Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Naoki00_" data-source="post: 6369520" data-attributes="member: 99243">So I joined a one shot game with a group I've never played before, and we got into a very interesting argument before the game got underway about stats and how they should be. While creating the characters we of course rolled in front of the DM, 4d6 drop the lowest, and put the rolls in what stats you want.the average rolls of the other 4 members were 15, 15, 12, 12, 10, 8 (I'm mostly rounding since a few 13s and such were around but thats the jist), and I rolled 18, 18, 16, 14, 12, 13. This created a rather odd uproar from the DM when I asked if he'd let them reroll their negative scores since to me that seems like bad rolls.The DM got a bit miffed and said that my own rolls were 'incredibly high' and that a character is supposed to always have at least one terrible score and only 1 or 2 at a +2 mod or more, and that anything more imbalances encounters. Personally I've never played with a character who had a negative score since in my normal group we don't believe in handicapping a character at creation when they have a pretty low survival rate at 1st-3rd levels anyway, thus I to me the OTHERS scores were the bizarre ones since they seems excited to get 'decent' rolls.I admit rolling the second 18 was amazing, but to me those scores don't seem anything to really be 'amazed' at since they aren't really a huge boost to things (I never got the big deal behind a +1 addition when mathmatically your not much more likely to roll well, +4 is more decent)What are your own opinions on stats and their importance and things like this?</blockquote>

Verification