Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8387049" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I've never seen or heard of anyone doing that, but I'm sure they exist. They are likely worried about the mechanical swing of rolled stats unbalancing the game. I would say that they would be far better served finding a rolling ruleset that flattens to the curve to prevent that swing, rather than outright banning it. There are many many rolling systems, and I'm sure one of them is designed with that in mind.No, not even close, and you know it. Being able to have two classes at level 1 is MASSIVELY overpowered. Such a PC would overshadow every other character at the table. This does not happen with taking the standard array. In fact, if you take the standard array and someone else rolls well, you are likely to be weaker than them. This is why WoTC made both options standard. You can try the false equivalence game all you want, but most things you are going to try and pull are going to be pure power increases, and the Standard Array is not. Ah right, my apologies. I was misremembering your position on the Druid. That one is my bad.As long as no one who wants to have different fun tries to go to your table, then you kick them, because they aren't conforming to your fun.So, someone comes to your table wanting to use Thieves Cant, which you think is dumb and you don't like, and you are fine with it. Someone comes to your table wanting to use the standard array, which you think is dumb and you don't like, and you are going to ask them to leave because the only fun allowed at your table is rolling stats. This is part of my issue Max, this is just an arbitrary decision you made, something I know personally has impacted friends (not at your table specifically) and there is no reason for it. None. There is no reason not to allow the standard array. It constantly just comes down to "I personally like rolling stats" but the PHB specifically offered the array for people who DON'T like rolling stats. It isn't an option for you, you weren't their intended audience, and yet you've decided that anyone who doesn't like randomized stats isn't welcome at your table, because you have more fun with rolled stats. It just comes across as incredibly selfish.And it does, that is the 10% of the player base. Saying that about half of all people will use one of two options isn't assuming any "specific" individual is using the array, it is assuming the array is being used by part of the player base. Now, this is obviously not the most accurate data, but when they were designing the game and had 0 players because it wasn't released, this is exactly the type of assumptions they would have worked from. Apporximately 90% of the player base is going to have a 15 before racial ASI.Well, since they never once state that any of the rules are "realistic" how about I do some quick equivalence instead. You say that rolling is realistic (the game does not, it makes no comment on how realistic rolling is. This is your personal assumption). The Devs said that the array is equal to rolling in basically all ways. There was no commentary on it being different in any way other than being less random for the specific individual character. Therefore, it should be equally realistic. Just like every Monster having identical stats. It is simply an abstraction to move the game along.So, you are going to call on "realism" by lightly referencing the real world. I show you that the real world doesn't conform to your "realism" and I'm wrong because there is an extreme end of the spectrum? The point is that you are clinging to a very specific part of that continuum, and making bold claims based entirely upon how "real" it is, but it isn't real. And if it isn't real, and that level of realism isn't impacted by simply letting things shift slightly, then claiming we can't change it because it wouldn't be "real" any more is a bit of nonsense.</blockquote>

Verification