>Roll ability scores, create character around scores OR >Create

>>50844919
Neither.
>Create base character concept, roll ability scores, finalize character design around results.

>>50844919

It depends. I normally prefer the first, unless i have a specific character concept i really really want to try.

Roll 3d6 down the line, play a broken unplayable mess.
I play Rifts

>>50844919
Point buy you sick lunatics

Depends on what the game sets out to do.

First option is clearly the best in OSR games where quick play, high lethality and trying to make the best of a situation is common, but the latter is good with systems that have a lot to do with character builds and character narrative.

I'd say that the second method should use a point-buy system though, so the first one is better.

File: the_red_knight_by_shiantu.jpg (386KB, 900x1271px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 900x1271px

>>50844919
>Create character, assign stats that fit that concept

>>50844919
Point buy.

Dm assigned array

>>50844983
>>50845000

>Here chose A or B and those are the only tw-
>I pick C!

>>50844919
If I HAVE to choose, the former.

But I prefer points buy.
And also to not play D&D.

>>50844919
Neither.

>>50845025
>you have to eat this shit sandwich or drink this gas
>do it faggot

>>50845073
No, you aren't forced to do it, you just have to favor one over another. It's "would you" rather than "you have to".

>>50845025
When faced with two terrible options, you either choose something else or don't pick anything at all.

>>50844919
>Create character, attempt to roll ability scores that fit said character

This is the right choice, unless the game tell you to roll something at random.

The stats define who your character is, they are part of the fluff

>>50845000
This
Preferably in GURPS, not an archaic game system.

PROTIP: BEING POINT BUY DONT INVALIDADE THE QUESTION

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_20140103234637e1a.jpg (136KB, 840x500px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 840x500px

Roll first, character second to fit the attributes.

I enjoy coming up with characters using the limitations set by the attributes. Most of my more creative characters came about this way. If the rules don't have tables for race/class/etc., I'll make some myself for extra fun.

I like rolling first. It's fun to go in cold and make a character on the spot based on what the dice give me to work with.

>>50845103
The point is, rolling for stats is terrible.

>>50844919

>Find a gaming group that uses point buy.

>m-muh point buy

God you are some whiny fuckers. Just roll you pussies.

>>50844919
The latter.

I enjoy a bit of randomness from dice rolling, and how it on some level takes the decision out of my hands - compared to point buy, where I'm always tempted to make either a very rounded build or a very skewed one. Even if I cheat a little by freely putting whatever numbers I rolled wherever I chose, I still get something I would not have made myself.

Creating a character based on randomly rolled scores seems frustrating, especially when I don't have a good grip of how each class works yet.

Point buy is shit.

I'd rather everybody (including myself) roll scores and then try to make characters around them. It's the original suggested D&D character creation method for a reason: Getting your own first choice is boring.

This way you're forced to get out and explore classes/whatever that you don't know much about.

>>50848810
>m-muh rolled stats
God you are some whiny idiots. Just stop acting retarded you speds.

Do you prefer 4d6 drop lowest x6, or 3d6 x7 drop lowest?

Or hardcore grognard?
>>50844970

Rolled 6, 6, 6, 2, 4, 5, 2, 2, 6, 6, 5, 5 = 55 (12d6)

>>50844919
Create character.

Use this system:

Have base 6 in all stats and roll 12d6 adding every 2d6 down the line and assigning to stats as wished.
The average stat is 12 this way, 8 is minimum and 18 is maximum.

My players like it this way.

Rollan for example.
Making a Monk 2/Rogue to start at lvl 3.

>>50850379
An 18, 14, 15 10, 18, 16.

14 Str
18 Dex
16 Con
10 Int
18 Wis
15 Cha

>Monk with a +3 in Con, +4 in Dex/Wis, +2 in Str and Cha.

>>50850327
Mean of 3d10, plus 7, sell 2 for 1 once.

No retards but no showboats either

>>50844919
If I'm gonna roll for stats,
Then I'll let chance decide the character.
Prexisting concepts are for point buy systems.

>>50850084
The reason is because you werent expeted to survive very long. Rolling was because rping was literally meaningless in a gauntlet dungeon crawl

Rolled stats are garbage

>>50848623

You're retarded.

>>50851972

Rolling for stats is a valueless, pointless mechanic that only continues due to pointless bullshit nostalgia and should be completely forgotten.

Well, with a few exceptions. Gonzo comedy games like MAID RPG are the only examples I've seen where point buy actually works, because failing a roll is just as good as succeeding when it comes to the point of the game, ending up in strange and funny situations.

But in anything where success or failure actually matters, leaving your characters vital statics up to chance is just stupid.

>>50846040
Yes it does. Who the fuck would buy stats first, then say "well I guess I need a character concept so I'll build around what I already made"?
Unless you're taking seriously hardcore powergamers forced to roleplay.

>>50852005
So roll for stats is bullshit and points buy mostly doesn't work, do you have a specific third alternative or does that post miss something?

>>50844919
I do mostly #1

In one game I rolled ultra mediocre stats all around; my highest stat was a 12.

I roleplayed it as my character being a shopkeeper who accidentally fell into a hole to the underdark.

>>50852055

>points buy mostly doesn't work

What are you even talking about? Point buy works fine.

>>50852046

Sometimes I'll read through a new game and think 'Ohh, that class/ability/playstyle looks fun' and build around that, although I always make sure they're a fully fleshed out character regardless of where the concept started.

>>50844919
>Have character concept that you want to play
>Roll stats
>See if you can play your character with those stats
>If not, adjust

>>50844948

This guy gets it.

I have to admit that point buy is probably better for D and D, given the range of shit that you can end up with otherwise, but some systems suffer less for it.

Rogue Trader and the rest of that little family are a good example - more stats in general, the ability to buy them higher with xp and a hard minimum (and the Origin Path stuff) means you'll almost always be able to actually do your character's job.

