Wow, do I hate rolling for stats!

Jeff Wilder

First Post
Pathfinder game, I rolled what would be 11 points in point-buy. Everyone else rolled between 15 and 20 points, except the guy who rolled about 28 points.

I went from feeling enthusiastic to feeling like my character might as well be named The Gimp.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Filcher

First Post
Your PC dies of plague at the age of 9, due to a low Con score. Continue to roll characters until you beat 15 points in the point buy.

There is a lot of value in low-stat PCs, but not if the player isn't excited about them. It should be a fun game, after all.
 
Last edited:

Holy Bovine

First Post
Pathfinder game, I rolled what would be 11 points in point-buy. Everyone else rolled between 15 and 20 points, except the guy who rolled about 28 points.

I went from feeling enthusiastic to feeling like my character might as well be named The Gimp.

The main reason I hate rolling for stats is that i almost always end up with a series of numbers between 9 and 11. I hate playing an Average Joe. That is what i am in real life! I play RPGs to be special in some way. I'd almost rather have a few stats at 5 than play a guy with 10s & 11s across the board.
 
Last edited:

Dog Moon

Adventurer
This is why in my games what we do is have everyone roll and then we take the best set of numbers and people use those. Allows everyone to be on equal footing to start out with and unless everyone rolls bad prevents anyone from having a really bad roll.

Now it means that everyone has the same stats, but this doesn't bother our group at all when compared to the above and still allows us to have the fun with rolling our stats.
 

Aus_Snow

First Post
I love it. :cool:

I've played my fair share of suboptimal PCs, and they have been no less memorable for it. A little more so, in some cases, if anything. Also, they've not only survived, but thrived as well, for the most part. Just a bit more challenging at times, is all.

Let's see if my luck is any worse than yours... (dice rolls yet to come)

edit: LOL! Yes, I'd say so. :D Mind you , that wouldn't be a keeper, right?
 
Last edited:


Stoat

Adventurer
There are games where its fun to roll stats randomly and adapt to the results.

IMO, 3rd and 4th Edition D&D are not those games.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Do you hate rolling, or do you just hate rolling when you roll under the average of the group?

Some forms of game work well with the randomness, others do not. Sometimes, when handed a lemon, you can make some very fine lemonade.

As an example: years ago, I was running a 2e game, and we rolled randomly for stats. One player got a pretty decent set, except for one 6. He stuck to that set, though, and found he could put together a paladin out of it, if he put that 6 in Intelligence.

He spent a lot of time thinking how he'd play an Int of 6, coupled with a Wisdom score in the teens. He even did a bit of research, and came up with the idea of playing it as a learning disability. Ultimately it led to some of the best roleplaying I've ever seen. And it would never have happened if we'd used point-buy, as the player would never have thought of or chosen to build the character that way on his own. The stricture of the dice led to inspiration.
 

A

amerigoV

Guest
I would make a deal with the DM - you will play the PC just to see how long they survive on the condition that you can transfer the XP to the replacement PC you have waiting in the wings (ie, no penalty for death/replacement PC).

Also, see if the DM will give the group bonus XP if your character lives through each combat/session/adventure (with the caveat your PC has to do stuff and not just hide during combat). For extra XP, most groups will do the craziest stuff.

Just some ideas to make it interesting. Otherwise, as the theme song from M*A*S*H tells us, "Suicide is painless...."
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
There are games where its fun to roll stats randomly and adapt to the results.

IMO, 3rd and 4th Edition D&D are not those games.

Now, see, I feel the exact opposite about 3e (and PF). With 3e, compared to 1e/2e, you don't need to get very high stats to start getting bonuses. And there are ways to increase all stats via magic items and level-ups. 3e/PF is, IMO, one of the best games for rolling stats randomly.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
I'm a big fan of rolled stats, but my favorite RPG- HERO- doesn't use them. So I won't tell you to "man up.". You should never play a PC you don't enjoy- life's too short.

I'll just make this observation: in fiction, the hero isn't always the guy who was the best of the best, but rather is an Average Joe who rises above expectations to succeed. You see this in LotR, Westworld, and currently in Terriers.
 


