Random Character Generation

[Oni]

Sometimes I like to craft my character from the ground up, and I don't want the fickle finger of fate interferring with that. Sometimes I enjoy the thrill of seeing what randomly comes up, usually if I didn't have a notion of what I wanted to do in the first place. If I'm going to be randomly generating a character I would prefer it to be with a system that didn't hose you too badly for poor rolls. IMO oppinion in older version of dnd for instance if you rolled at highest a 14 or 15 you could still craft some sort of functional character out of it. If you did that in 4e you'd be screwed IMO the whole system is balanced too tightly around a certain range of to hit.

 

[billd91]

I voted random for some games, totally crafted for others. Superhero games, for instance, work really well totally crafted. Though I will say that random power generation in Villians and Vigilantes did lead to some interesting power combinations that were fun to creatively wrap together in an origin story.

But I think that there is something about totally crafting your character that can lead to trouble. Take a look at D&D 3.5 and some of the debates that come up about balance, imbalance, uber-caster characters, useless fighters, and system mastery. Part of the problems associated with such debates come from or are exacerbated by people using point-buy character creation in a game designed around random generation.

I remember a lot of debates on ENWorld about rolling stats vs point buy and how much more "balanced" point buy was because you couldn't end up with lucky vs unluckly players. There's an element of truth to that. But relying on point buy makes the problem players with more system mastery dominating those without worse. There's no possibility of luck helping the player with less mastery.

The difference between point buy and random generation exacerbates the problem we see with high-powered casters, weak fighters, and the gulf between good and weak saves. When you have the freedom to throw your points exactly where you want them, system mastery suggests putting them into your spell-casting stat to raise your save DCs. The strategy of putting a lot of points into the one stat is strong and seductive and probably nets you a good 2 points over your stat rolling peers on your DCs. Fighters, under the same regime, invest heavily in Strength which ends up shorting their Save-feeding stats like Dex and Wisdom, making their weak saves even weaker in comparison to your stat roller.

Point buying systems also, I think, make the problems you see with single stat dependent and multi-stat dependent classes worse. If the characters are rolled, the monk gets a modicum of moderate stat bumps around his abilities and probably one good one and the wizard gets a good stat bump for his main ability. In point buy, the monk gets a moderate set of stat bumps and one good one while the wizard gets an exceptional one around his prime ability.

I've just been thinking about this stuff for a while and realized how the difference between the two systems complicates things.

 

[Glyfair]

But relying on point buy makes the problem players with more system mastery dominating those without worse. There's no possibility of luck helping the player with less mastery.

There is, but it is less. One thing you forget, however, is that there is just as much as chance of luck hurting the player with less mastery even more. In fact, the player with less system mastery has less of a chance of being able to deal with a poor set of rolls.y

 

[Wik]

All random, with very limited player choice during creation, is a favourite of mine. I love "mutant" games where you get a (mostly) random character, and you interpret that character through play. It's also fun when you get random setbacks, so that one character could be a god with awesome abilities and little in the way of setbacks, while another will have some lame super power ("Oooo! I can smell SOUND....") and has, like, no arms.

I also love games like Warhammer, where CharGen can be entirely random (if you use the default assumption, the only choices made by the player are when your career gives an option among skills or talents, and the purchasing of gear; even your character's NAME can be random). The great thing about Warhammer, I should mention, is that while your character's start can be random, how he chooses to meet the world and progress is entirely up to you.

 

[sjmiller]

For me, it really, really, depends on the game system. If I am playing D&D, in any incarnation, I expect to roll for attributes and hit points. Random rolls are required for Traveller, Gamma World, Villains and Vigilantes, and games of a similar age. If I am playing GURPS, or Hero System, then buying everything is required. For Silver Age Sentinels it looks like I will be doing a point buy method. For all of the games I have mentioned the preferred system is the one the game is originally designed to use. Sure, D&D has been retrofitted to use a point buy system, but I think it is a flawed implementation. GURPS characters can, believe it or not, be generated randomly, but again, it is an imperfect match.

I think the whole "game balance" bugaboo with character creation is full of sounds and fury, signifying nothing important. Maybe I am just a grumpy old man, but for me D&D characters are made with dice, not a calculator.

 

[Remathilis]

Of course, randomness can lead to some wonderful memories.

Playing Heroes Unlimited, we decided to randomly role up everything about our PCs. I decided on a mutant and got to rolling. I remember rolling two powers for my mutant, and taking a deep breath and the % dice, I rolled.

The first power: stoney skin (like the Thing of Fantastic Four)
The second power: control aquatic animals/breathe water (like Aquaman).

And so was born the Saga of AQUA-ROCK!

When another player rolled up a space alien who gained his power from exposure to our sun (like Superman) but was radioactive when doing so (and killed everyone around him with radiation if not wearing a lead suit) so he was completely shielded from the sun (which gave him his powers) by a lead suit or else he'd wipe out everyone in a 5 mile radius. Oh well, he did have a gun...

We laughed our capes off, but never did play the game... Then again, I think it was more fun to generate PCs in a Palladium game than to actually PLAY it...

 

[InVinoVeritas]

There is, but it is less. One thing you forget, however, is that there is just as much as chance of luck hurting the player with less mastery even more. In fact, the player with less system mastery has less of a chance of being able to deal with a poor set of rolls.y

I would disagree.

The key is in what kind of mastery the player demonstrates. If a player has poor mastery of character building or permanent bonus accretion, then a random system does him no harm, and a choice system can be disastrous. However, a player with poor mastery of tactics and judgment, resulting in poor situational bonus accretion, will find trouble, even if he luckily or skillfully creates a high-powered character.

 

[Glyfair]

I would disagree.

The key is in what kind of mastery the player demonstrates. If a player has poor mastery of character building or permanent bonus accretion, then a random system does him no harm, and a choice system can be disastrous. However, a player with poor mastery of tactics and judgment, resulting in poor situational bonus accretion, will find trouble, even if he luckily or skillfully creates a high-powered character.

But the original point was that random was better for players with no system mastery. If you want to compare people with different types of system mastery you are opening up an entirely different can of worms (one I don't really want to be drawn into).

 

[InVinoVeritas]

But the original point was that random was better for players with no system mastery. If you want to compare people with different types of system mastery you are opening up an entirely different can of worms (one I don't really want to be drawn into).

Fair enough.

But now that I think about it further, a player's system mastery will depend necessarily on the system in question. That system will define whether situational or permanent bonuses are more important, and the character generation method will have a lot to say about that.

I've met RP neophytes who might not know a d20 from a 401(k), but they'll know intuitively who they need to speak to next, whether they need to take the high ground, or that it's just best to blow up the MacGuffin already. Such players will flounder without a lot of hand holding if they have to sculpt their own characters, but will perform admirably even if they roll poor characters.

 

[RFisher]

I agree with a lot of this, but I generally prefer point buy.

I probably come down a little hard on point-based systems in this kind of convo, just because my conclusions tend to be a bit counter to the “conventional wisdom”.

Truth is, I enjoy just about every spot on the spectrum. They all have trade-offs.

My (limited) experience with random generation says that someone will always roll better than someone else, and that the someone else will be jealous and that this tension will cause problems. Of course, having mature players would ameliorate the situation.

Even with point-buy systems, though, unless the PCs are all exactly the same, somebody’s going to be jealous because that 10-point thingy that Bob bought is proving more valuable than this 10-point thingy that I bought. (Consider also the people who think it’s so awful that not all feats are equal.)

If you make all the PCs identical, then you’re going to get people complaining that my PC is just like Bob’s PC.

There’s only one solution to immature players.