Rolled 5, 6, 5, 1, 4, 3, 3, 3, 5, 3 = 38 (10d6)

>>50844919
It depends on the type of game we're playing. Both the setting, and also the mood.

Is it a quick pick-up game? A one shot? A tournament game? Are we planning on a longer campaign for 6 months or more? Is it high-mortality? Is the system one that needs specific roles filled? What kind of party are we playing, and do I need to worry about integrating with the other players characters?

Anyways.

I suppose I would probably prefer to roll ability scores first if doing 3d6 down the line, and create character first if I can assign the stats however I want.

>>50844983
Or you can do something like this.

Or change it right up and do a combination where you get 48 points and assign a minimum 8 in each stat and then roll 10d6 to see how many "total" points you get to assign.

>>50852219
Right. So with rolling 10d6 to make up the remaining 108 potential points for 18 in each state, or max rolls for 3d6 for each stat, we end up with 38 points to spend.

You still have to make choices, you could still not be able to make a Paladin, but at least you have some flexibility with where you put the points.

On average mathematically, with this system you end up with 35 points to spend. Over six stats, that's 6 points in 5 stats and one in 5, or 14 in all and 13 in one. Want 18 (another 4) in one stat, let's say Str. 16 in Con after?

Str 18 Str 18
Dex 13 Dex 13
Con 13 Con 16
Wis 13 Wis 12
Int 13 Int 11
Cha 13 Cha 13

Etc. So you see how it creates a fairly balanced but playable character.

Rolled 1, 3, 5, 3, 5, 1, 3, 6, 5, 6 = 38 (10d6)

>>50852261

Rolled 8, 9, 1, 5, 9, 10 = 42 (6d10)

>>50852261
Want to make it less point-buy, more random? Roll your d10 6 times and go down the line. Average roll is 5.53

> anydice.com is what I used.

>>50852287
So

STR 16
DEX 17
CON 9
WIS 13
INT 17
CHA 18

Not too fucking shabby, given that crap CON I would probably play as a surprisingly good Bard but you could just as feasibly be a Wizard of some sort. Maybe a rogue, or a spellblade IDFK I don't really play D&D that much but I do love dice and rolling up characters.

I never see the point in adjusting/attempting to balance rolls.

If you want pointless bullshit randomness, go with that. If you want non-randomness, use point buy. Anything in between is just busywork.

>>50844919
2nd one, but if its just not possible to create the concept I had in mind I'll move onto option 1

File: Moonstar.jpg (459KB, 500x774px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 500x774px

>>50852297
It's called "I hate that point-buy makes me feel like less of a special snowflake, so I'll agree to some convoluted dice rolling convention that almost guarantees me having stats equal to or better than the most generous point-buy".

In other words it's pure undiluted turbo-autism.
So given it's /tg/, this thread should go places.

>>50852046
>Who the fuck would buy stats first, then say "well I guess I need a character concept so I'll build around what I already made"?

Someone doing a conceptual character based at stats choice.

How to have roll with some sort of freedom.

Roll stat order at random.
Roll 3d6 for stat 1 and for stat 2. Decide if you want to swap or not.
Roll 3d6 for stat 3 and for stat 4. Decide if you want to swap or not.
Roll 3d6 for stat 5 and for stat 6. Decide if you want to swap or not.

>>50852532
Or you could make
Roll 2 stats at random, roll 3d6, decide where the number go.
Continue doing that until you rolled everything

>>50852548
speed 12
dex 5
int 12
str 12
will 10
health 12

I like to roll 3d6 in order or arrange when playing AD&D 2e, but it does not apply to modern games.
Higher stats were less needful in those eras. A perfectly good fighter could be had with the minimum of 9 strength for example while today starting with less than 16 or so is considered foolhardy.

>>50852633
Even back then Gary himself said rolling 3d6 was a terrible idea.

>>50852328

It's really only a problem with shit like D&D. Even then, mostly only because of minimum requirements. 12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.

>>50852297

The main reason for rolling stats is to force people to try and play creatively, either with a class they don't normally play, or in a class where they have to use lateral thinking to get around optimization.

Then again, you went with the "X creates a special snowflake"! argument, so I'm pretty sure you're just an autistic faggot that thinks stats are relevant past determining character creation.

If you're going to play them game relying on your stats instead of just using them, you should probably go back to vidya.

>>50852665
>>50852633
From Grognardia

> I found myself thinking about this because, earlier today, I'd re-read the original appearance of the barbarian sub-class for AD&D, which Gary Gygax offered up for consideration in issue 63 of Dragon (July 1982). Unlike most sub-classes, the barbarian has no ability score prerequisites. Instead, Gygax offers an unusual method for determining ability scores:

Strength: best 3 of 9D6
Intelligence: 3D6
Wisdom: 4D4
Dexterity: best 3 of 7D6
Constitution: best 3 of 8D6
Charisma: 3D6

> Clearly, this is an area where Gary had a different opinion from my own. He explains his position in a post to ENWorld from December 2003:

> in 1972 we all rolled 3d6, but later when AD&D made the stats more meaningful, players would keep rolling until they got more viable numbers, so then we switched to various systems--roll seven or eight times with 3d6 and keep the six best totals or roll d4d and throw out the lowest die.

> After all, the object of the game is to have fun, and weak PCs aren't much fun for most players. Even fine role-players want characters with at least one or two redeming stats...

>>50852665
iirc that recommendation related to tournaments and not to ordinary gaming rounds and campaigns.

>>50852755
This is something that gets passed over a lot when people bring up Gygax.

He viewed tournaments, D&D as a commercial product, and individual groups and campaigns as very different things.

Tournaments are strictly structured so they flow quickly and easily from character creation to module completion because of limited time playing with strangers.

