D&D 5E Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats

[TwoSix]

I've seen lots of them. You should choose better people to game with.

Even if they are fudging their rolls, it's immaterial. If someone has a rolling standard that allows a 3-18 range, they're implicitly saying they don't think a set of rolls like 18-18-16-15-14-14 is game breaking. If they thought it was game-breaking, they would use a system where there was 0% chance of it happening, not 0.1%.

 

[Oofta]

My statement had nothing to do with rolling. You claimed an equal footing is good. I'm saying that an equal footing is a pipe dream that doesn't exist with arrays or point buys.

Once again, I've never said all characters should be "equal". I want PCs to have an even starting point. That's not a pipe dream, it's a simple fact that point buy comes closer to achieving that goal than semi random ability scores.

You like people to start with semi random ability scores which can have a dramatic impact on the effectiveness of their character build. I don't get it, but it's your preference. So be it.

In other words, you like rolling for ability scores, I prefer point buy. There's nothing else new here.

 

[Caliban]

It's not a complaint unless he's complaining. Stating a reason why you prefer one over the other is an explanation, not a complaint. If I say, I prefer rolling because it's more realistic and that point buy/arrays are very unrealistic, which I hate, there's no complaint there. There's nothing about the situation which is unsatisfactory or unacceptable, as I can use rolling which IS satisfactory and acceptable. Now, if rolling wasn't an option and he came here saying that he hates point buy, THEN it would be a complaint.

com·plaint
kəmˈplānt/Submit
noun
1.
a statement that a situation is unsatisfactory or unacceptable.

Glad you agree with me then.

But they are NOT clones! They do NOT all have exactly 16 intelligence! I absolutely hate this about point-buy!

The only games I get to play are AL.

Point-buy is better than no game. I understand why organised play requires equality in a way that home games do not.

 

[Arial Black]

After 100 pages of it? Yes.

Most of the length of the thread can be directly attributed to you.

So, nothing to do with those posters to whom I am replying, nor with those who reply to me?

 

[Caliban]

So, nothing to do with those posters to whom I am replying, nor with those who reply to me?

"Most", not all. And you replying and others responding to you would be things attributable to you.

 

[Arial Black]

Nope. Saying "I hate this thing about point buy" is complaining about point buy (which Arial did, and I called them on). Continually extolling the supposed virtues of one over the other propaganda.

In post #80, Oofta wrote, "If forced stat randomness is the only option and the DM will not budge, politely decline and start up you own campaign. It's what I would do".

Oofta states that he would rather have no game at all than play 5E where the DM's character creation rules involve rolling stats. I've stated that although I prefer rolling I will use point-buy if rolling is not allowed, because that is better than not playing.

Yet YOU characterise what I write as 'complaining about point-buy' while not saying a thing about Oofta 'complaining about rolling'.

YOU accuse me of 'spouting propaganda' for extolling the virtues of rolling, and giving my opinion on why I like rolling and don't like point-buy.

Yet YOU say nothing at all when Oofta extols the virtues of point-buy, or when he gives his opinions about why he likes point-buy and hates rolling so much he refuses to play in a game that uses it!

Why the double standard?

 

[Caliban]

In post #80, Oofta wrote, "If forced stat randomness is the only option and the DM will not budge, politely decline and start up you own campaign. It's what I would do".

Oofta states that he would rather have no game at all than play 5E where the DM's character creation rules involve rolling stats. I've stated that although I prefer rolling I will use point-buy if rolling is not allowed, because that is better than not playing.

Yet YOU characterise what I write as 'complaining about point-buy' while not saying a thing about Oofta 'complaining about rolling'.

YOU accuse me of 'spouting propaganda' for extolling the virtues of rolling, and giving my opinion on why I like rolling and don't like point-buy.

Yet YOU say nothing at all when Oofta extols the virtues of point-buy, or when he gives his opinions about why he likes point-buy and hates rolling so much he refuses to play in a game that uses it!

Why the double standard?

Translation: "He's on to me! Deflect! Deflect!"

But to give your question more attention than it deserves: Oofta states up front he has a personal preference and doesn't pretend otherwise. He also doesn't have a problem with other people preferring to roll their stats.

You state all your preferences as absolute truths, and imply that point buy is inherently inferior whenever anyone says that is what they prefer (and yet it is also all you play - so how would you know? Nostalgia?). And you go on...and on...and on... about it. It's just tiresome.

 

[Arial Black]

"Most", not all. And you replying and others responding to you would be things attributable to you.

Like Oofta, I have contributed to this thread since page 1. Why is the length of this thread my fault but not his?

Oofta and I started replying to each other originally when I disputed his seeming assertion that one of the benefits of point-buy is that this method lets players play whatever concept they want. So, according to YOUR logic, me replying to what Oofta wrote must be his fault. Right?

Again, why the double standard?

 

[Caliban]

Like Oofta, I have contributed to this thread since page 1. Why is the length of this thread my fault but not his?

Oofta and I started replying to each other originally when I disputed his seeming assertion that one of the benefits of point-buy is that this method lets players play whatever concept they want. So, according to YOUR logic, me replying to what Oofta wrote must be his fault. Right?

Again, why the double standard?

No double standard. Just more attempts to deflect on your part.

 

[Arial Black]

Translation: "He's on to me! Deflect! Deflect!"

But to give your question more attention than it deserves: Oofta states up front he has a personal preference and doesn't pretend otherwise. He also doesn't have a problem with other people preferring to roll their stats.

You state all your preferences as absolute truths, and imply that point buy is inherently inferior whenever anyone says that is what they prefer (and yet it is also all you play - so how would you know? Nostalgia?). And you go on...and on...and on... about it. It's just tiresome.

Oofta and I are each doing the exact same thing: arguing our case in this debate.

A neutral observer could not see two people debating and declare that only one of the two was at fault on the grounds that he is engaging in debate!

Conclusion: you are not a neutral observer.

It's okay to take sides in the debate. It's not okay to pretend to be a neutral observer when you are not.