What is the standard ability score set? Are most games playing too high?

[Desdichado]

Artificial, how? I mean, moreso than any other element of the game>

Artificial because that's not even part of the rules, much less an artificial construct within them. The default ability generation methods give much more control to the players.

Interpretation? Not in previous editions, anyway -- and many of the limitations were there for a reason, and made the game better, IMO.

I'm not talking about what previous generations of the game have done, I'm talking about what's been current since 3e. What was done in the past is irrelevent.

For that matter, I don't believe that it was done for any reason other than that was what was arbitrarily decided on back in the day and inertia kept it that way for many years. Rather; the RPG world as a whole moved on, and D&D finally followed suit when 3e was released--and that was what was done for a reason, not the prior method.

Speculative? Yes. But I certainly believe it.

Would it be unfun if you rolled all 18s?

Not for me, no. I'm not griping that I don't have high enough scores if I roll stats in order, I'm griping that I have to roll my stats first and then come up with a character concept second, which I don't like. I know what I want to play before I start making a character. If I was "forced to be creative" and had to play something that wasn't my initial concept, I'd be bored and frustrated with the game from the get-go. Frankly, if I knew that was the character generation method a GM was going to use, I'd almost certainly pass on the game in the first place.

I don't get excited about "being creative" about character generation. I get excited about building the character I already have in my mind.

 

[Reynard]

I'm not talking about what previous generations of the game have done, I'm talking about what's been current since 3e. What was done in the past is irrelevent.

With D&D -- and other game with a legacy -- I don't think it is irrelevent at all.

I don't get excited about "being creative" about character generation. I get excited about building the character I already have in my mind.

Don't get me wrong, building to concept can be fun, too. But there's something to be said for go the other way, too.

I get frustrated with players who think they have an inalienable right to anything and everything -- the ones that balk at random stat rolls, the ones that cry foul when a limit is put on options, the ones that want plot immunity and customized gear. I know some DMs love plying with those folks -- and they can have them. I'd rather have players that roll with the punches and challenge me as much as challenge them, both tactically and role-playing wise.

 

[3d6]

That's a good point. For most stats, in 1E, you needed (IIRC) a 15 or a 16 before you got any bonus at all. (OTOH, IIRC, you also didn't get penalties on low stats until you got down to around 5 or 6...)

I just looked in my 2E PHB, and these two characters are basically exactly the same in combat (although there are some differences, like chance to break down doors and survive resurrection). I decided to include reaction modifier and loyalty base as combat statistics, as they do affect when your henchmen retreat and can help you avoid combat entirely.

Strength 8, Dexterity 7, Constitution 7, Intelligence 3, Wisdom 8, Charisma 9

Strength 15, Dexterity 14, Constitution 14, Intelligence 18, Wisdom 14, Charisma 12

 

[Desdichado]

With D&D -- and other game with a legacy -- I don't think it is irrelevent at all.

:shrug: Suit yourself. You're pulling it out like it's an important factor now when it hasn't been a current rule for many years. Maybe it's not completely irrelevent, but it's relevence seems pretty small to me.

Don't get me wrong, building to concept can be fun, too. But there's something to be said for go the other way, too.

If it's something you enjoy, then yes, certainly. For me it's not. Presumably, for the player base as a whole it's not. I firmly believe that's exactly why games over time--including D&D which was one of the last to finally adopt this measure--have eliminated that, though. The industry as a whole has rejected that paradigm of character creation. Being stuck with something that you don't actually want to play, and having to live with it for the entirety of the game is a recipe for a frustrating game experience, IMO.

I get frustrated with players who think they have an inalienable right to anything and everything -- the ones that balk at random stat rolls, the ones that cry foul when a limit is put on options, the ones that want plot immunity and customized gear. I know some DMs love plying with those folks -- and they can have them. I'd rather have players that roll with the punches and challenge me as much as challenge them, both tactically and role-playing wise.

I certainly balk at random stat rolls, but not at much of the rest of your post. Lumping folks who don't like random stat rolls with folks who want plot immunity and customized gear is disingenious at best and a complete fallacy for no other reason that to tar the process with a bad brush at worst.

 

[Kestrel]

32 points...for all our games for years now.

 

[Reynard]

:shrug: Suit yourself. You're pulling it out like it's an important factor now when it hasn't been a current rule for many years. Maybe it's not completely irrelevent, but it's relevence seems pretty small to me.