FreeXenon

Geeky Ecohumanistic Futurist
Yea, I am in the same boat. I usually get crappy stats when rolling. We moved at my suggestion to the "Everybody sucks equally rule' which has been kind of mentioned already. One set of numbers for everyone.

However, if you were really motivated, playing average joe farmer who is somehow caught up and forced into this epic adventure with really professional and awe inspiring adventurers could be an interesting role playing experience. Hell, even your most likely eventual death could be something tales could be told of.

I feel your pain. Good luck!
 

IronWolf

blank
I am not a big fan of rolling for stats these days. I tend to have a concept in mind and being able to use a point-buy to mold the stats to my concept is more attractive to me. I mean there is a certain allure to rolling and then building off of that, but I don't think I have the guts to actually go through with it for a long term character.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Do you hate rolling, or do you just hate rolling when you roll under the average of the group?

Some forms of game work well with the randomness, others do not. Sometimes, when handed a lemon, you can make some very fine lemonade.

As an example: years ago, I was running a 2e game, and we rolled randomly for stats. One player got a pretty decent set, except for one 6. He stuck to that set, though, and found he could put together a paladin out of it, if he put that 6 in Intelligence.

He spent a lot of time thinking how he'd play an Int of 6, coupled with a Wisdom score in the teens. He even did a bit of research, and came up with the idea of playing it as a learning disability. Ultimately it led to some of the best roleplaying I've ever seen. And it would never have happened if we'd used point-buy, as the player would never have thought of or chosen to build the character that way on his own. The stricture of the dice led to inspiration.

QFT and to observe that such a set of stats for a Paladin would also work for Dudley Doright.
 


ggroy

First Post
I'm the opposite. I can't stand point buy character generation. Everyone comes out the same time and time again. I like having a random character, and thankfully my players feel the same.

According to some fans of stat rolling you need to man up and deal with it.

I, on the other hand, hate the randomness.

There are games where its fun to roll stats randomly and adapt to the results.

IMO, 3rd and 4th Edition D&D are not those games.


Why not a compromise hybrid of both point buy and random?

I liked the recent version of Gamma World using the 4E D&D ruleset.

IIRC, it assigned 18 to a primary stat and 16 to a secondary stat, while the remaining stats were generated randomly (3d6 for each one, iirc).
 

rogueattorney

Adventurer
I don't like for char-gen to be a major part of the game. To the extent that I spend any time at all on char-gen, I'd rather it be more like a game of craps than doing my taxes. Point buy feels to me like doing my taxes. Especially in games such as 3.x, where I then pick out race, class, spells, skills, feats, equipment. It's probably because the character sheets bear a slight resemblance to the 1040.
 

Treebore

First Post
I just allow my players to create stats however they wish, within racial limits of 3 to 18, plus racial modifiers.

Why people insist on obsessing over what method to use is beyond me, this is a game, let the players play what they want to play. It isn't like it makes it harder for me to kill them.

I have one player who goes by the random method, and I have others that go by methods that have high results, and they are all happy because they are playing precisely the kind of character they want, even when one character is noticeably less capable than the others. You know what I see, though? The guy with average stats plays smarter than the others and he has gotten hurt far less often than the others, and two others in one of my current games have already died.

The only thing where he is supposed to suck is in skills and saves, but so far he has done well in those regards as well.

I think it is because on a D20 to have a truly "significant" difference the difference has to be 6 or greater. A difference of 5 or less is not of mathematically significance.

So since the attribute modifiers tend to be 1 to 4, not 6 or higher, you don't really see a big difference when you consider all the rolls made. People just obsess and remember the few rolls that they failed, and forget all about the numerous rolls they succeeded at.

Heck, just two weeks ago I played in a game where the fighter who had good attributes still missed 7 times in a row. Why? Because he was rolling a D20, and dice roll randomly. So such a long bad streak is possible, just highly unlikely.

Now if he had bad attributes he would have blamed it on his attributes, but he had high attributes, so when he looked for something to blame he latched onto his to hit bonus being two lower than another fighters. Never mind every roll he failed to hit with failed by 4 points or more. He was just rolling crappy. That 2 points of difference had nothing to do with it.

So my point is, people tend to fail to look at the actual averages of the dice they rolled, they fixate on the few times they fail, and then blame it on not having that +3 or +4 attribute modifier, even if they failed the roll by 5 or more.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top