Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 7142041" data-attributes="member: 6688937">I think it does have an impact...the early editions strongly incentivised players to lie or cheat their stats, especially fighters with their exceptional strength. The last AD&amp;D campaign we played, the Dwarf Fighter simply outclassed the human fighter in every single way imaginable because an 18/76 (at start) is so completely superior to a 16 Str. The Dwarf player (who always seems to be playing a Dwarf with at least an 18 Str) just couldn't let it go how &quot;useless&quot; the human fighter was. Not that he was wrong in his assessment of their relative ability to contribute, but ... well let's just say that the proportion of AD&amp;D fighters I've seen with &quot;honestly rolled&quot; exceptional strength beggars believe. (I think the ridiculous rolling methods presented in the 1e Unearthed Arcana serve to demonstrate just how important stats were in early editions.) One of my best friends absolutely refused to play &quot;Slightly-above average man&quot; (all 12's) in a college AD&amp;D game, and I don't blame him. All that character did was qualify to be mechanically horrible at anything.I honestly think that the effects of the stats (if they are so fundamental to things as Str to an AD&amp;D Fighter) should be rolled into the class at design time. That is, if you pick Fighter...you're strong, done...want non-strong fighters? have separate classes for Swordmasters and Brutes (or whatever coolsy names you want). Same for wizards, etc. and the relevant abilities for them. Skip stat-rolling as a step of character gen. If you want to replace the inspirational thing...have a table of quirks or background traits (maybe one for each class) that everyone rolls on or selects from. IMO, YMMV, and all that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ratskinner, post: 7142041, member: 6688937"] I think it does have an impact...the early editions strongly incentivised players to lie or cheat their stats, especially fighters with their exceptional strength. The last AD&D campaign we played, the Dwarf Fighter simply outclassed the human fighter in every single way imaginable because an 18/76 (at start) is so completely superior to a 16 Str. The Dwarf player (who [I][U]always[/U][/I] seems to be playing a Dwarf with at least an 18 Str) just couldn't let it go how "useless" the human fighter was. Not that he was wrong in his assessment of their relative ability to contribute, but ... well let's just say that the proportion of AD&D fighters I've seen with "honestly rolled" exceptional strength beggars believe. (I think the ridiculous rolling methods presented in the 1e Unearthed Arcana serve to demonstrate just how important stats were in early editions.) One of my best friends absolutely refused to play "Slightly-above average man" (all 12's) in a college AD&D game, and I don't blame him. All that character did was qualify to be mechanically horrible at anything. I honestly think that the effects of the stats (if they are so fundamental to things as Str to an AD&D Fighter) should be rolled into the class at design time. That is, if you pick Fighter...you're strong, done...want non-strong fighters? have separate classes for Swordmasters and Brutes (or whatever coolsy names you want). Same for wizards, etc. and the relevant abilities for them. Skip stat-rolling as a step of character gen. If you want to replace the inspirational thing...have a table of quirks or background traits (maybe one for each class) that everyone rolls on or selects from. IMO, YMMV, and all that. [/QUOTE]

Verification