It is an important factor to me because I think it is something the game is sorely missing and something that is very difficult to put back in to the game (even if the DMG states rather explicitely that race/class limits are perfectly valid) because many players, IME, don't like being told no, especially if it is saying no to something in the core.

If it's something you enjoy, then yes, certainly. For me it's not. Presumably, for the player base as a whole it's not. I firmly believe that's exactly why games over time--including D&D which was one of the last to finally adopt this measure--have eliminated that, though. The industry as a whole has rejected that paradigm of character creation. Being stuck with something that you don't actually want to play, and having to live with it for the entirety of the game is a recipe for a frustrating game experience, IMO.

To each his own, obviously. And, realistically, it doesn't happen often simply because players don't tend to like it. More often than not, it's 4d6 DTL, arrange to taste.

I certainly balk at random stat rolls, but not at much of the rest of your post. Lumping folks who don't like random stat rolls with folks who want plot immunity and customized gear is disingenious at best and a complete fallacy for no other reason that to tar the process with a bad brush at worst.

I didn't mean to imply that players that frustrate me have all of those qualities: one is usually enough.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Possibly, depending on what one means by heroic. It can indicate moral virtues such as altruism or courage. It can also refer to achievements, capabilities or great competence. If the latter then in an rpg clearly better numbers = better capabilities = more heroic.

I see higher stat characters as more effective, rather than more heroic. Really, who is more heroic when it comes to charging into the fray; the fighter with 18 Str, 17 Dex and 16 Con or the one with 13 Str, 12 Dex and 9 Con? Who is more likely to be effective and come out alive?


My personal opinion is that higher point buy is, at least in part, the result of frustration with "common" low level encounters, and a desire to level up quickly and to get to the more "fun" encounters with unusual and dangerous creatures. People are tired of taking their first level characters out to stop the kobold raiding party, or orc bandits, or skeletons, or whatever low CR creatures they usually encounter.

 

[Erywin]

We use 32 point-buy in our gestalt game and 28 in our other game. As a DM, i prefer 28 - it's much easier to balance encounters.
-blarg

Heh as the DM of the Gestalt game, I just bump up the ECL of the party by 2 when sorting out what monsters to throw at them I have to say tho, my 28 pt buy Archivist/Dread Necro is pretty damn fun to play.

 

[JustKim]

Being effective and being a hero are not the same thing.

As much as I enjoy the amusing stories from Crothianland, where the heroes are real heroes, the players hang on the DM's every word, everything is allowed and powergaming never happens, I find this particular poetic waxing is trite. Effectiveness is a key component of being a hero.

To be a hero you must do heroic things successfully. If you run into a burning building to save a baby and are burned to death three feet from the door, you aren't a hero. If you intervene on a mugging and are yourself beaten and mugged, you are not a hero. If you can't do anything well but are always trying to be heroic, then what you are is comic relief.

 

[Emirikol]

I get frustrated with players who think they have an inalienable right to anything and everything -- the ones that balk at random stat rolls, the ones that cry foul when a limit is put on options, the ones that want plot immunity and customized gear.

I hear you there. In a TRADITIONAL D&D GAME and the DM is presenting the PC's with a scenario plot and the PC's are meant to face those challenges with what they've got and with 'set' magic items. There's a +1 dagger in the Dungeon BECAUSE it's part of the plot..not to placate a whiny mage character who wants a +1 dagger..now in a SIMS-type D&D game, the players are EXPECTED to have plot-immunity and absolute-customizable-control because the DM doesn't choose to exercise any control on his game OR the other players simply expect it and it becomes part of peer-pressure to have overly-optimized/customized characters.

It's the difference between bumper-cars and NASCAR racing. One you take what you get and have fun and the other you tweak and fine-tune to be the absolute champion.

Anyways, the contradiction is that house ruling a few more advancements in ability scores or higher start-up actually lean towards the SIMS type game unless you balance it with fewer (required) items.

One more random thought before I go:
RANDOM MAGIC ITEMS (e.g no magic shops) = RANDOM STAT DETERMINATION (e.g. 4d6)
..meaning you get what you get and you play that way.

POINT BUY = Customization = MAGIC SHOPS = Customization = SIMs-Type Game


I just wanna play the game with some friends..I don't want to have to compete with the other players for power escalation and it seems like it only takes one guy who does 570 points of damage a round to wreck any level-headed thinking becasue the DM typically responds by throwing more/tougher monsters at the party which only PUNISHES PLAYERS WHO DON'T ESCALATE THEIR OWN POWER.


jh