D&D as a product needed first of all to sell lol, but second to provide a framework for new GMs to be familiar with, and for players and GMs to be able to consistently play across different groups.

Whereas individual campaigns could do anything. Rule Zero, if you don't like something houserule it.

One of the things that made Gygax such a legend was the fact that he had no problem tailoring his games to his players on the fly.

I'm pretty sure he would have been fine doing whatever kind of stat generation his group wanted to do, so they could get past character creation and on to playing the actual game.

Heck, you can even work bad stats into a game. Playing a fighter with 8 strength? Well, one of his goals is now to recover Bracelets of the Ogre to increase his strength. Refluff it as a family heirloom that was lost in his Grandfathers time, or further back, who started a line of great warriors despite not being physically imposing himself, and the character is a fighter because he is expected to carry on the tradition. Or that he was passed over for inheritance because of his weakness and is trying to regain it.

Can't do that in a tournament though.

>>50844919
Point buy.

>create dozens of character concepts, save them until rolling stats that fit a particular one

>>50848810
What if the system does not support rolling stats?
Like Star Wars...

>>50853086

Then you're playing a system with better design and you can ignore the idiots shouting about rolled stats.

>>50853101
Hooray!

>>50853101
It's not "better design." It's just different design, coming at an RPG from a different angle. Modern RPGs want you to make the character that you want to make, representing a big heroic dude who's awesome at everything before the game even starts. Oldschool D&D is based around playing a regular person who has the potential for greatness, and then strives to achieve that greatness, rather than having it given to them.

Essentially, you're playing a more or less regular person instead of the greatest <whatever> in the tri-state area, and until we get to Gattaca people are stuck with the genetics they were given.

>>50853181

Except that's horseshit.

Pointbuy does not mean high power. It just means having choice rather than introducing pointless randomness.

You can have pointbuy in a low power game just fine.

>>50853208
> pointless randomness
You mean the very foundation of genetics itself? Pointbuy is either a gamist aberration in which a person can actually choose their own physical and mental characteristics, or it's representative of you the player choosing to inhabit the body of a single person drawn from a relatively large pool of candidates. Neither of those are representative of the vast majority of the population. Ergo, even if you're a shitty low-powered hero, you're still a hero as a function of the chargen system.

Not saying that pointbuy is bad, of course. Just saying that rolling for stats is a perfectly viable roleplaying option, because most of us poor humans didn't get to choose our stats either, and we seem to do alright. Usually people complaining about stat-rolling are folks that are simply sperging out because they didn't get the exact stat allocation they wanted, rather than just playing a character that has faults and/or weaknesses.

>>50850379
I prefer 14 in every stat and roll 6d4, down the line. More hardcore since you have to take what you roll in a stat.

I haven't rolled on 4chan in over a year, probably doing it wrong.

>>50853277

I don't even... What? What the fuck are you talking about?

>>50852727
>12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.
I said something like this a month ago and I get shit on by everyone for being an idiot, I'm glad someone agrees with me.

Though my statement was a +3 vs +4 modifier isn't that use of a deal.

>>50853314

It entirely depends on the system. In some cases, it isn't a big deal, in other cases it can massively affect your effectiveness. It all depends on how finely tuned the math is.

As the poster you were replying to said, in old school it wasn't a big deal, but in 3.PF or 4e the difference between a 12 and an 18 can make a massive difference to what a character is capable of doing.

>>50853290
I'll try to use simpler words this time.
A) Normal people don't get to choose their own stats. Their stats are randomly derived from their parents.
B) Point-buy lets you choose your stats. Normal people don't get to do this.
C) Therefore, if you're using point-buy, you aren't a normal person.

Following C), there can be two major reasons for this. Either you say 1) "fuck the police" and assign whatever stats you want where you want because it's an RPG and fuck realism. Or you say 2) "oh, well, I'm sure someone in this area has the stats and background I want, I'll just play them."

Both 1) and 2) make your character heroic compared to regular mortals, for different reasons.

Neither 1) nor 2) have the capacity to simulate playing a flawed character, unless you CHOOSE to make a flawed character. Thus, they are significantly different from real life, because real life is all about becoming aware of your own flaws and weaknesses, and either overcoming them, or simply coming to terms with them.

Stat rolling allows for RP where you attempt to overcome your own flaws in a way that point-buy simply cannot duplicate, because any flaws in point-buy are part of your character concept rather than actual flaws.

Stat rolling and point-buy lead to different but equally valid playstyles.

Let me boil down this pointless non-debate for you spergs.

A guy wants to spend an evening pretending to be a knight on a quest. You can either: a) let him play a fucking knight and suggest which stats/skills he should pick out or b) tell him that a random string of numbers over which he has no control by definition is preventing him from doing so.

There really isn't anything else to it.

>>50853372
This is an absurd meta argument that has no bearing on an actual game.

A dragonborn paladin in DnD is by far less normal than an office worker who ends up investigating a monster attack in GURPS. Its crazy to pretend otherwise.

Unless you want to use a pointless definition of normal that just makes you sound like you are trying to denigrate point buy supporters.

>>50853372

I get what you're saying. I just have no idea why it's relevant to RPG's or why you're somehow equating character generation mechanics with genetics. It makes no fucking sense.

>>50853372

>imaginary flaws that I choose for my imaginary character are different than imaginary flaws that are randomly assigned to my imaginary character

You realize how dumb you sound, right?

>>50853290
Anon rolled terribly for his genetics, thus now suffers from autism, making it impossible for him to differentiate games from reality

>>50852727
> 12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.

Bull fucking shit. Especially at lower levels. In 5e your stats are going to be most of your attack modifier.

The difference between a 12(+1) vs 18(+4) is a 15% hit rate and is the lion's share of a character's attack modifier. That is difference between missing half the time and two thirds the time.

