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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guilt Puppy" data-source="post: 1457190" data-attributes="member: 6521">I don't think anyone's said he should feel guilty (don't get me wrong, I wholly support guilt in all its permutations) -- most of the posts in support of rerolling for lower stats are along the lines of "that doesn't sound like it'll be a very fun character to play," which is (I think) what the original poster was worried about.The idea is, it's one thing to feel like a "kick butt adventurer," it's another thing to feel like a kick butt set of stats, for some people at least. The way I game, a lot of the enjoyment I get is from having a sense of risk, of having a character with weaknesses, and perservering through. There are other ways to play the game, of course, and there's no one way that's "better" or "right." Your bit about "I'm not obliged to follow some DMs rules, I can simply walk" goes without saying -- finding a group that fits your style of play is always important. (Of course, it helps to be willing to compromise a little.)Based on the fact that the poster even came here with this question suggests to me that his way of playing the game isn't compatible with this set of stats. If that's the case, he should reroll. Even if he being a statmonster doesn't ruin the game for him, if he consistently overshadows the other players it might spoil the game a bit for them, and it's hard to enjoy a game that nobody else is enjoying.As far as rolling methods, I personally prefer the standard 4d6 drop method, as I (and the players I game with, usually) quite enjoy the anticipation that goes into rolling up a character, and likewise I (and my players) are generally willing to accept the statistical imbalances which can end up occurring. If a game is a bit more slashy, I'll usually tack a "roll a seventh stat if none of the first six are above 16, and replace your lowest" caveat, just to help avoid characters that are so weak they end up becoming stressfully unheroic in play.Also, I've gotta try this rolling method. Going for a Wizard:Str (3) 2 6 1  - 9Dex (4) 2 6 5 6 - 17Con (3) 3 4 5  - 12Int (8) 5 4 4 4 3 2 3 2 - 13Wis (4) 4 5 2 5 - 14Cha (3) 6 3 3 - 12Which would actually be an interesting set of stats to play with, and not at all what I had in mind (clearly) in allocating the dice rolls. There's something that feels a bit more natural about this method, yet it still allows you to distribute stats in a way that at least involves you in a process. I would only use this method in a game where the players had vague ideas of what sort of character they wanted to play going into it ("Wizard," for instance... if I think Wizard and then run into these stats, suddenly I've got this very different sort of Wizard presented to me -- perhaps after three levels of Wizard I'll go monk, or maybe I'm just a rather average magician at any given level, compensating for my lack of magical prowess with a bit of vesatility)... If you have any real character concept going into it, though (as it sounds like the original poster did), you're bound to run into trouble.</blockquote>

Verification