• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Worlds of Design: Rolls vs. Points in Character Building

Let’s talk about methods of generating RPG characters, both stochastic and deterministic.

Let’s talk about methods of generating RPG characters, both stochastic and deterministic.

cube-4716670_960_720.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.
"Life is like a game of cards. The hand you are dealt is determinism; the way you play it is free will." Jawaharlal Nehru

When creating character attributes, there are two broad approaches to generating them: stochastic and deterministic. The stochastic method involves chance, while the deterministic method does not. Most any other method is going to be one of the other, whatever the details. The pros of one method tend to be the cons of the other.

Stochastic
The classic method is rolling dice, usually D6, sometimes an alternative like percentage dice. There are various ways do this. For example, some of the old methods were to sum the roll of 3d6 six times in a specific order of six character abilities. A variation was 3d6 and change the order as desired, another was roll 4d6, don’t count the lowest die, and then you might be able to change order or not; and so forth.

What are the pros of rolling the dice? First of all and primarily, variety (barring cheating). You get a big range of dice rolls. Dice rolling promotes realism, you get a big variation in numbers so you get some 3s, in fact you get as many 3s as 18s, and with some methods you have the opportunity to play characters with “cripplingly bad" ability numbers. Further, it's always exciting to roll dice, whether you like it or not. (Keep in mind, when I first saw D&D I said “I hate dice games.”)

One of the cons of rolling dice is that it's unfair in the long run, a player can get big advantages lasting for years of real-time throughout the campaign just by getting lucky in the first dice rolls. This can be frustrating to those who didn't get lucky. Perhaps even more, rolling dice encourages cheating. I've seen people roll one character after another until they get one they like - meaning lots of high numbers - and then they take that to a game to use. That’s not possible with point buy. Another con is that you may want to play a particular character class yet the dice just won’t cooperate (when you’re rolling in specific order).

Deterministic
The other method which I believe has been devised independently by several people including myself (I had an article for my system published a long time ago) is the one used in fifth edition D&D. A player is given a number of generic points to buy ability numbers. The lowest numbers can be very cheap, for example, if you are using a 3 to 18 scale, when you buy a 3 it may cost you one point, while an 18 may cost 20-some points. You decide what you want, for which ability, and allocate until you run out of points.

Point buy is very fair (FRP is a game, for some people). No one need be envious of someone who either 1) rolled high or 2) rolled many characters and picked the best one. It prevents the typical new character with sky-high abilities, it prevents cheating, so the player has to supply the skill, not rely on bonuses from big ability numbers. Of course, the GM can choose the number of points available to the players so he/she can give generally higher or lower numbers on average as they choose.

But point buy lacks variety for a particular class. The numbers tend to be the same. It's not exciting, it’s cerebral, and as such it takes a little longer than rolling dice. That's all the cons I can think of. Keep in mind I'm biased in favor of point buy. It's clean, fair and simple.

I haven’t spent much time trying to figure out yet another method of generating a character. The only other method I can think of that isn’t one or the other is to have some kind of skilled contest determine the numbers, such as pitching pennies or bowling. Then the question becomes why use one kind of skill over another?

Do you favor one method over the other? And has anyone devised a method that is not stochastic or deterministic?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

TwoSix

"Diegetics", by L. Ron Gygax
I only pointed out the two because people (clearly including you) often think that kind of asshattery doesn't happen, being too far over the edge.
I think part of the problem is that you're assigning the desire to play the same character as some kind of moral failing, whereas it seems to me it's simply a case of that player having a different set of play priorities than you. That's the sort of thing that should be sorted out by discussion, not by changing the rules.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

pemerton

Legend
To pick up an earlier point, I'm not entirely sure why the whole idea of "rolling to find out who your character" only applies (in the context of Dungeons & Derivatives) to six attributes and not to things like your race, background, class, or skills. It also doesn't really seem like you are rolling to discover your character if you making six rolls and then building the rest. It seems less about rolling to discover and more about seeing how effective of a character you can build with the stats you stumble upon.
Upthread I think I mentioned the example of a player in one of our AD&D one-shots who rolled for race, class and alignment, and I think also for stats.

One reason I think Classic Traveller PC gen is different from D&D roll-for-stats (and even roll-for-stats in order) is because of its lifepath aspect.
 

pemerton

Legend
I think part of the problem is that you're assigning the desire to play the same character as some kind of moral failing, whereas it seems to me it's simply a case of that player having a different set of play priorities than you.
I don't see what's wrong with liking to play the same character. We're talking about a leisure activity, not a test of personal fortitude!
 

prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
I don't see what's wrong with liking to play the same character. We're talking about a leisure activity, not a test of personal fortitude!

