Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Dumb Luck: Reclaiming the Lower Half of the Stat-Spectrum
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Hitcher" data-source="post: 6284755" data-attributes="member: 63747"><p>Okay, so it's my opinion that rolling 3d6 for stats is the way to go. Why? Because I like what the element of chance does for character creation, and I like the idea of flawed heroes - they're just more interesting. And why have a stat range of 3-18 if you're only going to use the top half?</p><p> </p><p>The only problem with this approach - and it is a big problem - is that getting a 7 or a 4 for a stat doesn't create a hero that's flawed in any kind of interesting manner. It just creates a character who is slightly (or a lot) worse at hitting the target numbers for their rolls. Now I grant you that this can SOMETIMES be dramatic, when it happens at just the right moment, but mostly it's just kind of annoying:</p><p> </p><p>"Oh, if I would have hit if I'd had a slightly higher Strength". See? BORING.</p><p> </p><p>So I got to thinking about what could be done to make low stats more interesting and maybe even appealing, and yes, we could tie them into some kind of epic system of custom flaws, but that's way more work than I want to do, and it's not very D&D.</p><p> </p><p>So instead I thought "what about a consolation prize?" And here's what I came up with: Dumb Luck.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The fact is that lots of fantasy fiction stars heroes who are just as often lucky as they are skilled or strong or smart. The stars align, and they get away with stuff that everyday folk. I think Terry Pratchett's Guards! Guards! says it best (I forget which character actually utters the words):</p><p> </p><p>"Million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten." That's how a lot of fiction WORKS. So why not let us have lucky heroes, as well as powerful ones? (Yes, I'm aware that Halflings already have something like this, but let's leave that aside for a moment).</p><p> </p><p>So here's the rule:</p><p> </p><p>For each point of NEGATIVE MODIFIER a character has against a given Attribute, that character receives one Dumb Luck re-roll PER LEVEL for a check, attack or saving throw made using that Attribute. </p><p> </p><p>If their re-roll is successful, that success should always be described as a pure lucky break. This roll only allows the re-roll of a single die - if two dice were rolled for Advantage or Disadvantage, the second die result stands (so a double failure on a Disadvantaged roll won't be helped by the re-roll, for example).</p><p> </p><p>That's it. The "per level" thing is a little quirky, but "per day" seems too much, and "per session" is not a very D&D kind of measurement. Per level keeps it all on a, er... level playing field. Shouldn't be too hard to keep track of.</p><p> </p><p>So there you have it. The intent of the rule is to give characters with a low stat or three an extra little quirk without unbalancing the game in any dramatic way. </p><p> </p><p>Please share your thoughts, or any ALTERNATE IDEAS you have that might make playing low-stat characters a bit more interesting.</p><p></p><p><span style="color: darkorange"><strong>Mod Note:</strong> I have removed formatting information that forced this to appear as black text, which made it illegible on the black forum skin. Hope nobody minds. ~Umbran</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Hitcher, post: 6284755, member: 63747"] Okay, so it's my opinion that rolling 3d6 for stats is the way to go. Why? Because I like what the element of chance does for character creation, and I like the idea of flawed heroes - they're just more interesting. And why have a stat range of 3-18 if you're only going to use the top half? The only problem with this approach - and it is a big problem - is that getting a 7 or a 4 for a stat doesn't create a hero that's flawed in any kind of interesting manner. It just creates a character who is slightly (or a lot) worse at hitting the target numbers for their rolls. Now I grant you that this can SOMETIMES be dramatic, when it happens at just the right moment, but mostly it's just kind of annoying: "Oh, if I would have hit if I'd had a slightly higher Strength". See? BORING. So I got to thinking about what could be done to make low stats more interesting and maybe even appealing, and yes, we could tie them into some kind of epic system of custom flaws, but that's way more work than I want to do, and it's not very D&D. So instead I thought "what about a consolation prize?" And here's what I came up with: Dumb Luck. The fact is that lots of fantasy fiction stars heroes who are just as often lucky as they are skilled or strong or smart. The stars align, and they get away with stuff that everyday folk. I think Terry Pratchett's Guards! Guards! says it best (I forget which character actually utters the words): "Million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten." That's how a lot of fiction WORKS. So why not let us have lucky heroes, as well as powerful ones? (Yes, I'm aware that Halflings already have something like this, but let's leave that aside for a moment). So here's the rule: For each point of NEGATIVE MODIFIER a character has against a given Attribute, that character receives one Dumb Luck re-roll PER LEVEL for a check, attack or saving throw made using that Attribute. If their re-roll is successful, that success should always be described as a pure lucky break. This roll only allows the re-roll of a single die - if two dice were rolled for Advantage or Disadvantage, the second die result stands (so a double failure on a Disadvantaged roll won't be helped by the re-roll, for example). That's it. The "per level" thing is a little quirky, but "per day" seems too much, and "per session" is not a very D&D kind of measurement. Per level keeps it all on a, er... level playing field. Shouldn't be too hard to keep track of. So there you have it. The intent of the rule is to give characters with a low stat or three an extra little quirk without unbalancing the game in any dramatic way. Please share your thoughts, or any ALTERNATE IDEAS you have that might make playing low-stat characters a bit more interesting. [color=darkorange][B]Mod Note:[/B] I have removed formatting information that forced this to appear as black text, which made it illegible on the black forum skin. Hope nobody minds. ~Umbran[/color] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Dumb Luck: Reclaiming the Lower Half of the Stat-Spectrum
Top