Really, No PC Gnomes! Stop Asking!

[Lurks-no-More]

Turns out, it still doesn't much matter what your race is, especially now that we aren't rolling for ability scores.

You know, rolling for scores (in the same way as in 3e) is still listed in the PHB.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

You know, rolling for scores (in the same way as in 3e) is still listed in the PHB.

Yeah, but it's very, very strongly discouraged.


**Note to mods: I'm copying this short section of the PHB for the purpose of comment and criticism which clearly falls under my Fair Use rights in the US. See http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-a.html**


"Some players like the idea of generating ability scores
randomly. The result of this method can be really
good, or it can be really bad. On average, you’ll come
out a little worse than if you had used the standard
array. If you roll well, you can come out way ahead, but
if you roll poorly, you might generate a character who’s
virtually unplayable. Use this method with caution." PHB 4e p18


This makes it pretty clear that they would have just thrown out rolling ability scores if that mechanic was not so nostalgic. I do not agree with them. I just played a Human Fighter in an original D&D adventure with the original, straight-rolled, 3d6 base stats of 3/13/7/11/7/6. His flaws (a fighter with a Str 3?!) and general mediocrity made for some fantastic role playing, though WotC would likely have deemed this character "unplayable". D&D 4E is still a role playing game, right?

The standard array is listed as the first method. Adjusting a base array of 8/10/10/10/10/10 with 22 points is the second method, but this is discouraged as being "complicated".

Finally they get around to mentioning rolling your abilities after a page turn.

They make it pretty clear you should just take the standard array of 16/14/13/12/11/10 and not be über at anything but not be bad at anything either.

 

[hong]

Yeah, but it's very, very strongly discouraged.

Your point is...?

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Your point is...?

My point is, we don't roll for ability scores anymore.

Yeah, it's still listed in the PHB. But we use the rules and WotC's rulings to best effect here, yeah? And the best effect comes from not rolling for scores, but instead using the standard array.

So, we don't roll for ability scores anymore, so what race you pick really doesn't matter.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

I just played a Human Fighter in an original D&D adventure with the original, straight-rolled, 3d6 base stats of 3/13/7/11/7/6. His flaws (a fighter with a Str 3?!) and general mediocrity made for some fantastic role playing, though WotC would likely have deemed this character "unplayable".

Ah yes, the "I can only roleplay incompetent characters" defense. I have a hard time with it myself; rolling stats on my Elf Rogue meant that, with his piddly CON score, he spent much of the campaign unconscious. It proved to be extremely difficult to roleplay.

 

[hong]

My point is, we don't roll for ability scores anymore.

Yeah, it's still listed in the PHB. But we use the rules and WotC's rulings to best effect here, yeah? And the best effect comes from not rolling for scores, but instead using the standard array.

So, we don't roll for ability scores anymore, so what race you pick really doesn't matter.

Pah. It is very easy to play a fighter with a Strength of 3. Just show up at the table with weights attached to your arms.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Ah yes, the "I can only roleplay incompetent characters" defense. I have a hard time with it myself; rolling stats on my Elf Rogue meant that, with his piddly CON score, he spent much of the campaign unconscious. It proved to be extremely difficult to roleplay.

Ah yes, the "I have an unreasonable emotional attachment to mediocre characters and can't get myself killed so I can reroll" defense.

Go cry in your beer someplace else.

 

[Boarstorm]

I just played a Human Fighter in an original D&D adventure with the original, straight-rolled, 3d6 base stats of 3/13/7/11/7/6. His flaws (a fighter with a Str 3?!) and general mediocrity made for some fantastic role playing, though WotC would likely have deemed this character "unplayable".

As I recall, OD&D deemed that character "unplayable" too. Didn't it require at least a 9 in strength to qualify for the class?

... or am I getting my editions confused?

Go cry in your beer someplace else.

The irony is palpable.

 

[Sashi]

Ah yes, the "I can only roleplay incompetent characters" defense. I have a hard time with it myself; rolling stats on my Elf Rogue meant that, with his piddly CON score, he spent much of the campaign unconscious. It proved to be extremely difficult to roleplay.

Are you kidding? That's the easiest roleplay I've ever had.

*stuffing pizza in your mouth* "What, Sorry, I didn't know about that, I was unconcious."

 

[hong]

Ah yes, the "I have an unreasonable emotional attachment to mediocre characters and can't get myself killed so I can reroll" defense.

Go cry in your beer someplace else.

Gnomes can turn invisible, so it's harder to kill yourself than you realise.