Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6628769" data-attributes="member: 42582">My 3E experience is limited (when we did play it, we used random rolls as per the book) and PF I haven't played at all. While I believe that class balance overshadows stat imbalance, I'm not sure that's a good rationale for rolling!That said, in Rolemaster games (which have been very close to full-points-buy PC building), we have used high rolled stats as an opportunity to open up boutique build options that otherwise wouldn't be viable (due to MAD), and have used low rolled stats as an excuse to play builds or races that otherwise would be too overpowered. Which I guess is somewhat similar.For me, the mechanical imbalance of power issue isn't connected to linearity or APing (which as you know I am not a big fan of) but is connected to &quot;encounter centric&quot; for a certain reading of encounter: I prioritise mechanical action resolution as a way of working out what happens when the proverbial hits the fan (be that combat, social, exploration), and thereby setting the fictional parameters of what happens next, and having one player systematically disadvantaged relative to another in that respect seems to detract rather than add.If I was playing a character-tree or disposable-PC game, rolling stats might fit right in! But my game is the opposite: for instance, I have two players in my group with whom I've been playing, on average 20+ times per year, for seventeen-and-a-half years, who in that time have played 4 PCs. Another player, who is only a year or two behind them, has played 3 PCs. In those circumstances, I think that a degree of equality of mechanical capability is fairly important!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6628769, member: 42582"] My 3E experience is limited (when we did play it, we used random rolls as per the book) and PF I haven't played at all. While I believe that class balance overshadows stat imbalance, I'm not sure that's a good rationale for rolling! That said, in Rolemaster games (which have been very close to full-points-buy PC building), we have used high rolled stats as an opportunity to open up boutique build options that otherwise wouldn't be viable (due to MAD), and have used low rolled stats as an excuse to play builds or races that otherwise would be too overpowered. Which I guess is somewhat similar. For me, the mechanical imbalance of power issue isn't connected to linearity or APing (which as you know I am not a big fan of) but is connected to "encounter centric" for a certain reading of [I]encounter[/I]: I prioritise mechanical action resolution as a way of working out what happens when the proverbial hits the fan (be that combat, social, exploration), and thereby setting the fictional parameters of what happens next, and having one player systematically disadvantaged relative to another in that respect seems to detract rather than add. If I was playing a character-tree or disposable-PC game, rolling stats might fit right in! But my game is the opposite: for instance, I have two players in my group with whom I've been playing, on average 20+ times per year, for seventeen-and-a-half years, who in that time have played 4 PCs. Another player, who is only a year or two behind them, has played 3 PCs. In those circumstances, I think that a degree of equality of mechanical capability is fairly important! [/QUOTE]

Verification