Some people tend more toward novelty-seeking, even in leisure activities, than others do. Personally, I try not to repeat character concepts (at least closely in time). There's also the thing that can happen at a table, that if you don't want characters stepping on each other's toes, if Joe always plays Joe's Type of Character, then no one else can play a similar concept if Joe is at the table.

Neither of these make it necessarily wrong to always play the same type of character--especially not to satisfy someone whose novelty-seeking extends to wanting others to stretch their comfort zones--but it might be courteous to allow someone else to play [character type] now and then, if asked.
 

pemerton

Legend
Some people tend more toward novelty-seeking, even in leisure activities, than others do. Personally, I try not to repeat character concepts (at least closely in time). There's also the thing that can happen at a table, that if you don't want characters stepping on each other's toes, if Joe always plays Joe's Type of Character, then no one else can play a similar concept if Joe is at the table.

Neither of these make it necessarily wrong to always play the same type of character
I'm not sure what the word necessarily is doing in that last sentence. As to the first (putative) reason, why does the fact that person A prefers not to repeat concepts in his/her play give pwerson B a reason not to play the same character type?

As to the second, where is this idea that the game can't have two similar PCs coming from? It's not a rule I'm familiar with in any game but Apocalypse World, where at the start of the game there can be only one of each playbook so that - as Vincent Baker has said in subsequent comments - the GM doesn't have to provide multiple copies.

it might be courteous to allow someone else to play [character type] now and then, if asked.
This seems something of a rabbit from a hat. Where in this thread has anyone advocated for discourtesy?

On this issue I think it also Apocalypse World that advises, hopefully redundantly, that if two people are interested in the same playbook they can sort it out like adults. (EDIT: I just checked, it's actually Dungeon World p 49, which has a similar rule about starting classes.)
 

prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
I'm not sure what the word necessarily is doing in that last sentence. As to the first (putative) reason, why does the fact that person A prefers not to repeat concepts in his/her play give pwerson B a reason not to play the same character type?

I was getting at it not being wrongbadfun to want to play the same type of character all the time, in spite of it not being to my own tastes.

As to the second, where is this idea that the game can't have two similar PCs coming from? It's not a rule I'm familiar with in any game but Apocalypse World, where at the start of the game there can be only one of each playbook so that - as Vincent Baker has said in subsequent comments - the GM doesn't have to provide multiple copies.

It's rarely a hard-coded rule, but it comes up in supers games; it comes up enough that there's a term for it--niche protection--and it's probably more of a table expectations thing than anything else.

This seems something of a rabbit from a hat. Where in this thread has anyone advocated for discourtesy?

On this issue I think it also Apocalypse World that advises, hopefully redundantly, that if two people are interested in the same playbook they can sort it out like adults. (EDIT: I just checked, it's actually Dungeon World p 49, which has a similar rule about starting classes.)

I wasn't saying anyone had advocated for discourtesy; I was advocating for courtesy. I was giving a reason why a player who prefers to play the same type of character might want to let someone else play that type of character.
 

Hussar

Legend
I don't see what's wrong with liking to play the same character. We're talking about a leisure activity, not a test of personal fortitude!

Well, when it's the EXACT same character every single time, regardless of setting, theme, campaign or anything else, it become extremely boring for everyone else at the table. Oh, look, Bob's playing a human fighter... again. Way to stretch those wings out there Bob. Way to give anyone else at the table anything to work with. And, expecially, way to screw over your DM by yet again, giving him the same steaming pile to work with in this campaign as you did in the five previous campaigns.

So, yeah, count me in the camp of strongly disliking players who repeatedly play the same character. It's boring, and it's lazy as all get out.
 


Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
So, yeah, count me in the camp of strongly disliking players who repeatedly play the same character. It's boring, and it's lazy as all get out.
I don't mind players who have a very specific tastes in characters and often play characters that resemble each other. That's more of a game to game thing though, not PC to PC in the same game. I don't like the feel of someone dropping a carbon copy of the same PC that just died. To temporize a little, if the window dressing is different, if the character feels different but plays very similarly, that's less of an issue. But when the new character might as well be a clone of the old character top to bottom I'm not a fan.
 

Hussar

Legend
Meh. Having just gotten out of a group where at least two of the players played nothing but carbon copies of the same character over and over and over again, across several campaigns, my patience for that sort of thing is pretty much zero.

FFS, I get liking this or that, but, come on. Stretch those legs a bit. Step outside of the comfort zone with just a pinkie toe once in a while. Yet another Man with no Name character with zero background and I want to drive a pencil into my left ear.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top