The hero is the guy -- or gal --that didn't end up a mouldering corpse at the bottom of a pit impaled on kobold punji sticks. The hero is the one that, through a combination of luck and grit and talent, find his fortune and fame and glory
Yeah, except some need more luck than others if you're rolling for stats, and/or (which can be even worse) hit points.
See, I think, there's nothing wrong if there are players who are interested in the challenge of trying to play and survive with a character that has consistently bad stats. But why isn't this simply optional? Just use point-buy and note that it's fine to not spend all the points. Shouldn't that make everyone happy?
Why force players who aren't interested in the challenge to use rolled stats? Let everyone start on a level play field. If the 'pro' players want to start with a handicap: let them.
I think even players who like to roll for their stats are happier to play a character for which they rolled good stats (assuming a game where the stats are actually relevant to determine success).
See, I've played characters with rolled stats for a lot of years. I agree that it's pretty cool if a character that started off bad manages to survive for a long time against all odds. But after the character's inevitable demise, don't you you ever wonder what might have become of her if she had been just a bit more lucky at the beginning of her career?
For a character that you intend to play for many years to come, it's just too much of a gamble for my taste to start with stats that are below average.
This wasn't as much of a problem when I started playing rpgs and I was still at school: I had plently of time and we played almost every day. Who cared if it took ten attempts (and thus characters) until I finally managed to survive to reach level 2?
These days I want to make the most of the precious time left for playing rpgs, so, yes, these days I prefer to _start_ playing a hero. Let someone else cast out the rats in the village tavern's cellar, I was born for greater things!
Aside from the question of rolling for stats: How many groups start at levels higher than one? Quite a few, I should think! And the reason is the reason I gave: They want to play heroes!
Starting from level 1 (or even level 0) is fun for a few times but eventually it can get old. Particularly if you want to see a campaign through to the end, you have to do something to even the odds.
Naturally, the reverse can be true, too: If you've played high-level heroes for a couple of years, you may find it's fun to play a nobody again. But the novelty wears off quickly - at least for me.
Looking beyond D&D and level-based rpg systems, I feel the best possible system is Ars Magica's troupe style: Even in the course of a single adventure you get to play lowly grogs, ordinary covenfolk, inspiring knights, noblewomen, merchants, and archmages - whatever strikes your fancy.
D&D is just not set up that way (despite some groups that may be playing it similarly).
)
