Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6628234" data-attributes="member: 6787650">It may be statistically equivalent and also equitable (equitable: &quot;fair and impartial&quot;; fair, just, impartial, even-handed, unbiased, unprejudiced, egalitarian) by some definitions of &quot;fair&quot; including the one I'd use. That doesn't make it a good idea. Mathematically, rolling saving throws for the players is equivalent to letting them roll their own, but I don't think many players like having the DM roll their saves for them. It feels like stepping on the player's toes, and especially in this case, the players are likely IMO to feel that the experience is a bit cheapened by you having rolled these stats for them. But maybe not--if they asked you to roll their stats for them (as I have done with some DMs) to remove any possible suspicions of cheating, then the players would be fine with it. I would, anyway, and if I got the 12 and under set I'd play either a Moon Druid or a Sorlock, because either one can be fun with low initial stats. (Cha 9 for a warlock would be pushing it--I have a Cha 9 sorcerer in my current game, now Cha 11 due to ASI, and while he is playable, his niche is narrower than it could be with better stats. He throws a lot of Magic Missiles for example because Cha doesn't affect them. If all stats were 9 and under I would definitely make a Moon Druid instead of a Sorlock because Cha 9 goes past my personal boundaries of where fun is.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6628234, member: 6787650"] It may be statistically equivalent and also equitable (equitable: "fair and impartial"; fair, just, impartial, even-handed, unbiased, unprejudiced, egalitarian) by some definitions of "fair" including the one I'd use. That doesn't make it a good idea. Mathematically, rolling saving throws [I]for[/I] the players is equivalent to letting them roll their own, but I don't think many players like having the DM roll their saves for them. It feels like stepping on the player's toes, and especially in this case, the players are likely IMO to feel that the experience is a bit cheapened by you having rolled these stats for them. But maybe not--if they [I]asked[/I] you to roll their stats for them (as I have done with some DMs) to remove any possible suspicions of cheating, then the players would be fine with it. I would, anyway, and if I got the 12 and under set I'd play either a Moon Druid or a Sorlock, because either one can be fun with low initial stats. ([B]Cha 9[/B] for a warlock would be pushing it--I have a Cha 9 sorcerer in my current game, now Cha 11 due to ASI, and while he is playable, his niche is narrower than it could be with better stats. He throws a lot of Magic Missiles for example because Cha doesn't affect them. If all stats were 9 and under I would definitely make a Moon Druid instead of a Sorlock because Cha 9 goes past my personal boundaries of where fun is.) [/QUOTE]

Verification