>>50853508
There's no actual link to the way you role-play your character and your character's mechanics. It's meta by definition. Even for pallies, who have actual role-play restrictions, you get a very different character if you're using the 2e Complete Paladin's Handbook or you're trying not to be a complete retard.

Paladins have unusually high minimum stats, so they're going to be unusual and rare regardless of whether you're using point buy.

>>50853571

>There's no actual link to the way you role-play your character and your character's mechanics.

What? This makes no sense.

Your characters mechanics are a representation of the character you're roleplaying. Having a good, functional set of mechanics is helpful in a roleplaying sense because it lets you clearly define your character capabilities and have a good idea of the ways in which they can meaningfully interact with the world and setting.

Your characters is more than their mechanics, but if the mechanics aren't a useful part of the character then they might as well not exist.

>>50853522
>things you choose to do
>things you don't choose to do, but happen anyway
These are not the same. If you have a problem with things that are imaginary, maybe /tg/ isn't the place for you?

>>50853511
From an in-universe perspective, characters are born, not made. Rolling for stats simulates that better. If you don't care about simulationism, then it's completely irrelevant to you. But that doesn't mean it's completely irrelevant to everyone.

Is no one going to mention how there's literally nothing stopping you from assigning your points at random in a point-buy system? Roll-for-stats is the objectively inferior chargen method solely due to the fact that it can easily be replicated in a broader system such as point-buy.

>>50853619

>I am not pretending to be autistic because I choose to, I do it because the die told me

>>50853611
I didn't even begin to claim that mechanics weren't a useful part of the character. But just because your strength is 18 doesn't mean you're obligated to play a strongman, nor if you have 6 constitution are you required to play a kid with an inhaler. Your character's personality is the majority of their RP, and that's not really linked to your stats in most systems. You can absolutely play womanizer with a shitty CHA score, you just probably won't get many ladies. Perhaps you're suave as hell, but you smell terrible all the time, or perhaps you're Eric Idle's wink-wink nudge-nudge guy.

>>50853662
>But just because your strength is 18 doesn't mean you're obligated to play a strongman

>If your character is strong you are not obligated to play a strong character.

I'm not parsing that one.

>>50853679
Strongman = carnival guy who lifts things heavy stuff for a living.

File: 1442898227389.jpg (69KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x480px

>>50853619
>D&D
>Simulationist

Also

>Implying all the hardcore simulationist games like Hero System and GURPS use random chargen.

File: image.jpg (51KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x600px

>>50853277
Underrated post. Too bad fa/tg/guys are autistic min/maxing munchkins and wouldnt know good philosophy if it pissed in their face.

But I guess that's what happens when you're born with low INT and try to role play a smart person.

>>50852727
>>50853314
>12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.
You're both fucking idiots and should actually learn the game that you're playing.

Without even getting into the nitty-gritty mechanical aspects, a character with 18 STR would have a light load of 100 lb. while a character with 12 STR would have a light load of 43 lb.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/carryingCapacity.htm

In case you haven't noticed or just suck at math, that's a difference of 57 lbs. which is a big fucking difference.

>>50853536
Gee, Anon, maybe if that's the case you shouldn't just go in flailing like a retard.

Maybe you could consider using a ranged weapon instead, which uses Dex? Or weapon with the Finesse quality, which also uses Dex?

Maybe work with another party member to gain Advantage?

Cover doesn't work only for ranged weapons, get yourself a spear and stab from behind a buddy, or a barrier. Alternatively, don't just stand there, hit it and quit it and make the enemy decide between chasing you and giving an AoO to your buddy or letting you get away.

Maybe use some thought before getting into fights to prep the area, or position yourself. Maybe look to see if you might get ambushed somewhere.

You can also interact with one object or feature of The Environment for free each round, so use that too. Knock stuff over, throw something at your enemy to distract him. Or get your GM to allow you to try and distract them verbally since there aren't really skills for that.

Honestly, engaging all this sort of stuff is one of the reasons people argue FOR rolling stats. So that you're forced to work around your weaknesses instead of just rolling your way through shit. That's what ruins D&D players for other games where they don't understand how beneficial things like positioning, or cover, or terrain, or preparation etc. can be.

And once again, Finesse.

>>50853753

7/10, gave me a pause for a bit.

Except none of what you said makes any difference to his core point? Which was that it is a significant difference?

If anything, pointing out ways to close the difference just means you acknowledge that the difference is significant.

>>50853782

> Without even getting into the nitty-gritty mechanical aspects, a character with 18 STR would have a light load of 100 lb. while a character with 12 STR would have a light load of 43 lb.

Either don't carry a bunch of heavy shit around, or get I dunno maybe a cart or something? Or get the guy with 18 STR to help you carry shit.

>>50853753
Oh, I didn't realize I was a baby at character creation. Gosh, I sure am a precocious toddler!

Genetics =/= Environment.

A low STR to me, represents a person who was malnourished during their childhoood, or didn't bother to do physical exercise, not someone with Muscular Dystrophy or some shit.

I honestly can't see genetics accounting for more than 1 or 2 points.

Same with intellect, wisdom, charisma etc. 90% of who you are is what you've done with your Human base template, excluding outliers from genetic disorders.

>>50853277
People IRL didn't choose to start off stronger than others but we, as players, choose who our characters are going to end up being.

We choose their race, their class, their alignment, their spells, even their height, weight, age, and sex. These characters are not autonomous and they live or die based on our direction as players.

Genetics have nothing to with rolled stats and that argument has no bearing because this is supposed to be a game where everyone is supposed to contribute equally to the party dynamic.

On a related note, I always thought it was weird as hell that there's more mechanical difference between strength 18 and 18/100 than there is 18 and 6, especially since there's only a 1% chance it even becomes relevant for a given character.

Yet another bizarre D&D quirk.

