GenghisDon
First Post
I go with old 1e AD&D stats for 4e. Standard 4d6, best 3 is a bit weak for 4e. I add the old caveat of 2 15+ also are needed. 4d6 any order OR 3d6 6 times, but in order.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Method 3's average character
- Thread starter Particle_Man
- Start date
Particle_Man
Explorer
GURPS has a points system (you don't roll your stats) but combat is very lethal.
TOON has rolled stats but you simply cannot die.
If you want a more lethal, "back to basics", rolled system I would recommend Labyrinth Lord or Swords and Wizardry or OSRIC, but since each is a free download I worry that you might object to one or more of them as too much like communism.
You could buy the 1991 Rules Cyclopedia for Dungeons and Dragons off of E-bay for some money, so that should satisfy all of your gaming and capitalist needs.
Dice rolls are used for randomization, for encounters and such.
Randomization in permanent characteristics can lead to a permanent imbalance.
Since the 2.0E days, we had used 18-16-14-12-10-08 as starting stats, which is equal to a 22 point buy-in with the two +2 increases you get in 4.0E.
For HP, we used d12=7, d10=6, d8=5, d6=4 & d4=3.
Does that make me a communist?
Randomization in permanent characteristics can lead to a permanent imbalance.
Since the 2.0E days, we had used 18-16-14-12-10-08 as starting stats, which is equal to a 22 point buy-in with the two +2 increases you get in 4.0E.
For HP, we used d12=7, d10=6, d8=5, d6=4 & d4=3.
Does that make me a communist?
Marshall
First Post
No, no, no. You've got your Marx's mixed up. This reminds you of Groucho Marx..
keterys
First Post
I've a couple times used a card method for random stats that I liked - it ensures that everyone has the same raw pool of possibility, but it's not completely set.
I don't remember the exact details I went with since it's been a few years since we used it, , and there's a fair amount of customization possible, but it involved something like
A) take 2 6s, 4 5s, 4 4s, 4 3s, 2 2s *, shuffled well, and set aside 1 2 and 2 Aces
B) set 6 stat piles (you can declare them in advance or not) and deal the cards out into six piles
C) Reveal the cards. Starting at a base of 6*, add any cards in the stack to an absolute maximum of 18*. Discard cards that would lead you to exceed that value.
D) Take the cards set aside in the beginning and add them onto the stacks. You may add a maximum of (one/two/three) cards to one stat, and 18 is the maximum allowed.
* Adjust higher and lower for the numbers you want. You might want more cards, with a lower base, but require a minimum of 1 or 2 cards each, for instance.
I don't remember the exact details I went with since it's been a few years since we used it, , and there's a fair amount of customization possible, but it involved something like
A) take 2 6s, 4 5s, 4 4s, 4 3s, 2 2s *, shuffled well, and set aside 1 2 and 2 Aces
B) set 6 stat piles (you can declare them in advance or not) and deal the cards out into six piles
C) Reveal the cards. Starting at a base of 6*, add any cards in the stack to an absolute maximum of 18*. Discard cards that would lead you to exceed that value.
D) Take the cards set aside in the beginning and add them onto the stacks. You may add a maximum of (one/two/three) cards to one stat, and 18 is the maximum allowed.
* Adjust higher and lower for the numbers you want. You might want more cards, with a lower base, but require a minimum of 1 or 2 cards each, for instance.
LuckyAdrastus
First Post
Ah yes, that's it! Considering my failure to join the actual, you know, fight, I'm reminded of Groucho's famous line (somewhat reworked).
"I don't care to belong to any adventuring party that would have me as a member."
Dr_Ruminahui
First Post
For what its worth, I had my players do the "roll 4D6, choose 3" method, with the ability to opt to use point buy instead if they didn't like their rolls. 2 players ended up using point buy, with 3 using the rolls they made.
It makes for a nice balance - only 1 player has an 18 for a stat (the point buy wizard, whose racial bonus [eladrin] bumped it up to 20), the dice rollers only getting as high as 17s plus racial bonuses, with much more variety in their other stats as well.
It does feel (to me) that the dice rollers have somewhat better characters, but its not anything I've heard any of the players complain about. Additionally, it does mean that the group average for stats is likely somewhat higher than what 20 points of point buy would get them, but given that we don't play very often and my treasure allocation has been a bit wierd (no holy symbols given until level 4 was the main thing), it seems to work fine.
It makes for a nice balance - only 1 player has an 18 for a stat (the point buy wizard, whose racial bonus [eladrin] bumped it up to 20), the dice rollers only getting as high as 17s plus racial bonuses, with much more variety in their other stats as well.
It does feel (to me) that the dice rollers have somewhat better characters, but its not anything I've heard any of the players complain about. Additionally, it does mean that the group average for stats is likely somewhat higher than what 20 points of point buy would get them, but given that we don't play very often and my treasure allocation has been a bit wierd (no holy symbols given until level 4 was the main thing), it seems to work fine.
Particle_Man
Explorer
Well, you gave us a 2-3 split. And it is sort of a self-selection process. Those that roll up equal or worse characters would switch to the point buy method (to gain customization + at least equal stats), leaving only "kept" rolled characters that are at least somewhat better than point buy.
