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
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats
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="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7235563" data-attributes="member: 6799649"><p>Okay, step by step:-</p><p></p><p>* whatever ability scores a creature has can only be understood in the context of the scores of other creatures in the world. To illustrate this, let's say you're picking up an RPG you have never played or heard of before. You skim the rules, and come across the stat block of an NPC. That NPC has a Strength score of 27. Is 27 good or bad? Is it weakest possible (ability scores are generated on 25 + 2d10)? Is it fairly weak (1d100 for each stat)? Average (1d%/2)? High (10 + 2d10)? Superheroic (3d6)? You cannot possibly tell, unless you have context. In D&D, now and always, the context is that the 'normal' population's scores are represented by the 3d6 bell curve, and the method used to generate the ability scores of PC's (whatever method that might be) is deliberately skewed to give higher results <em>in the context of that bell curve</em>.</p><p></p><p>* although the underlying assumption was (and remains) that bell curve, games have evolved techniques to make the DM's life easier. The DM doesn't <em>need</em> to pre-generate 20,000 NPCs whenever the party reach a new city(!), he can just invent 'reasonable' stats for NPCs the party meet on the fly; 'reasonable' in the context of that bell curve. These other methods of generating NPCs did not replace the background assumption of that bell curve, they <em>assume</em> that bell curve <em>to this day!</em> Even the stat block of the commoner in the 5E MM reflects that bell curve, as are the stats for every NPC in that section, where their stats are judged (good or bad or average?) in the context of that bell curve. In fact, the bell curve is <strong>so</strong> ingrained into the structure of D&D that the writer of the rules assumes that <em>we all already understand this</em> so he feels no need to explain it!</p><p></p><p>* since the general population is assumed to be the bell curve, then any valid character concept must fall within that bell curve, or be measured against it, with credible explanations for stats that go beyond it. This also works the other way: any arrangement of six scores from 3 to 18 <em>is a valid character concept</em>, for PCs and NPCs. Any PC stat generating method that takes away any of those possible scores from 3 to 18 also takes away the concepts that go with those scores.</p><p></p><p>* another consequence of the bell curve is that all creatures are <strong>not</strong> created equal! Any method that makes all PCs equal not only takes away the vast majority of valid concepts but also has sacrificed realism on the alter of game balance.</p><p></p><p>Although sacrificing realism for game balance <strong>is</strong> a valid choice, and a valid personal preference, what it most definitely is <strong>not</strong> is a method that 'allows players to play the concept they want', since it denies the vast majority of valid concepts.</p><p></p><p><em>That</em> is the source of this part of the discussion. It's not that anyone's preference is a problem, it's that some claims made about a particular method are demonstrably not true.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arial Black, post: 7235563, member: 6799649"] Okay, step by step:- * whatever ability scores a creature has can only be understood in the context of the scores of other creatures in the world. To illustrate this, let's say you're picking up an RPG you have never played or heard of before. You skim the rules, and come across the stat block of an NPC. That NPC has a Strength score of 27. Is 27 good or bad? Is it weakest possible (ability scores are generated on 25 + 2d10)? Is it fairly weak (1d100 for each stat)? Average (1d%/2)? High (10 + 2d10)? Superheroic (3d6)? You cannot possibly tell, unless you have context. In D&D, now and always, the context is that the 'normal' population's scores are represented by the 3d6 bell curve, and the method used to generate the ability scores of PC's (whatever method that might be) is deliberately skewed to give higher results [i]in the context of that bell curve[/i]. * although the underlying assumption was (and remains) that bell curve, games have evolved techniques to make the DM's life easier. The DM doesn't [i]need[/i] to pre-generate 20,000 NPCs whenever the party reach a new city(!), he can just invent 'reasonable' stats for NPCs the party meet on the fly; 'reasonable' in the context of that bell curve. These other methods of generating NPCs did not replace the background assumption of that bell curve, they [i]assume[/i] that bell curve [i]to this day![/i] Even the stat block of the commoner in the 5E MM reflects that bell curve, as are the stats for every NPC in that section, where their stats are judged (good or bad or average?) in the context of that bell curve. In fact, the bell curve is [b]so[/b] ingrained into the structure of D&D that the writer of the rules assumes that [i]we all already understand this[/i] so he feels no need to explain it! * since the general population is assumed to be the bell curve, then any valid character concept must fall within that bell curve, or be measured against it, with credible explanations for stats that go beyond it. This also works the other way: any arrangement of six scores from 3 to 18 [i]is a valid character concept[/i], for PCs and NPCs. Any PC stat generating method that takes away any of those possible scores from 3 to 18 also takes away the concepts that go with those scores. * another consequence of the bell curve is that all creatures are [b]not[/b] created equal! Any method that makes all PCs equal not only takes away the vast majority of valid concepts but also has sacrificed realism on the alter of game balance. Although sacrificing realism for game balance [b]is[/b] a valid choice, and a valid personal preference, what it most definitely is [b]not[/b] is a method that 'allows players to play the concept they want', since it denies the vast majority of valid concepts. [i]That[/i] is the source of this part of the discussion. It's not that anyone's preference is a problem, it's that some claims made about a particular method are demonstrably not true. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Point Buy vs Rolling for Stats
Top