File: goalposts.jpg (29KB, 300x240px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 300x240px

>>50853808
>12 STR and 18 STR aren't really a huge difference.
>Hurr just don't carry heavy shit xD

Pic related

>>50853852
It's called teamwork, and is a viable solution to the problem of "I am not strong enough to carry this on my own."

Playing with 12 STR just means I play differently, not that I can't play.

I mean, what do you do when you point buy a wizard and have low Strength?

>>50853831
Even when I roll stats, I use it to create the character still. WHY does he have low Con but high Str? It doesn't make sense for him to have been bookish and not physical as a reason for low Con in that case. Maybe he had a sickness as a child he never recovered from, or grew up in a sanitized environment, or inherited something from his parents, or has really bad allergies, etc.

Why does he have such high Cha? Is my character just really good looking, with good physical stats? Or does he have high intelligence and is manipulative and able to persuade people? Or a high Wis score, and he's just a genuine and caring person and people respond to that.

>>50853792
That's not the point anon, but keep moving the goalposts I guess.

>>50853888
The point I was trying to make was that there was a difference between 18 STR and 12 STR. If there was no difference then I wouldn't need teamwork because I'd be just as strong at 12 STR than the other guy would be at 18 STR.
>>50853888
What does any of that have to do with anything I just said? You really need to learn how to focus and structure your argument because everything you just wrote was anecdotal at best.

File: Goalpost.jpg (36KB, 625x353px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 625x353px

>>50853792
>Implying that changing the stat involved matters.
>Implying that the difference between a 12 Dex vs 18 Dex wouldn't have the same fucking effect on Ranged/Finesse attacks.
>Implying a guy with good stats can't use the same tactics.


Gee, Anon, those goalposts are sure flailing around like retards.

>>50853888
>Even when I roll stats, I use it to create the character still.

On the other hand, I can come up with interesting characters all on my own.

(Also, nobody cares if your dude got really sick one time when he was a kid. Seriously, nobody else at the table gives a fuck about your backstory except when it affects the game in the present in a major way. Memorable characters have fun quirks and mannerisms, not pages of pointless history.)

>>50853841
Percentile strength was just weird shit. There's a reason it only shows up in AD&D.

>>50853831
> this is supposed to be a game where everyone is supposed to contribute equally to the party dynamic
This is exactly the original point I was making. This is a modern gaming philosophy that lends itself to point buy systems because every character should have identical capabilities. So the point of chargen is to allocate your capabilities to make a character. But, because optimization is a thing and no RPG is balanced, the power level within your party is never going to be even unless you're all playing clones.

For old-school D&D, it simply isn't true. You roll your stats because not everyone has the same capabilities, and not everyone is as useful to a group as everyone else. You then work with what you're given and make the best of it. Not everyone in the party has to have the same power level, but that's ok because the system is designed around that, and even if you roll REALLY poorly you can usually use the aforementioned balance problems to even out your usefulness to the group somewhat. As long as you get ONE half-decent stat roll, you can make a competent wizard.

People who claim that stat rolling is shit are usually either not realizing that there are different styles of RPGs, or they're conflating their dislikes with each other.

>>50853971

>This is a modern gaming philosophy that lends itself to point buy systems because every character should have identical capabilities.

Nope. Equal and balanced does not mean identical, moron.

>>50853993
Are you randomly assigning a point buy value? No? Then characters have identical CAPABILITIES. Not identical STATS. That's literally the entire purpose of point buy. Reading comprehension, brah.

>>50853971
>because optimization is a thing and no RPG is balanced, the power level within your party is never going to be even unless you're all playing clones.
You actually have no fucking idea what the fuck you're talking about.

1) Equal != Identitcal
2) If everyone has the same amount of resource to build their character, they'll always be equal.
3) OD&D didn't have modifiers until you reached 16, anything below that gave no modifiers.
4) It's difficult to contribute when one party member got lucky and rolled god stats while your character was lucky to roll a 13 as their highest.
5) Wizards need one stat while most martials need STR for melee atk/dmg, DEX for ranged atk/dmg, CON for health, and WIS for perception, not even comparable.
6) On that note, it's much more difficult to have a well rounded character w/ rolled stats vs. point buy.

You really need to play the games you claim to know about instead of just spouting shit for (You)'s mate.

>>50853910
>>50853892

I never said there wasn't a difference. Just that it wasn't significant. If I for some reason wanted to deal damage with 12 strength, I would still be able to do so.

I might have to use a Finesse weapon instead if I have the Dexterity, I might have to really work on positioning or tactics with another player to compensate for it, but it wouldn't make it impossible to contribute.

>>50853914

Wait, are you saying that 12 would be the highest stat? That's insane. Reroll that shit. Or play it knowing that you're gimped as fuck and ask the GM to have a quest line to get better stats or some shit.

>Implying a guy with good stats can't use the same tactics.

Never said they couldn't, just that you could use those tactics to still deal damage effectively with only 12 strength.

Same as if you're a low level wizard who made his character with the array and dumped Str and you run out of spells, do you just stop doing shit and wait and see what happens because you have "12 strength"?

>>50853922

> Nobody at YOUR table gives a fuck about character backstory.

I mean, it was just an example of how you can use rolled stats as inspiration for characters you don't normally play. Your dude was sick as a kid, how does that affect his current character? Did he get saved by a Cleric and now follows their faith? Did they fail to cure him, and now he is distrustful of Gods and Magic in general? Does he have moral objections against poisons and curses that do the same to others?

Jesus dude. I mean, don't write an essay on your character, but "fun little quirks and mannerisms" sounds pretty fucking weak.

>>50854031

There you go, moving the goalposts again.

>>50854090

You claimed it wasn't consistent, then made a lot of points entirely about how to close the gap.

If you have to write that much about making up the difference, then there is a significant statistical fucking difference.

>>50854065
>4) It's difficult to contribute when one party member got lucky and rolled god stats while your character was lucky to roll a 13 as their highest.

