So many point buyers, and even a few standard arrays...I'm almost shocked. Heh. My group has ALWAYS went with stat rolls. This time around, the group I play in rolled straight 4d6 x6. Most players had decent score sets over +6 bonuses without racials. I ended up with, err, +4 total (14, 14, 14, 11, 10, and 7)....which royally sucked for me. As a human pally, I added +2 to Wisdom (go figure) and ended with 14 STR and CHA which was quite painful. I actually should have point bought (which was an option...that no one took) but it was too late....the dice were cast (and they BETRAYED ME!).
Unbalanced? Yes.
One of the "weakest" characters in the party stat wise? Yes.
Does my GM care? Nope!
Do I care? Not anymore....
At first I was really sour. Combat wise, my character often "under performs" (mainly cause my dice SPITE me) not hitting as often as I could like. But, she plays smart (mostly), probably comes up with more smarter combat tactics, helps take out more opponents by influencing the party by yelling at them, and adds more role-playing flavor to the game than the rest of the party. I think the GM appreciates that...
Heck, he shares the same gaming philoophy as me...why have "balanced" characters? In the real world, life isn't fair. More so though, why do the players need "balance"? Aren't they all part of the same "team"? Aren't they all working together? With the variety in classes, skills, and feats (okay, less so in this edition), each player can contribute in one way or another to add to the party. And even without the built in game mechanics for variety, players ultimately choose to make their characters outstanding, as heroes.
So "balanced" character creation...no need, as long as the players can live with their characters stat lines, and are able to come up with ways to make their characters outstanding heroes, despite the differences in natural aptitude.
Fox
Unbalanced? Yes.
One of the "weakest" characters in the party stat wise? Yes.
Does my GM care? Nope!
Do I care? Not anymore....
At first I was really sour. Combat wise, my character often "under performs" (mainly cause my dice SPITE me) not hitting as often as I could like. But, she plays smart (mostly), probably comes up with more smarter combat tactics, helps take out more opponents by influencing the party by yelling at them, and adds more role-playing flavor to the game than the rest of the party. I think the GM appreciates that...
Heck, he shares the same gaming philoophy as me...why have "balanced" characters? In the real world, life isn't fair. More so though, why do the players need "balance"? Aren't they all part of the same "team"? Aren't they all working together? With the variety in classes, skills, and feats (okay, less so in this edition), each player can contribute in one way or another to add to the party. And even without the built in game mechanics for variety, players ultimately choose to make their characters outstanding, as heroes.
So "balanced" character creation...no need, as long as the players can live with their characters stat lines, and are able to come up with ways to make their characters outstanding heroes, despite the differences in natural aptitude.
Fox