Search results

Let's try to go back before the word game bull**** and start over. I put a list of three things that I want out of stat generation, two of them specific and concrete enough to have a discussion about. I haven't really heard specific and concrete reasons in favor of rolling stats, not in the...

Mostly because weapons and armor. There are no Dex weapons that are 2 handed. If you want a Polearm or to roll 2d6 for damage, you pretty much need strength As for armor, heavy armor has the edge, and it scales faster since it doesn't require 20 in a stat for max AC.

And now, semantics over semantics. Wow.

The books don't exist in a vacuum, remember the two year playtest that preceded them. The books exist in that larger context.

If you find the difference stats make to be minor, I don't think you're really playing the game as other people. Again with the semantics.

Semantics, really? Come back with a real argument some time.

I've been thinking of taking Resilient Con at level 1 instead of PAM due to it being spoiled to me that there is a +2 Greatsword in Strahd.

Sorcerer 1 loses heavy armor and I have Dex 8 because of MAD. Been thinking of taking a Sorcerer dip early otherwise though. Maybe at level 3.

I've never encountered specifically this at a gaming table, I have encountered it during conversations at FLGS and conventions with other gamers. I think different tastes lead different people to different tables, but a lot of times the local gaming community and certainly a gaming con is bigger...

The argument isn't that the olds shouldn't be able to play their game, but that the system shouldn't validate the preferences of the olds above others, and that for a lot of the olds, the system excluding or discouraging what they don't want in the game is as important as or imperative to being...

To put it more specifically, I refuse to accept that a table being ok with a bad system(one where the results need to be discarded/fudged/cheated to generate acceptable results) has any real meaning to anybody outside that table.

You are using a much different sense of the word cheating in this specific instance. For my purposes, the method should work. If the method of used honestly has a high failure rate and some sort of "cheat" is necessary IMO it's a bad method. If you have to discard the results a lot of the time...

Depends on your definition of cheating. For the purpose of goal #3, "house rules" as you've called them in this thread amount to cheating(though only for the purpose of goal #3) and in almost all cases don't assure #1.

What I want from stat generation is three basic things: 1. Power balance where one PC isn't more powerful than another 2. Stat generation results in characters that live up to player expectations 3. Cheating isn't required to assure 1 and 2 Rolling 4d6 drop lowest arrange to taste doesn't...

If every character had the same lowest stat, as far as I'm concerned it results in the same thing. It's a disadvantage the array, point buy, and rolling to taste all share. If a specific concept or mechanical optimization is being built toward, the six stats will be arranged from highest to...

Roll X and arrange the results to taste would have resulted in something similar, with everybody putting their lowest roll into Intelligence.

Not if "more weight must be given to 'traditional' D&D as it was before 3E" is one of the premises.

During my optimization research, I was told repeatedly that there is a point in 5E where the casters begin to dominate, but it was never specifically described when that was.

Latitude sounds about right. I was never really on board with the AD&D God-DM concept.

The range was about the same, but I'd say the game worked better outside(above) that range than previous editions.