Are you talking about OD&D or new D&D?

Because in OD&D you could totally still contribute with shit stats. Even if it's only as a plucky youth sent to check for traps.

Usually going with shit rolls where 13 is your highest stat meant you ran a high-lethality character.

Or your GM wasn't a fucking dick and let you re-roll.

>>50854065
Point buy a fighter in 3e, put points into optimal things. Point buy a sorcerer in 3e, put points into optimal things. Look, everyone had the same resources, so those characters are equally strong and useful to the party! Point buy is broken just as badly by system balance as rolled stats are, if not more so.

If your goal is having a group of players with equal power levels, there is no solution in D&D, you have to go to other systems. Which stat generation system you use won't fix that.

>>50854090
Being able to lift 57 more lbs. is pretty fucking significant. Even looking at it from a mechanical standpoint, being able to deal at least 3 more damage to someone without even rolling is pretty significant as well, especially in a game like D&D where damage given reduces the damage received simply by reducing the number of enemies on the field.

You've either never played, get the bulk of your misinformation from 4chan, are retarded and got past your handler, or a combination of the three.

>>50854112
Obviously I was talking about new D&D, as evidenced by the point directly above it.

>3) OD&D didn't have modifiers until you reached 16, anything below that gave no modifiers.

There weren't shit stats in OD&D because stats back then didn't matter until you hit 16.

>>50854093
No goalposts were moved. You just didn't understand my post. If you've got 25 build points, that's 25 points of stats going into your character. Every character at the table has 25 points of capabilities. That does not mean that every character is identical, only that they have identical capabilities, in this example 25 points worth.

>>50854109
>You claimed it wasn't significant

The thing is, because you CAN close the gap it isn't significant. It just means you take a different route, not that you can't get to where you're going.

It's just as valid as if you're playing a low level Fighter with 12 strength for some reason, or if your are playing a Wizard with 12 strength who ran out of spells.

And if you DO play a Fighter, as you gain levels you get more and more options to close the gap.

>>50854175
Ah, yeah I stopped with D&D around 3.PF.

Still, all the points I made for getting around only having a +1 modifier vs a +4 modifier were from the 5E SRD.

>>50854155
> Being able to lift 57 more lbs. is pretty fucking significant.

Use a lever. Use a friend. Did you lift your way through campaigns for some reason?

Jesus Christ. These arguments are why people say D&D ruins players.

>>50854175
Except for bend/lift, carry weight, learning spells from scrolls, bonus priest spells, and the whole AD&D nonweapon proficiency system.

>>50854150
>Look, everyone had the same resources, so those characters are equally strong and useful to the party!
>If your goal is having a group of players with equal power levels, there is no solution in D&D

There's really nothing else to say, you're legitimately stupid and should just walk away from this conversation until you gain focus to avoid embarrassing yourself further.

>>50854180

>The thing is, because you CAN close the gap it isn't significant. It just means you take a different route, not that you can't get to where you're going.

Except that's bullshit because nothing stops someone with the actually good stat using the exact same techniques to stay ahead.

>>50845949
i mean at this point gurpse is a pretty fucking archeic game system, its older than anything anyone on this board is likely to have played since unlike dnd editions are still fundamentaly the same game

>>50854229
Diminishing returns, and this isn't a competitive game. You don't have to do the most damage, you just have to do enough.

>>50854204
If I was just as strong as a dude with 18 STR then I wouldn't need to do all that shit just to equal the dude who has 18 STR.

At this point you're arguing in circles. Either get a point or I'm not responding next time.

>>50854090
>Wait, are you saying that 12 would be the highest stat?

No, I was saying a +3 to hit was a +3 to hit. Of course a character is going to use his best avenue of attack. Shifting the stat from Strength to Dexterity doesn't matter.

>Never said they couldn't, just that you could use those tactics to still deal damage effectively with only 12 strength.

The guy with high stats will use those tactics all the more effectively. The point is that the low stat guy is still behind on resources.

>Same as if you're a low level wizard who made his character with the array and dumped Str and you run out of spells, do you just stop doing shit and wait and see what happens because you have "12 strength"?

Cantrips are a thing, and there are damage dealing ones. In fact some casters are built around Cantripping all day everyday. So there isn't really any reason for a wizard to be engaging in melee combat, barring shapeshifting shenanigans.

>>50854239

>Diminishing returns

Explain how this actually applies in D&D.

>this isn't a competitive game.

Ahh, that old chestnut. Balance is just as important in a cooperative game as a competitive one, just in different ways.

The game is less fun if people don't have equal ability to contribute. Those contributions can happen in different ways, but everyone should feel roughly on par when it comes to their ability to influence events and overcome obstacles.

>>50854243
Just because you aren't as strong as the guy with 18 Str doesn't mean you can't contribute. Just because he can contribute more it doesn't mean you contribute less.

>>50854239
How do we define "enough" exactly and how does "enough" stack when you have a dude in the party who laps your damage output just because he got a bigger stat number than you?

Because if we say 10 DMG/turn is enough then the guy whose rolling 30-60 DMG a turn is going to look that much more impressive next to you. At best, you might be able to kill steal but then, nobody is happy.

>>50854257

If a person with 18 Str and a person with 12 Str both undertake the same action, which relies on Str, then yes, the person with 12 Str is contributing lest. It is a statistical fact.

>>50854239
Ok, I will play Superman, Joe over there plays Batman, Tina gets Wonder Woman, Chad gets the Martian Manhunter, and you get Arm-Fall-Off-Boy. Don't worry, clever play will make Arm-Fall-Off-Boy as effective as everyone else.

>>50854257
If there were a contest where both people had to roll STR, the dude with 12 STR is going to contribute less simply because his numbers are smaller.

That's the way the game works, you get the dude with 18 STR to lift the boulder while the dude with CHA negotiates, that's kinda how the party is supposed to work.

