Have These Basic Questions been answered yet?

[A'koss]

Actually, in this thread from December http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=214430, Scott Rouse stated that there are 3 methods for determining attributes, all in the PHB, and NONE of them is a default...

Interesting... I'm pretty sure I wasn't misremembering though so I'm guessing this was a change. Thanks for the link!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

everyone should play as he likes, but I wouldn´t like 84 point buy method, and hp differences would be too big, if PCs have maxed d12s and commoners non-maxed d4s without tripple hd at first level.

I believe there are no maxed hd... i would bet on fixed scores which will range from 4 to 8 or 10

 

[Warbringer]

Personally, Id love to see base hit points go to humanoids have 5hp per level.

If the class level is a defender +2 hps; if the class level is a striker +1
If the class level is a martial +2...

So a 5th level martial defender has a base of (45 hps)
So a 5th level martial striker has a base of (40 hps)
So a 5th level arcane striker has a base of (30 hps)

etc..

FWIW I've played fixed hit points all the way through 3.x (average roundup), with one eberron campaign at max (that was fun! )

 

[Lizard]

I certainly hope there is no more rolling for HP. Seriously, do people still roll for hitpoints? No group I have been in has rolled hitpoints in ages. Everybody just gets max HP. Nothing sucks more than rolling a 1 for hp.

And ability scores, 28 point buy is pathetic. Does anyone actually play like that?

My group does 84 points, assign to each stat on a 1 for 1 basis. Nothing above 18 or below a 3 (this is before applying racial modifiers). Thats the equivalent of having at least a 14 in every stat. PCs should be the best of the best.

Alternatively, we do 4d6, drop the lowest, reroll all 1s and 2s.

I'm hoping that rolling for HP and subpar stat point buy systems are a thing of the past.

Wow. Who in your group represents the Lollipop Guild?

I thought I was a wuss player-coddling DM with 32 point buy (using DMG) and allowing a choice of average hit points (alternating with level, so, for a D10, 6, then 5, then 6, then 5) or a roll *with me watching*. No one chooses the roll.

Classed monsters get elite stats; otherwise, by-the-book. (Elites also get action points, since the PCs get them as per Unearthed Arcana.)

I haven't rolled for hit points in 8 years. Does anyone? If 4e make rolling optional, I think it will just be reflecting the way most people play.

 

[Dausuul]

Wow. Who in your group represents the Lollipop Guild?

I thought I was a wuss player-coddling DM with 32 point buy (using DMG) and allowing a choice of average hit points (alternating with level, so, for a D10, 6, then 5, then 6, then 5) or a roll *with me watching*. No one chooses the roll.

Classed monsters get elite stats; otherwise, by-the-book. (Elites also get action points, since the PCs get them as per Unearthed Arcana.)

I haven't rolled for hit points in 8 years. Does anyone? If 4e make rolling optional, I think it will just be reflecting the way most people play.

My group usually gives players the option; you can take the average value or roll for hit points. If you roll, though, you keep what you get (and if that means you roll nothing but 1s and 2s, so be it). Some of us roll, some of us take the average.

For stats, we mostly do 32-point buy, though we've experimented a bit with alternative systems. 32 seems to be pretty standard in the gaming community (heck, even Neverwinter Nights uses it). I hope 4E will reflect this, and not try to balance everything on 25-point buy the way 3E did.

Of course, that will require changing the rules on rolling for stats, since 4d6 drop lowest is roughly equivalent to 28-point buy...

 

[Lanefan]

Why stop there if you want to reflect reality?

d100 roll:
1-90 - Commoner
91-95 - Warrior
96-98 - Expert
99 - Aristocrat or Adept
00 - PC class

That's about right, in fact. (though I might add another single-number slot for "Non-Adventuring Specials"; this would include sages, stay-at-home artificers, temple clerics, retired adventurers who haven't lost their skills, and so on) That said, for game purposes the PCs all are PCs because they are assumed to have rolled '00'. That still doesn't make them all the same...within that '00' there's a whole bunch of variety possible...starting with race and class and diverging further from there. I simply prefer to have that variety reflected in the characters played.

Lanefan

 

[Lanefan]

Of course, that will require changing the rules on rolling for stats, since 4d6 drop lowest is roughly equivalent to 28-point buy...

Out of sheer dumb curiousity, do you happen to know what the point-buy equivalent would be for 5d6, drop 2?

Lanefan

 

[Tewligan]

For me, I let the players decide to take 1/2 the HD value or roll; decide in advance. No whining rule after the roll.

Ha, that's exactly how I do it! Of course, I DO admit to goading the players a little bit...
"What, you're gonna just settle for 5 hp? If you roll, maybe you'll get 10!"

 

[Jack99]

Ummmm.... the mechanic is so broken that your group had to house-rule it, but if WotC fixed the mechanic your group would rebel? Huh?

Guess you could see it that way. However, to us, the rolling of HPs, while broken as is, is an integral part of what we define as DND.

 

[Darkness]

I'm a big fan of random...it reflects reality. Take a class full of computer science students, for example. Each will in theory be exposed to the same information during the class, and each will take in a certain amount of it. But there will still be a *wide* variety on the final test scores, in part due to innate ability to learn and in part due to other factors. Now, make that a class full of neophyte Wizards or acolyte Clerics, with the "final test" being life in the field, adventuring. Doesn't it just make sense there'll be some variance in ability?

Hm. To me, this reasoning calls for random xp - not random hp.