Dr_Ruminahui
First Post
Very true - I didn't say I was surprised by the fact that the people who kept their rolls seem to be better - indeed, that's to be expected.
Rather, I'm more surprised that those who went with point buy don't feel any worse off. As such, whatever imbalance there might have been, I can't really complain as my players all seem happy.
Now, things might have been different if our one optimizer (and by this I mean the one guy who takes feets/powers purely for their game advantages) hadn't rolled well for his stats.
Rather, I'm more surprised that those who went with point buy don't feel any worse off. As such, whatever imbalance there might have been, I can't really complain as my players all seem happy.
Now, things might have been different if our one optimizer (and by this I mean the one guy who takes feets/powers purely for their game advantages) hadn't rolled well for his stats.
doggywoggy
First Post
GRoucho...that's the name of my next Toon!!
hehe, I remember that from a woody allen movie (I'm a huge fan). That was a funny story about being stuck out of combat though. It really does suck for non wizards in other editions though...that's why I play one. Honestly the other classes are dull as doornails to play in combat. In regular RP, stats don't really matter as much. A lot of DMs will give out good pluses and bonuses for a well-layed out argument to an NPC.
IMO, as a lot you seem to be saying (as far as I understand it), is that the balance for rolling badly should be : your character will likely die sooner rather than later, so that the next one (hopefully stronger) will survive. You know, survival of the min-maxiest. Within reason of course. Make the characters heroic compared to farmers but amongst themselves, there are heroes and then there are SUPER HEROES. Just plainly gifted by providence. It's unfair and that's tough. HardTack and Brine for you, sir! I like the unpredictability of having dice make certain selections for me in life that I wouldn't normally have chosen. You know: I really wanted to be an olympic athlete but my low constitution and tenacious love of optimization led me to become a videogame programmer instead. (an example that I'm sure everyone here can relate to : you can't always get what you want, so make some lemonade).
In 2nd ed, you had to have a lot of prereqs to be a ranger and a pally to even QUALIFY for entry into the class. This often led to weaker STR-scores because you needed to keep a decent cha 14 or so, if I remember correctly. Looking over the Hybrid rules, from a purely mechanical POV it makes sense, but from a logic POV (really, religion should be free or mandatory...it's a by-product of a power-gamer combat-centric view of skills that ignores all others than should be dreamt of in 4e philosophy), some of the tradeoffs suck. Ok, I'm digressing because the port-wine is floweth.
My next toon I will beg my DM for a "The dice decides if I will take this class or that class". If I have multiple 18s, another Paladin or MAD-class! if I have weaker, then something with only one main stat but focus on something flavor-ful and not munchkin-ey. Everyone in this world had ONE thing they can probably do really, reall well, if they take the time and effort to find out what it is. You could be a legendary desk clerk that changes the entire outcome of the dragon war just by analyzing the stats about how much food they consume, and hide all the surface-dwelling cattle in a "scortched earth policy", making it impossible to sustain the siege for long. And then you win.
hehe, I remember that from a woody allen movie (I'm a huge fan). That was a funny story about being stuck out of combat though. It really does suck for non wizards in other editions though...that's why I play one. Honestly the other classes are dull as doornails to play in combat. In regular RP, stats don't really matter as much. A lot of DMs will give out good pluses and bonuses for a well-layed out argument to an NPC.
IMO, as a lot you seem to be saying (as far as I understand it), is that the balance for rolling badly should be : your character will likely die sooner rather than later, so that the next one (hopefully stronger) will survive. You know, survival of the min-maxiest. Within reason of course. Make the characters heroic compared to farmers but amongst themselves, there are heroes and then there are SUPER HEROES. Just plainly gifted by providence. It's unfair and that's tough. HardTack and Brine for you, sir! I like the unpredictability of having dice make certain selections for me in life that I wouldn't normally have chosen. You know: I really wanted to be an olympic athlete but my low constitution and tenacious love of optimization led me to become a videogame programmer instead. (an example that I'm sure everyone here can relate to : you can't always get what you want, so make some lemonade).
In 2nd ed, you had to have a lot of prereqs to be a ranger and a pally to even QUALIFY for entry into the class. This often led to weaker STR-scores because you needed to keep a decent cha 14 or so, if I remember correctly. Looking over the Hybrid rules, from a purely mechanical POV it makes sense, but from a logic POV (really, religion should be free or mandatory...it's a by-product of a power-gamer combat-centric view of skills that ignores all others than should be dreamt of in 4e philosophy), some of the tradeoffs suck. Ok, I'm digressing because the port-wine is floweth.
My next toon I will beg my DM for a "The dice decides if I will take this class or that class". If I have multiple 18s, another Paladin or MAD-class! if I have weaker, then something with only one main stat but focus on something flavor-ful and not munchkin-ey. Everyone in this world had ONE thing they can probably do really, reall well, if they take the time and effort to find out what it is. You could be a legendary desk clerk that changes the entire outcome of the dragon war just by analyzing the stats about how much food they consume, and hide all the surface-dwelling cattle in a "scortched earth policy", making it impossible to sustain the siege for long. And then you win.
Last edited:
