Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9379995" data-attributes="member: 7635">We didn't play Basic very long; 2e became our core system and when it did, we learned you were screwed when your scores weren't Uber. Warriors lost out on a key feature (exceptional strength) if you didn't roll an 18 strength. Wizards and priests could not reach the highest level of spells and wizards had a bad chance of failure in gaining me spells (and a hard limit on how many they could learn) if their Int wasn't exceptional. On the other end, Rogues needed high Dex bonuses to thief skills if they wanted anything better than a minimal chance to succeed doing their class functions. (And as discussed in the rogue thread, most thief skills came with harsh riders, so you needed every % you could get). If you intended to survive to and play beyond 5th level, you needed super scores and HP. Otherwise, you were dead PC walking because even if your 14 Int wizard survived to name level, you were never going to have the high spell levels or spell selection to meet those challenges. So making sure you had necessary scores was to make sure you were pulling your weight. Bob the wizard with a 14 Int and 9 HP at 5th level was a liability and an XP sponge. Pull your weight or retire and open a ration store. And it was just assumed you did. Everyone did. The other players did, the DM knew you did and he would do it when it was his turn to play. And it wasn't like TSR was shy about showing NPCs and pre gens with sky high scores. Or allowing infinite rerolls and point customization in Baldur's Gate and other D&D games. It was practically encouraged to have high scores. So we rolled 4d6 , dropped the lowest, and rolled until we got a set of scores that worked. And it broke, finally, when 3e pushed point buy and fixed HP in RPGA and that resolved the issue of needing super high scores and cheating to stay competitive. It was a weight relief from everyone that la costra nostra was gone. So you can get off your high horse about it. I was there and I saw how multiple groups interpreted it and I'm glad it's gone. You like it? Fine. But don't tell me it's better objectively or otherwise. I would never go back to it again.</blockquote>

Verification