Fairness Point-Buy and rolls other than stats

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

You only get to roll for stats once, but you get to roll for attacks, Spellcraft, etc multiple times. Those should even out in the end.

Technically, this means that rolling for hit points isn't fair, either, since you only get to roll those once per level.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Technically, this means that rolling for hit points isn't fair, either, since you only get to roll those once per level.

Hence why I give maximum HP at first level and average (per DMG) every level after that.

 

[Hejdun]

The DM does have to step in every now and then (ie stats too low or too high? Reroll!).

Ok, but if you are going to moderate the rolls for the sake of fairness, why not use a system that is inherently fair in the first place?

 

[haiiro]

Forget dice, forget point buy. Let the players choose their ability scores. If you can't trust the players to do this and still allow everyone to have fun, then you might need new players.

Crothian, this intrigues me -- but I do have a couple of questions. Since you're usually pretty direct, I assume you're serious about this.

- How long have you used this method in your games?
- What did you do before you settled on this method?
- Have you had any problems arise as a result of players picking stats?
- If you're running a game at the moment, would you mind posting the PCs' stats here? (Just the attributes, not their whole sheets.)

Thanks in advance.

 

[ergeheilalt]

I love random stats. Rolling up random stats often serve to provide inspiration when assigning class, race, skills, etc. I understand that some people find the stat rolling can be "unfair" for those who have a stroke of luck with a few 18's and the poor fellow who ends up with 6's and a couple 3's.

A friend of mine brought a good idea to my attension. Its a 6x6 matrix pattern that everyone is able to roll up. Rolling 4d6 and dropping the lowest (3d6 for low power games) 36. Then select a row for you PC and you assign your abilities in that order. Random, yet balancing in a way that allows people to have high scores with about the same frequency as another player.

There have been few complaints since I have instituted this meathod, but almost uniform characters, with one high score, a couple mediums, a few regulars, and one or two -1's.

Erge

 

[Ace]

Forget dice, forget point buy. Let the players choose their ability scores. If you can't trust the players to do this and still allow everyone to have fun, then you might need new players.

Well said! I feel exactly the same way

 

[Mercule]

Forget dice, forget point buy. Let the players choose their ability scores. If you can't trust the players to do this and still allow everyone to have fun, then you might need new players.

Because experience has taught me that, even when everyone wants to play fair, some people want a higher-powered character/game than others, or that different people (especially those converting frmo 2E to 3E for the first time) view what makes a "cool" stat differently. Point buy ensures, basically, that everyone is using the same ruler.

As to the original question(s):

1) I prefer point buy because a) it ensures the characters are balanced between themselves; and b) it allows greater control in transferring your vision to paper.

2) I like dice in play vs. not at creation because a) character creation pretty much affects _everything_ that follows; b) I like to see character _concepts_ rather than "hey, a high strength, I'll be a Fighter"; and c) dice during play represent a whole slew of variables that we don't want to deal with narratively, like timing of blows, moist/slick patches on the ground, a glint of sunlight in the eye, sneezing at an inopportune moment, and the like.

I may have other reasons, but nothing else leaps immediately to mind.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Roll? Point buy?

My first 3e game was choose your own stats. My PC ended up with a 14, 16, 12, 17, 10, 13. I loved that character, and played in fear of his death for 12 levels. (And he did die once.)

I've also played in a game that was point-buy, but without the weighted scores. (i.e. an 18 cost 18 points, a 5 cost 5 points.) This variation's good for promoting specialists instead of PCs with all 14's, since there's no penalty for putting more points into really high scores. But it maintains the even playing-field of point-buy.

Recently I rolled up a PC. The DM had us roll in order for our stats, 3d6 per stat, plus 6d6 that we could assign to stats as we wished to weight certain stats over others. I wanted a paladin, so I rolled 4d6 for strength, 3d6 dex, 4d6 con, 3d6 int, 4d6 wis, and 6d6 cha. It worked well. Still random, but it allowed you to give weight to the stats that you wanted higher.

Even so, I'm not sure I'd use it as a DM. While I rolled great stats this way, it didn't have to be so. And I don't like having my PCs strengths and weaknesses dictated to me.

 

[David Argall]

"why is it acceptable to absolutely suspend the randomness of game variables generation and the inherent “luck” associated with their creation in the name of “fairness”, while once the character creation process is completed, the suspension of “fairness” is willingly shelved until needed in the future creation of characters?

1. After creating these “fair” characters with identical potential why do you then accept the “unfairness” of rolling dice at all?

I mean instead of rolling a D20 to hit and such why not just give everyone a “to-hit” (along with skills, damage pools etc.) pool and let him or her decide how and when to “spend” these points. "

Despite the attempt to make this an argument taken to absurd lengths, the basic idea is not that unreasonable. After all, games like chess are popular enough and so the elimination of the random factor is by no means unthinkable. D&D5 or 6 might try such a system.
There are a number of questions that have to be answered 1st. Just a system can become easily gross or unplayable. As has already been noted, there may be obvious ways to job the system too. By contrast, the flaws in using dice are known and the corrections either in place or known. So until someone does a very large amount of work, the system is speculation.

"2. I guess the bottom line is why is one set of randomness OK and the other not?"

Well, the chief point is that one is very easily corrected and has a major chance of causing trouble, while the other requires great revisions to the game and the large number of rolls means things do tend to average out a lot more than the few times of stat rolling does.

 

[Fenes 2]

Forget dice, forget point buy. Let the players choose their ability scores. If you can't trust the players to do this and still allow everyone to have fun, then you might need new players.

We use a moderated form of this in one campaign. The final character (inlcuding gear etc.) is subject to DM/player approval, and there is an upper limit for the total of the stat modifiers. Works out pretty well.