Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 6027489" data-attributes="member: 2205">I don't remember 1e or B/X, and I never played 2e or 4e, but 3e and 3.5 had arrays, rolled stats and pointbuy and didn't push any of the methods over any other of the methods.Or when you start claiming that playstyle preferences are somehow tied to edition.  In my experience, the playstyle preference came first.  When 3e intorduced point buy (if it wasn't in 2e; like I said, I don't know.  It wasn't in 1e or B/X that I recall at all, though) it wasn't because the designers of 3e wanted to push it as an option.  It was because it had become prevalent in most systems other than D&D that were getting a fair bit of play in those days, and there was already strong demand for alternatives to rolling stats.  That combined with the fact that several alternatives were given, with equal "weight" in the PHB, makes it seem extremely unlikely that which edition you started with somehow drove preference for a certain playstyle.Anyway, perhaps you've misunderstood what I meant by passive aggressive.  If you're actively crowing about how yours is superior, that's not really passive aggressive.  If you're implying it--with caveats that the alternatives are perfect fine in theory or whtaever, but leaving yourself plausible deniability when called on it--that would be passive aggressive.  Otherwise, it's just aggressive aggressive.Anyway, I just mentioned it because it seemed close to the line of implying superiority, not because I was trying to call you on anything.  And I really don't want to get sucked into a debate about what is or isn't passive aggressive, so... meh, whatever.Issuing ultimatums like that is a problem with the player, not the method of stat generation!  Are you suggesting that point buy causes people to act like jerks to their supposed friends?  If so, that turned into strawman so large it's a fire hazard really fast.No, it's rare because most people aren't willing to be entitled, confrontational spoiled brats around their friends.  It doesn't have anything to do with how the rules of the game have changed over editions.  And, like I said, the rules for point buy originated mostly outside of D&D, and then came back to it with 3e anyway, not the other way around.Sometimes.  And sometimes it's not.  It's a gamble.  I'm fine with it for shorter campaigns, or one-shots.  Sure, why not?  But if I'm expected to play this character for a long time?  Not a chance.  If I have to because the GM insists on it, then I'll wonder exactly who is being the entitled one by trying to make me play a character I'm not interested in playing (a sure sign of terrible GMing, by my definition) just to prove a point.  And if I'm really not getting into the character, he'll most likely end up dying after attempting something ludicrous, or my attention might just wander out of the campaign over time.  See, curious, I greatly prefer more tailored chargen for the exact opposite reason, and I never build optimized, power-gamer friendly characters.  In fact, I frequently get chided by the more power-gamery players (really just one in our group now) for my suboptimal characters who are built to replicate flavor issues that I've come up with for the character, rather than for any other reason.So, yeah... I'd say that in my experience playing crappy characters can be a blast.  I actually prefer it to playing the charOp game within a game, and weird weaknesses and strange character features are what make characters interesting.  But playing a character that I don't like?  That's a whole 'nother issue entirely.</blockquote>

Verification