>>50854218
I'll reiterate again, then, since you seem incapable of understanding the finer points.

There are two major chargen philosophies. Make everyone have an equal power level even though they're different. Or make everyone different because everyone is different.

Old-school D&D realized that not everyone is equal. Some people get lucky and are strong, fast, smart, and successful. Other people aren't any of those things. It's a gritty, ugly thing, but it's not wrong. So you roll up a character, and do what you can with it. It limits a player's ability to optimize their character, which can be very helpful for some people to actually play their character rather than their character sheet.

More modern RPGs want everyone to be at least theoretically on the same playing field. So you use point buy, or karmagen for Shadowrun, or Storyteller, or whatever. It's not particularly realistic, but the hope is for verisimilitude within party dynamics because you don't want Angel Summoner and BMX Bandit. Unfortunately this ends up being a fool's choice because the very mechanics of the game undermine the point buy system. An optimized character will ALWAYS be better mechanically than an unoptimized one. A sorcerer will always be better than a fighter. There is no verisimilitude, because the game doesn't allow it unless the players choose to limit themselves.

>>50854259
Why do you say "Kill Steal" like someone would be unhappy about that? If your attack kills the guy, then the dude doing 30-60 damage can attack another enemy.

"Enough" is enough to let the other guy kill an enemy with 3 attacks instead of 4. Or to hold off a weaker enemy that might otherwise flank him, or get past him and attack your mage.

> Diminishing returns

If a guy only has 20hp, you only need to do 20 damage. You don't have to hit him for 60.

>>50854254
> Shifting the stat from Strength to Dexterity doesn't matter.

My entire point is that the difference in Str isn't significant, because the system allows you ways to work around having a low stat to still be effective. That might be using a weapon that uses a different stat, that might mean taking on a different role in combat, or even choosing a different class to play, or taking levels in a class.

It might mean you have to do preparation for combat, or be more cautious about getting into combat recklessly.

Maybe you get a caster to prepare a buff spell for you, it's not like you're alone out there. You have teammates that can help you.

Man, people in this thread play VERY differently from people I've played with.

>>50854345

Except it does not only affect damage. In fact, much more importantly, it effects accuracy.

D&D basically doesn't have diminishing returns related to accuracy due to how incredibly swingy the dice is. If you can stack on extra points of accuracy, doing so will virtually always be beneficial, and the +3 to attack rolls difference between Str 12 and 18 (or Dex 12 and 18) is extremely significant.

>>50854292
Too late, you have Superman in the party, everyone else is irrelevant.

But let's not turn this into a "Caster vs. Martial" debate by another name.

Luckily, Arm-Fall-Off-Boy decided, while the other guys where slugging it out with Bane, to drop his arm into Bane's Venom production vat and it clogged up the works, drying up the supply of Venom to his henchmen, allowing the rest of the gang to focus on taking down Bane himself.

Squirrel Gi- er, AFOB saves the day, huzzah.

>>50854377
>Implying the real powerhouse isn't Martian Manhunter.

>>50854294
Sure, it works fine when i'm playing the face, or the wise. But what when the guy who was supposed to be able to lift the boulder in the first place?

>>50854345
You are missing the goddamn fucking point. You keep implying that high stats don't matter. I say they do and demonstrated it. You just keep trying to move the goalposts by switching stats and advocating "clever play," I guess because you think I believe Strength is end all be all of stats. I am saying +4 attribute bonus to hit is significantly better than +1 attribute bonus to hit. What stat that fucking +4 comes from is entirely irrelevant. Clever play is all the more effective when the player has a more powerful character, so again it doesn't fucking matter.

>>50854323
You may keep reiterating and reiterating but it's not going to make your premise less flawed.

> Make everyone have an equal power level even though they're different. Or make everyone different because everyone is different.

As long as you believe this crap, you're always going to be wrong, simple as that.

You may not like that I'm stating this as if it's a fact but we're operating on such absurd premises that there isn't really a logical way to attack it. I'd have an easier time explaining to a blind man what the sky looks like than explaining to you why the core of your argument is fundamentally wrong and have you meet me even 1/10th of the way, let alone half.

>>50852076
>Gonzo comedy games like MAID RPG are the only examples I've seen where point buy actually works

>>50854377
>Superman
>Not Martian Manhunter
>Not Batman w/ prep-time

Sure thing mate.

>>50854443
What stupid thing are you going on about?

You structured your sentence weirdly.

>>50854556
>I cannot be wrong, ergo, his argument is flawed
FTFY

>>50854374
Are we still talking 5E?

With the whole "Bounded Accuracy" and HP bloat?

With the 5 - 30 DC "to hit", maximum Ability bonus of +5, maximum proficiency bonus of +6, with magical items granting +1 most of the time and +3 at max? D20 + Ability+ Proficiency vs. DC +/- modifiers?

I mean, yeah okay at max you would have +7 instead of +11, so on a roll of 20 to hit a DC 30 you're screwed unless you have some sort of artifact to get that final +3. But DC 30 should be pretty end-game, and I would hope that if you've been playing a low Str character that long you would have invested in some other skills or equipment to create Advantage to influence that, or quested for equipment to raise your accuracy, or ideally had a GM that realized you were playing with abnormally low stats and offered you a chance over the course of the game to raise that.

If a "hard" DC is 20, then you would have to roll a 19 (with no proficiency bonus) or higher to hit, as opposed to a 17 (with no proficiency bonus).

That doubles your chances from 0.100 to 0.200 without advantage. With advantage for 12 Str it goes up to 0.191, with advantage for Str 18 it goes to 0.359.

So we already see a diminishing return. Lets add a proficiency point and make it DC 18 and DC 16. Normal is 0.150 vs 0.250, advantage is 0.278 vs 0.437. Finally lets go all the way to 13 vs 9 (7 Ability/Prof bonus vs 11) 0.400 vs 0.600 and 0.639 vs 0.840.

