Generation: rolling vs. point buy

[Jeff Wilder]

Over the years I've become absolutely convinced that players don't actually want to roll randomly for their stats, even though many claim to. What they actually want is the possibility of rolling above average or extremely well for stats, combined with the possibility of whining their way out of substandard (but still playable) stats.

I also don't think it is fair to or fun for players who roll decent stats (+5 to +7, say) or slightly substandard stats to be in the same group with players who rolled (for the sake or argument, assume legitimately) in the +12 to +14 range.

I'll never run a game with random stats again. Point-buy just solves too many problems.

 

[Shellman]

My group tends to use the point buy system, although the DM has always allowed us to roll dice and distribute the scores as we see fit to the appropriate attributes.

I have played with other players who claim they built there character rolling the 4d6 method and they always ended up with better scores than anyone else in the group. I never did call the guy out on the subject, but I was amazed at how all his attributes were way above average on every character he built.

I guess that's why I always use the point buy system unless the DM directs otherwise. I can justify my ability scores in black and white without question. Its natural for everyone to want to build the strongest character they can, but I won't do it at the expense of integrity as a player. My group also tends to play high powered games, so we usually start out at a 32-36 point buy.

 

[Al]

Wait, wait, wait. When you're talking Organic generation Al, you're forcing them to pick race and class first? What the spork!? I've seen it done, and the result was 5 out of 6 characters in the party being unplayably useless characters, to say nothing of the fact that you just killed the monk, paladin and bard classes! When the wizard ended up Int 11 and the fighter was Con 8, the problem is obvious. If you're going organic, then the only way to do it is stats, then race and class, anything else is bastadry of the highest order.

That is what I do - sorry if I gave the impression otherwise. Needless to say, forcing class/race picks then rolling organic woul dineed be "bastadry of the highest order".

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Over the years I've become absolutely convinced that players don't actually want to roll randomly for their stats, even though many claim to. What they actually want is the possibility of rolling above average or extremely well for stats, combined with the possibility of whining their way out of substandard (but still playable) stats.

To a certain extent I agree with your sentiments, there are definitely some who'd choose the default 4d6 method over elite array because they'd skew the 4d6 to produce upper results. I don't have any issues with mighty characters (we've played with 50pt buy equivalent in the past) but rather the non-structual manipulation that may occur.

Let me explain what I mean by non-structural, I'm talking about all the tricks that a player may use to wheedle out of legitimate results that they don't like and try to get the unfair (on the other players) rerolls. E.g suicides, whining.

The thing is that this may occur even with generous dice pools and the such because the player will look at the 'average' result under a generous system and manipulate things if they get something in the lower half. All that has happened is the goal posts have shifted but the (imo dysfunctional) player's expectations have shifted just as much.

After all of this semi-rant I come to the question I ask my players that pick up the dice instead of using the alternate point buy, "can you handle a poor result?" They all said yes but I now know one actually meant to say "no".

 

[Rystil Arden]

Over the years I've become absolutely convinced that players don't actually want to roll randomly for their stats, even though many claim to. What they actually want is the possibility of rolling above average or extremely well for stats, combined with the possibility of whining their way out of substandard (but still playable) stats.

I also don't think it is fair to or fun for players who roll decent stats (+5 to +7, say) or slightly substandard stats to be in the same group with players who rolled (for the sake or argument, assume legitimately) in the +12 to +14 range.

I'll never run a game with random stats again. Point-buy just solves too many problems.

I don't know about that. As far as I'm concerned, I'd certainly rather roll 4d6 than take 25 Point Buy (as a standard for my group) because of the extremely likely possibility of doing better, but if I do worse, then so be it, that's where it stands. Why do I care so much about this possibility if I am also willing to make do with whatever I roll? Because there's a number of interesting character concepts to which justice cannot be given with 25 Point Buy. If I get the right stats, I'll play one of them, and if not, I'll play something else. But if I had a DM who always ran 25 PB, I'd never be able to play them.

Needless to say, if the Point Buy value is reasonably high (near or above the 4d6 average), then my reservation no longer stands.

 

[Abraxas]

Wait a second, the classes were playtested with default array ability scores which suggests that this is not an issue. Perhaps the issue here is that in core combat statistics (AB, Dam, AC, hps) you are expecting the Paladin to perform like the Fighter, or the Monk like the Rogue, when they're expected to not be similar.

I'm playing a campaign with 25pt buy and my Paladin gets his fair share of time in the sun - I just needed to realize that the 2 fighters outshine me in pure damage output but I still form the core of the defensive frontline.

I'm not as positive as you are that the playtesting suggests anything about how effective point buy characters were when compared to each other. To me there is a difference between being adequate and shining.

I don't expect the paladin to perfrom like the pure fighters, but they do need decent Str, Con and Cha scores, which means typically Dex, Int and Wis are where you sacrifice. Dex and Wis directly affect your saves (but this can be offset somewhat by a high Cha) among a number of other things. Having a low Int means a measly 2 skill pts (or less) per level. I am curious how you assigned your scores with the 25 point buy.

 

[Thanee]

Sample 25 PB Paladin

S14 D10 C13 I10 W12 C14

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darmanicus]

Roll every time, it's the only way to get good stats however you have to practice your dice rolling every day!

The paladin I currently play is a 39pt character.

 

[Dracomeander]

Sample 25 PB Paladin

S14 D10 C13 I10 W12 C14

Bye
Thanee

And there is the 'cookie cutter' array I was talking about. 95% of the people I know would assign their attributes that way for a paladin no matter what their concept was as that is the most efficient way to do it for the mechanics of the game. The variances I see are in how the personalities are potrayed in the course of the campaign not in how the attributes are distributed.

 

[Thanee]

I'm not really opposing that. In fact, that's precisely why I prefer random generation methods (I just like those with a higher degree of balance better than those with a high spread like 4d6-drop-lowest).

Bye
Thanee