Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7250289" data-attributes="member: 996">Yep.&nbsp; Fair, just with a greater potential for imbalance...&nbsp;His method, point buy, produces PCs with the same point-buy total, every time.&nbsp; In whatever theory it's based on, that's presumably 'even,' it weights high scores more heavily than 8-13, which seems reasonable enough considering the game.&nbsp; Of course, the PCs won't be even, someone may play a fighter, someone else a paladin, etc...&nbsp; but the scores, alone, won't be a source of profound imbalance, at least.&nbsp; Everyone using array, obviously, would give a more 'even' result (still not perfectly balanced, since the stats aren't perfectly balanced).Rolling, obviously, can give more 'uneven' results.&nbsp; It can also, coincidentally, give identical results, just like array (unlikely, but hey).&nbsp;&nbsp; So it seems <s>unfair</s> inappropriate to say uneven results are /the/ reason for using random, since you might not get them. The sense of realism random delivers is undermined by arranging, too.&nbsp; So I'm not sure I do see the point.&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp; OK, sure, the point might be the same as the excitement of gambling for stakes, though - the stakes are better characters if you 'win,' against a worse one if you 'lose,' rather than winning or losing money.&nbsp; :shrug:&nbsp; &nbsp;6(a), (b)(1),&nbsp; and 10(a/b).&nbsp;From &quot;eye of the beholder&quot; to &quot;cogent argument?&quot;&nbsp; ...sounds 7(a).&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7250289, member: 996"] Yep. Fair, just with a greater potential for imbalance... His method, point buy, produces PCs with the same point-buy total, every time. In whatever theory it's based on, that's presumably 'even,' it weights high scores more heavily than 8-13, which seems reasonable enough considering the game. Of course, the PCs won't be even, someone may play a fighter, someone else a paladin, etc... but the scores, alone, won't be a source of profound imbalance, at least. Everyone using array, obviously, would give a more 'even' result (still not perfectly balanced, since the stats aren't perfectly balanced). Rolling, obviously, can give more 'uneven' results. It can also, coincidentally, give identical results, just like array (unlikely, but hey). So it seems [s]unfair[/s] inappropriate to say uneven results are /the/ reason for using random, since you might not get them. The sense of realism random delivers is undermined by arranging, too. So I'm not sure I do see the point. ;) OK, sure, the point might be the same as the excitement of gambling for stakes, though - the stakes are better characters if you 'win,' against a worse one if you 'lose,' rather than winning or losing money. :shrug: 6(a), (b)(1), and 10(a/b). From "eye of the beholder" to "cogent argument?" ...sounds 7(a). ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification