Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 6625429" data-attributes="member: 15700">OK, I think I need to repeat myself a bit because you both seem to be ignoring it.  Let's break this down.  What exactly is "better mechanically" or "impacts play significantly"?  A +1 bonus?  A +2 bonus?  Because that's all you're going to get if you take the risk to roll vs. array or point by.  You also will most likely have extra -'s as well, which you keep ignoring.  But anyway, let's just set that very relevant point aside for now.  Even if you ignore that very important fact, right now you have the same thing in point buy and array.  I gave examples earlier.  In my array game right now, the two fighters have different bonuses to hit and damage and have since creation based on the choices of array distribution and race.  That +1 difference between the two has no impact to gameplay, encounter building, whatever in the game.  So disparity already exists no matter which method you use.  It also happens whenever a PC finds an item that either increases an ability score or increases a bonus.  It is indisputable fact that the game assumes PCs will have different values in their bonuses/penalties.Choosing how to distribute your array or point buy, and choosing which race to play are also choices.  It's all a choice.I said this to Hussar earlier when he tried the same strawman.  I'm making no judgements about what type of games you like or don't like.  And I'm not saying my style is better than yours.  It's actually you guys who are arguing that one (random chargen) is worse than the other.  In fact, I've stated from the beginning that the two styles more often than not end up with similar results.  Some times one ends up mechanically better than the other, and vice versa.  What I am saying is that the arguments I'm seeing for why random chargen is bad seems to be coming down to sour grapes or jealousy.  Why?  Let's look at the arguments:1. I don't like one PC having a significant mechanical advantage over another  2. I have to change encounter balance when one PC is mechanically better than the other.3. I am being punished because another PC has a higher stat4. It is not fair for another PC to have a higher stat  (these last two aren't necessarily in this thread, but in other threads that sparked this one)Let's look at the objective factual data1. The vast majority of time, random roll will not grant a PC additional variation in modifiers outside of array or point buy, and when it does, it's just as likely to have lower modifiers as well2. Attribute modifier variance exists in all three methods currently due to player choice of distribution and race selection3. The game assumes variation in modifiers from one PC to the next alreadyThose three factual points all disprove argument 1 and 2 right off unless you're talking about a variance of maybe a +4/5 difference, and even then it's still pretty subjective as to what the impact is.  Also, the chances of that actually happening in random vs array are so remote that they likely won't ever happen.For argument 3, that's just not what punishment means, as I explained in the very first post of this thread.For #4, people are confusing "fair" with "lucky".  They mean different things.  If everyone is treated the same, given the same choices and opportunities, then they are being treated fairly.  Like I keep saying that keeps getting ignored, if me and Bob are both given $1000 and I put mine in the bank and Bob invests his in a risky venture and doubles it, I'm not being treated unfairly.  That's just silly to think or say that, and if I did, it would only be because of my sour grapes or jealousy.So....this all begs the question of both of you.  Since variation already exists in all methods, and I'm assuming you don't make all your PCs have the same modifiers for everything, why do you still steadfastly argue that random gen is bad when it doesn't result in any more variation than what currently is there?  What exactly is this "significant difference" look like?  Because from where I'm sitting, just the thought that another PC might have an extra +1 is what you don't like.  It doesn't impact balance, or overall game play, or anything like that because there are so many factors that impact modifiers throughout the game that mathematically an additional +1 is incredibly minor.  Just that someone else might be a little better overall is what chaps your hide and you can't have that.  Nevermind the fact that the PC most likely also has an additional "-" or lower value in another stat than your PC (because that's how statistics works).So yeah, when someone adamantly sticks to an argument that easily breaks down upon scrutiny, that rings of sour grapes or jealousy to me.  I said it earlier.  99% of the time you wouldn't even know the other PC had a higher stat unless you looked at their sheet or did the reverse math on their die rolls.  And that's the exact same behavior of little Jimmy measuring the pie slices to make sure they were exactly the same.  As my mom used to say, and as I say to my kids, "Worry about yourself, and stop worrying about him."Besides, D&D is a team game.  This attitude of PC vs PC competition (no one can be better than me) is toxic, IMO, because it breed resentment.  PCs are supposed to help each other, and be glad when something good happens to another.  Not get upset because your PC didn't roll as high.  It's the exact same with random HP rolls.  There's a big difference between:"I don't like random HP rolls because I want the sure thing and I don't want to take the risk or mathematically taking 6 on a d10 always is better"and"Random HP rolls are bad because I rolled a 4 for HP and Joe rolled an 8.  That's not fair."</blockquote>

Verification