Role/Roll Playing

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Yes, and characters were quickly generated and disposable. When Bob the Fighter died in his first combat, the party mysteriously stumbled upon Bob II the Fighter being held captive by the orcs, and, him seeming a trustworthy fellow, he was quickly added to party.

Pretty much, yup.

Little awkward when a dm insists on the replacement starts at 1st level when the party was much higher. Good times.

 

[AeroDm]

Think about it. In 2E AD&D, the default stat rolling method is 3d6 with no arrangement. CON averages 10-11. This means that you have no CON bonus.

I see this line of argument a lot, but no one ever seems to mention that CON didn't kick in with regards to HP until 7 (-1) or 14 (+1). That same range is -2 or +2 in 3e and beyond. So while older editions were "harsher" with regards to generating stats, they also made stats less important. You can't hold 3e and beyond to the same standards of "grittiness" as older editions without also taking into consideration what grittiness meant in each edition.

 

[Water Bob]

Yes, and characters were quickly generated and disposable.

Our group had plenty of games where the 1st level characters never died and lived to ripe old powerful ages.

Did characters die? Sure they did. They died at 6th level and 10th level and 14th level, too.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Our group had plenty of games where the 1st level characters never died and lived to ripe old powerful ages.

Did characters die? Sure they did. They died at 6th level and 10th level and 14th level, too.

... which has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.

 

[Water Bob]

... which has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.

It has as much to do with the price and the place as your comment that 1st level 2E AD&D characters were disposable. Your implication is that the vast majority of 1st level characters in that game die. That wasn't my experience all the years I played that edition of the game.

 

[Holy Bovine]

*looks over poll options*

Hmmmm...no "I'll stab you in the eye if you use this terminology around me." choice?

Poll Fail!

 

[Holy Bovine]

There's a player that will be upset that his mage has a low CON score, citing that mages already have the smallest hit die and mages need every hit point that they can get. Then, there's the player who will look at that low CON score, accept it, embrace it, and turn his mage into the scratchy voiced, health-problemed, Raistlin Majere.

So good roleplayers just copy what ever hackneyed, trite, fantasy character their stats suggest?

Weird.

 

[AeroDm]

To follow up on my last post, if we presume that stats don't impact the game from 8 to 13 (based on 2e CON) that means that on 3d6 only 33% of characters would roll a stat that had an impact on play. In 3e and beyond, 75% of characters would roll a stat that had an impact on play. It is impossible to compare the "roleplay" versus "rollplay" across editions without appropriately considering this fact.

Stat  Count     %     Cumulative %
3	1	0.5%	0.5%
4	3	1.4%	1.9%
5	6	2.8%	4.6%
6	10	4.6%	9.3%
7	15	6.9%	16.2%
8	21	9.7%	25.9%
9	25	11.6%	37.5%
10	27	12.5%	50.0%
11	27	12.5%	62.5%
12	25	11.6%	74.1%
13	21	9.7%	83.8%
14	15	6.9%	90.7%
15	10	4.6%	95.4%
16	6	2.8%	98.1%
17	3	1.4%	99.5%
18	1	0.5%	100.0%

 

[Dandu]

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Basically, I do both... preferably at the same time. But, I do put role over roll, and enjoy meaningful characters more than uber-awesome-mega characters.

I find this delightfully ironic given your username is one of the most powerful beings in a power-filled multiverse.

Well played, sir.