to many of my 1st level characters dropping like flies because they weren't anyof those things. They were just average Joes who might survive if they were real lucky, otherwise not. So the ability to create a character who's closer to what I wanted to begin with has a definite appeal. Of course, there were those rare time times when you'd get something really kewl...
__________________ Scrag 'em all and let the gods sort 'em out!
If I were to pull numbers out of the air, I'd say a good mix of player choice vs random generation would be about 80% choice, 20% random.
To my mind, that would be enough for player with a specific concept in mind to get something that approximates that concept, while allowing a chance for a minor perk or flaw that the player would not have chosen.
Base attributes should be random, but what you do with those abilities should be choice. I didn't choose to be this good looking, but I sure am going to use it for all its worth.
__________________ "Your imagination, limited only by your chosen powers"
I voted "choose and sculpt," because for the most part that's what I prefer. But I do get tired of seeing and making characters that are ideally suited to their roles.
Recently, my gaming group started a new 3.5 campaign, and (after a dozen or so point-buy campaigns in a row) decided to roll one random set of six stats and have all players use that set, arranged to preference. Everyone has really enjoyed the result, but I'm not convinced I'd want to do that every time.
Recently, my gaming group started a new 3.5 campaign, and (after a dozen or so point-buy campaigns in a row) decided to roll one random set of six stats and have all players use that set, arranged to preference. Everyone has really enjoyed the result, but I'm not convinced I'd want to do that every time.
That is one of the few random methods I'd be willing to try.
An alternative I would try sometime is have the players choose their stats. I would only do this in a group that is heavy on the role assumption and low on power gaming.
__________________ David A. Blizzard
"The only constant I am sure of is this accelerating rate of change" - Downside Up by Peter Gabriel
The answer somewhat depends on the system you're playing, even within the D+D realm:
In 3e, where each stat point makes a difference, random is a manageable risk.
In 4e, where balance is king, random doesn't fit too well.
In 1e, gimme those dice and let 'em fly!
Then again, if you *really* want random, try rolling for race and class as well. Been there, done this, and the results have at times been quite worthwhile if only because it forced me into new ideas.
For me, it depends mainly on what kind of game I'm going to play.
For a one-shot, I prefer random character generation. And by that I mean really random, unlike 3e, where you rolled for stats, but chose all the rest. I want the challange (both gamist and roleplaying one) of a character I didn't expect.
For a campaign (playing more than 3 sessions with one character) I prefer character generation without random elements. I need a character that fits me, a character I may shape on the basis of the envisioned background and give him some mechanical efficiency at the same time.
In strongly simulationist game I may play a randomly generated character. Being disadventaged gives as many (if not more) fun roleplaying opportunities as being powerful.
In a strongly gamist play I prefer a character I created and optimized myself. While trying to get around my weaknesses using my strengths may be interesting, being just weaker than the rest of the party sucks. Maybe, if there was a system that creates random, but balanced characters...
In a strongly narrativist play, I may have the competence and background aspects of my character randomly generated, but I couldn't deal with one that has personality and value system I cannot understand (definitely not the same as "agree with").
Then again, if you *really* want random, try rolling for race and class as well. Been there, done this, and the results have at times been quite worthwhile if only because it forced me into new ideas.
Gamma World is mostly like this. You choose your race (Human, Mutant, Animal, or Plant), but unless you choose Pure Strain Human, you have to roll your mutations randomly, and then you're stuck with them.
Also, since the method of generating your abilities depends on your race, you can't arrange your scores as desired, either. So, you can very easily end up with a character that is very different from your play styles. So, you might want to play a sneaky character, but end up rolling a hulking, clawed brute who shoots laser beams from his eyes. Makes for interesting justifications and questions on how you're supposed to look and function.
For me, it depends mainly on what kind of game I'm going to play.
For a one-shot, I prefer random character generation. And by that I mean really random, unlike 3e, where you rolled for stats, but chose all the rest. I want the challange (both gamist and roleplaying one) of a character I didn't expect.
For a campaign (playing more than 3 sessions with one character) I prefer character generation without random elements. I need a character that fits me, a character I may shape on the basis of the envisioned background and give him some mechanical efficiency at the same time.
In strongly simulationist game I may play a randomly generated character. Being disadventaged gives as many (if not more) fun roleplaying opportunities as being powerful.
