Computers beat up my role player
Kae'Yoss
First Post
Numion said:Point buy is optional in 3.0E (3.0E DMG, p. 19 "Here are eight optional variants you might want to consider.."). So there's no guaranteed 18's.. Maybe it's standard in 3.5E, though.
I'm a 3.0 grognard. I already feel rose colored shades blurring my vision a bit ..
Nah, 3.5 still uses 4d6 drop lowest as standard, and more's the pity.
Please note that while you might always choose to get an 18 with point buy, few do so unless the other 5 ability scores are of little concern to them. That 18 costs 16 of your 25 points, which means if you distribute the rest equally, you'll have 18, 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, or, if you concentrate on another stat, 18, 15, 9, 8, 8, 8.
Of course, if the DM grants you more points, it will be easier to get an 18 without crippling the character in all but his primary stat, but unless you give out a lot of points, stuff like 9d6 keep 3 best still wins out almost every time.
Raven Crowking
First Post
Hussar said:
No. It is like saying that 3.X isn't munchkinny because Pun Pun is unlikely to ever used in a game. However, if you do use Pun Pun in your game, it would be fair to say that your game is munchkinny.
IMHO. YMMV. YDMB.
RC
Raven Crowking
First Post
Akrasia said:
In the final analysis, internet forums resemble nothing more than Monty Python routines writ large.
Raven Crowking
First Post
Slife said:
Hence, IMHO. YMMV. YDMB.
Raven Crowking said:
Before UA, there were DMs that assumed every PC was (at least) minor nobility. If they switched to the UA social class rules, it could mean a decrease in the average PC social level. If the DM ignored the UA social class rules but included the Cavalier, then things could be weird because the social class rules were really part of the Cavalier class.
& when you're looking at ability score generation, I don't see many of the more liberal score generation schemes used in oAD&D as being all that different than 3e changing the modifier table. (Though my groups never used the UA method--we arguably used something even more munchkiny.) In 1e, we left the table alone & changed the probability that we'd get scores that gave a modifier. In 3e, they instead changed the table to give modifiers at lower scores, so sticking to 4d6k3 no longer makes 15, 15, 15, 15, 14 feel like 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10.
In any case, I think if any of us had as much text in print over as many years & had as many people reading it as Gygax, it'd be trivial to find two comments that seem ironic when pulled out of context & placed together. Heck, you could probably "prove" almost anything you wanted to that way.
Similar Threads
