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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7242920" data-attributes="member: 996">The point you were making it against was not literally anything, but anything within the parameters of the campaign.  Making this point that you've fought so hard for, pointless.The reality is the same as it was at the start:Point buy gives you the maximum freedom to design the character you want, every time.Array or random-and-arrange give you fewer degrees of freedom, you can choose how to distribute stats but not what they'll be.  An array of 6 different numbers maximizes that freedom, while random might well deliver the same, it may also deliver two or more identical numbers (theoretically even 6, though it's unlikely), reducing the degree of freedom accordingly.  It can also, for example, deliver a SAD array to a player wanting a MAD class or vice versa.  Random-in-order, of course, gives you the least ability to play the character you want.  But, it has the corresponding advantage that it may spark an idea - you may get to play what you didn't even know you wanted.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Not really, no, randomly determining which array is still random.  I suppose you could get there, though, if you wanted to, all you need is a seed and a hashing function, and just count down the list of arrays, then back up to the top... If you don't know the arsenic content, it's not an option, it's a danger.  If you do, hey, rat poison.Yeah, that's getting close to a de-facto array, just way more complicated. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Especially because of the no-two-stats-alike proviso.  1-for-1 is kinda problematic, really, too.</blockquote>

Verification