Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9018757" data-attributes="member: 7026594">Every group I ever played 2E with (over maybe 7 or 8 years of consistent play?) used more generous rolling methods than 3d6 in order.&nbsp; Finally settling on 4d6 drop lowest, three sets, pick one and arrange to taste.IME everyone concluded from looking at the ability bonus tables that designating 3d6 in order as the default was an error; the tables were rationalized updates of Gygax's tables from 1E, in 1E 4d6 drop the lowest was method 1, and in the 1978 PH Gary outright told us that a PC should have at least two scores of 15 or better to be viable.&nbsp; The character gen example with Rath in the 2E PH seemed decidedly unheroic and unappealing.While there's the core of a good sentiment there, certainly, about embracing characters who have a weakness or two and not obsessing over high stats, these are not inspiring characters.&nbsp; They are decidedly at odds with the messages implicitly communicated by the tables immediately preceding them, and they don't seem like the sorts who would go on the adventures TSR published.And the statistical reality is that in a group of a half dozen players rolling 3d6 down the line, usually one or two are going to get a couple or few high scores, one or two are going to get garbage, and the rest of the group pretty average numbers.&nbsp; The disparity between the folks who naturally roll up a hero and those who roll up a spear-carrier or a Rath is not a recipe for fun.3d6 down the line (with allowances for re-rolling &quot;hopeless characters&quot;) was functional in OD&amp;D and B/X or BECMI, all of which allowed swapping ability score points in increase your Prime Requisite.&nbsp; But AD&amp;D was never designed around it.I always guessed that the default in 2E was driven by misguided reader mail input, &quot;hardcore&quot; purist players sounding off.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mannahnin, post: 9018757, member: 7026594"] Every group I ever played 2E with (over maybe 7 or 8 years of consistent play?) used more generous rolling methods than 3d6 in order. Finally settling on 4d6 drop lowest, three sets, pick one and arrange to taste. IME everyone concluded from looking at the ability bonus tables that designating 3d6 in order as the default was an error; the tables were rationalized updates of Gygax's tables from 1E, in 1E 4d6 drop the lowest was method 1, and in the 1978 PH Gary outright told us that a PC should have at least two scores of 15 or better to be viable. The character gen example with Rath in the 2E PH seemed decidedly unheroic and unappealing. While there's the core of a good sentiment there, certainly, about embracing characters who have a weakness or two and not obsessing over high stats, these are not inspiring characters. They are decidedly at odds with the messages implicitly communicated by the tables immediately preceding them, and they don't seem like the sorts who would go on the adventures TSR published. And the statistical reality is that in a group of a half dozen players rolling 3d6 down the line, usually one or two are going to get a couple or few high scores, one or two are going to get garbage, and the rest of the group pretty average numbers. The disparity between the folks who naturally roll up a hero and those who roll up a spear-carrier or a Rath is not a recipe for fun. 3d6 down the line (with allowances for re-rolling "hopeless characters") was functional in OD&D and B/X or BECMI, all of which allowed swapping ability score points in increase your Prime Requisite. But AD&D was never designed around it. I always guessed that the default in 2E was driven by misguided reader mail input, "hardcore" purist players sounding off. [/QUOTE]

Verification