In a strongly gamist play I prefer a character I created and optimized myself. While trying to get around my weaknesses using my strengths may be interesting, being just weaker than the rest of the party sucks. Maybe, if there was a system that creates random, but balanced characters...
In a strongly narrativist play, I may have the competence and background aspects of my character randomly generated, but I couldn't deal with one that has personality and value system I cannot understand (definitely not the same as "agree with").
For one shots I prefer pregens from the GM sculpted and structured for the one shot
__________________ Ginnel
"Someone on the internet is wrong!"
Shabe on sharing loot
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shabe
Of course you may be talking about all of the above in character where all the characters in the party count every single coin and keep track of it individually and all know the exact price of items, all can divide big numbers in their heads and all carry around a handy set of dice with them for when the roll off occurs, then of course you are fine, else well done you've taken some of the r out or rpg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginnel
If you want to create something different do it.
All elves are fat and prone to flatulence and their nickname is Gary.
Bang I've just changed my world do the same with yours.
I never understood why there would be the huge volume of rules that were supposed to be "balanced" but that you would then go and generate characters that had random ability scores.
My (limited) experience with random generation says that someone will always roll better than someone else, and that the someone else will be jealous and that this tension will cause problems. Of course, having mature players would ameliorate the situation.
I also like to have control; and with a point buy I can get the stats that let me create the character I want.
I do, however, see value in random generation; in that it forces creativity. So for a rules-lite type of game, I think it is a valuable option.
__________________ "All of this has happened before-but it doesn't have to happen again."
For certain games, there is so much flavor attached to the randomness, I think it is a necessary thing (Gamma World and Traveler being good examples thereof). But for fantasy games, and the more rules-heavy ones especially, I like to select and sculpt.
For me, my openess to randmoness depends on both the type of game and what else I'm playing. As one the players in your 1e PbP, I'm happy to take what the dice give me (same with a BECMI PbP I'm in), because 1e is set up that way, and I'm also playing several 4e games where I can choose exactly what I want.
I wouldn't want a game with that kind of randomness be my only game, or to do that sort of thing in 3e or 4e, but as one of many games, using 1e or BECMI, I think it's great.
__________________ Gary Hoggatt - www.garyh.net "Such heroic nonsense..."
I concocted a set of rules related to ability score gains as PCs gain levels. These rules have the benefit of balancing PCs and NPCs out in the long run. How initial ability scores are determined depends on the needs of the campaign and the ability of the player group to handle a little something out of the ordinary (and potentially challenging). My preferred method is 3d6, reroll all rolls of 1. Normally I let the players arrange the rolls as desired, but in some campaigns where I want more of a "non-heroic" start to the characters, they might have to take the rolls in the order they're given. Since after gaining levels they'll grow in potential and are free to spend points as they see fit, they can build their character into the Mighty Warrior or Powerful Wizard they'd love to play (see Ed_Laprade's post). However, since they don't get as much choice to begin with, they get an opportunity to explore an unusual path to that paragon.
__________________ 'Genshou is the ruler of Genshouland and the creator of one thousand and one house rules; some of them good, some of them mediocre. Genshou likes cheese and root beer (but never together). Genshou is a young man who is always ridiculously cheerful. He has been described as a madman, a potato, and "cuddly".'
I don't know what to vote for because the answer I come up with "It depends on how the random method works and whether or not it's optional" isn't on the poll.
I know I don't support any method that gives some people bonuses and others penalties.
I know I don't believe in the idea that roleplaying should be about the challenge. The mechanics should be the challenge because that's the game, but roleplaying isn't a game to me it's a form of expression and shouldn't be about how hard it is.
I know I don't support realism in gaming. If I wanted realism I go out and do real things.
I know being forced to do something doesn't stretch my creativity. My creativity refuses to work under such conditions.
So saying all that I'd be okay if a point-build system had a method for rolling randomly which trait you'd pay for next, in case you were out of ideas and wanted a suggestion. But it should be optional.
I prefer as much random generation as possible (because it's fun to interpret the results and build off that with my imagination), but it's best if the designers understand what they are doing and have crafted good tables. I'm quite often "stuck" when faced with games that have no random element to character creation, since I can't see what's fun about making it all up myself. That's a very boring prospect to me. Especially in a game where I'm not familiar with the setting yet, randomness is best. I wish every single game had a random option, with well-written tables that made it so you always ended up with a playable character that fit the setting. It's a great tool, especially for times when you don't have a good idea what might be appropriate to play.
sculpted and structured for the one shot 
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
