I played a crappy character...and it was great!

[rogueattorney]

I've long said that I'd prefer char-gen to be more like rolling craps (epitomized by the original Traveler system) than doing my taxes (which is how 3.x always made me feel).

Character optimization simply isn't an aspect of the game that interests me. Especially at char-gen. If char-gen is going to be at all involved or more than a 5 minute process, I'd rather it be fun and a bit goofy. If we're playing a game that doesn't have a random aspect to char-gen (and involves more than 3 or 4 choices) I'll often randomize it on my own just to make it interesting.

I almost never come to the table as a player with a character concept in mind. I tend to think of play in the early part of a campaign as me getting to know the character and finding out what he's like. Having a character in mind before play begins ruins that part of the game for me.

 

[am181d]

I almost never come to the table as a player with a character concept in mind. I tend to think of play in the early part of a campaign as me getting to know the character and finding out what he's like. Having a character in mind before play begins ruins that part of the game for me.

I think this is the real split. If you like coming up with character concepts and then using the rules to create that character, you're going to be opposed to (or at least wary of) random stat gen. If you prefer being "inspired" by the character gen process, then random stat gen is a good thing.

I should point out that having a character concept going in does not automatically mean that you're optimizing or power gaming. Some of my favorite characters were deliberately flawed. (I recently played a one-armed, one-eyed masochistic fighter.)

Nothing wrong with any of these approaches, so if the game can allow all of it, that's probably for the best.

 

[airwalkrr]

I just want to say this thread is full of win. I am always trying to push my players to try things outside their comfort zone.

I recently put my Rifts campaign on hold for a few sessions to give me some time to formulate new ideas. In the meantime we are playing a mini-campaign of Nightbane. I ran into a particularly sticky situation when my wife rolled up a 4 IQ for her character and complained "I don't want to play a retard!" But I explained to her that how she chooses to role-play the 4 IQ is an important consideration and also that it was only going to be a short campaign and she might find she likes it. Otherwise she had very impressive physical stats so she decided to play a dumb brute, which is very different from the type of character she usually plays (cunning psychics are her favorite). We've only had one of two planned sessions so far, but I can say this much, she doesn't hate it, and has found ways to make the game very interesting with her low IQ character.

Part of the reason I wanted to run something like this was to give people a chance to step outside of their comfort zones and play something very different in a very different universe. So far, I believe I have accomplished the goal of getting people to broaden their horizons and I am having a very fulfilling time seeing everyone adapt to the situation.

 

[Agamon]

Given that the games I'm into right now (ACKS, DCC, Hackmaster) expect you to roll stats like this, this is the PC gen method I prefer.

However, newer games do have different ways to lessen the chance of a really low-stat PC (in ACKS, you roll 5 sets of stats, and 3 of them will be what you use for your next 3 PCs; DCC has you roll multiple PCs at L0 and run them all through the "character funnel" and see who survives; Hackmaster gives you a mulligan if you don't meet a certain threshold, and then lets you spend PC build points to increase them slightly), so the fact you just did it straight up and rolled with it is impressive.

The PC rolled was certainly playable, IMO, but would you have played him if you had 3 stats below 9 and none over 11? That would have been a crappy PC.

 

[Evenglare]

The characters we play, I make them roll and apply stats in order. However they get 2 sets to choose from , as it represents 2 paths in life they could have taken. I assume you could do this for more than 2 sets. But it works for us and it provides interesting characters.

Also first you choose race, then roll for stats, then choose your class. It's pretty fun.

 

[Blackbrrd]

My last 3.5 character I made with point-buy didn't have a stat over 14. That you call a character with a 17 crappy is beyond me.

I did take the spellcasting prodigy feat at level 1 though, so the effective wisdom was 16 for spells, but I guess Pathfinder has a similar feat. And I did have a lot of fourteens for the rest of my abilites. It was the best character I have played and through 2-3 years of gaming got up to level 18 before the DM got his first child and the game went out with the dirty dipers.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Techically all casters are DAD or SAD, Clerics like Cha but need wis everything else is gravy.
So you weren't crappy with 17 Wisdom at 1st.

Had you played a Monk then you'd be crappy (5 Str indeed).

 

[Kaodi]

There is nothing particular difficult about rolling scores and then using point buy to approximate the results. So your scores are in some sense "balanced" versus other players, but you have still permitted yourself an element of randomness.

 

[GreyLord]

I typically in older types such as BECMI or C&C playstyles will have the judgment that if they have a -1 overall, they can reroll any stat that is under 8 (under, not equal, unless ALL they rolled is 8 or lower). They keep their rerolls. I have had times when they decided to reroll and got something even lower, in fact our last group had a guy who had a 7, rerolled...and ended with a 6.

But typically they will get something at least a little higher.

That is if we are using the 3d6 in order method.

Maybe that makes me allowing power gamers as a DM...I see it typically as at least being nice to the players though so they don't get too upset at me for being too stringent.

 

[Zhaleskra]

I play it both ways, sometimes I have a clear mechanical idea, but not a background one and I let that develop during the game. Other times, I have the solid idea and use the mechanics to build that. Between the two, I'd say it's 70/30 with background first being on the 70 side.