So we go from hitting twice as often, to hitting 1.5 times as often, or to 1.87 times to 1.31.

Well shit. You know, I honestly have to give up the "Diminishing returns" part of my argument. It does close the gap, but for every 10 swings, the +3 will let you hit twice and the +1 only lets you hit once against a hard DC, scaling up to 6 hits and 4 hits at maximum bonus without magic/artifact gear.

I mean, I personally could live with that, but I can't argue that it isn't significant.

I did not realize how swingy 5E was with this whole bounded accuracy thing.

>>50854574
Yeah, sorry, english is not my native language and when i write rashly i do stupid stuff. What i meant to say was:

"What happens when i'm the one who's supposed to lift the boulder in the first place?"

>>50854550
Since your only actual argument seems to be "NO U" there is indeed nothing left to talk about. If you're unable to even discuss the premise then you have completely failed.

I actually have no idea what your position even is, because you haven't actually offered any arguments other than "you're wrong, idiot." So I don't even know whether you have a problem with my assertion that point buy and stat rolling have different goals for character creation, or whether you think that point buy isn't intended to equalize character power rather than randomize it.

Because you seem to have no position of your own, I am unable to even address it because YOU HAVE NO PREMISE.

>>50854637
No worries I guess, you're still wrong but at least now I know how wrong you are.

Anyways, if you're supposed to lift the boulder but your STR scores aren't high enough to do the job then at that point you're dead weight and should probably retire the character unless you have a gimmick that allows you to either lift boulders anyways or do something else that contributes to the party dynamic.

D&D is not a game where you can get away with having a weak link because at that point, not only are you taking up a slot that a better character could fill but you're also forcing other party members to pick up the slack.

I know it sucks but short of talking to the GM and working something out, there isn't really a whole lot you can do once your niche has been displaced.

>>50854520
Dude, you sound like anything that isn't optimized to hit as much as possible is useless.

I'm not "moving the goalposts", I'm saying that IN THE GAME, HAVING A STRENGTH OF 12 vs 18 ISN'T SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE GAME IS SET UP SO YOU CAN COMPENSATE FOR THAT.

Although >>50854374 made a very good point about how swingy accuracy is now in 5E. Which you'll note I conceded, since it seems increasing your accuracy is very limited.

I mean, using a Finesse weapon is still a valid option since it uses a different stat. But it definitely cuts down on how effective strategy and using other game mechanics to compensate can be.

I just don't see why you're stuck on only having one game mechanic be the end-all decider of what your character can do.

>>50854642
That roundabout shit doesn't work when I've been engaging you for the last hour and all you've been doing is either spouting nonsense or moving the goalposts.

Of course it'll seem as though I "have no premise" when I was arguing against a point you made like three arguments ago.

>>50854112
>Or your GM wasn't a fucking dick and let you re-roll.
Why roll at all if you're just gonna reroll until you get what you want

>>50854705
>I'm not "moving the goalposts"
Not him but yes you are, you've been doing so for the last hour.

>>50854112
>Or your GM wasn't a fucking dick and let you re-roll.
Why not just use point-buy then since you're just going to bitch until you get the right number anyways?

>>50854730
See, that was the perfect opportunity to link to your posts, if they actually had any content in them. Also, as I claimed before, my goalposts never moved. Any apparent shifting is actually just you not understanding what I wrote. (I'm not strength-guy, by the way, no clue what's going on with that one.)

>>50854776
If you're too lazy to scroll up and follow the conversation than I no longer see any reason to continue this farce.

Good bye

File: Alan_Keyes.jpg (57KB, 416x431px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 416x431px

I just gave the players in my Lankhmar campaign 30 point buy instead of the 27 in 5e. I suppose I could have went with 32, but in the end everyone got some solid attributes.

Isn't this so much easier than agonizing over dice rolling conventions and rerolling?

>>50854764
Why play a TTRPG if you can't figure out how to get around a boulder except by having one guy lift it?

>>50854752
Anon. The point is to have fun. There's getting some low stats, and then there's getting unusually bad stats.

The RPG police aren't going to bust in and make you point buy instead if you roll really shitty.

>>50854804
Let's see, then!
>>50854550
>>50854218
No content in these.
>>50854065
>>50853831
Contains points already addressed by myself and others.

So did you have something new?

>>50854861
Why roll if you're unwilling to accept all possible outcomes of it? You could just point buy whatever and save everyone the pointless effort

>>50854889
Exactly. Point buy exists so that people don't have to deal with a gimped character if they don't want to, or char-op magnates.
Rolling stats appeals to people who like to gamble, enjoy playing gimped characters as a challenge, or who don't know better because it's 1985 and D&D is the only RPG.

File: IMG_0318.jpg (156KB, 1000x608px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1000x608px

Most of the time rolling for stats comes accompanied with some sort of "drop the lowest roll" and, more importantly, the ability to assign those attributes as is appropriate. I don't have strong preferences one way or another, especially since I've never had a DM who was particularly anal about not letting a player re-roll completely crippled characters. Sometimes the randomness of it all can be fun, I guess.

That being said, I don't think I've ever seen a good argument for making a player roll their attributes right down the line. I'd be interested in hearing why a GM would think "okay, this first roll is your STR, this next roll is your WIS..." was a good idea over just letting players put those rolls where they want

File: alGore_1515233c.jpg (16KB, 460x288px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 460x288px

>>50854861
Admittedly point-buy is all the "fun" of getting a gift card for Christmas, but rolling is like getting Lottery Tickets.

Rolling stats isn't supposed to be fun at all.
So just fucking point buy and stop coming up with "no-fail" dice rolling methods.

>>50854918
It could be fun for a wacky one-shot in the vein of Kobolds Ate My Baby. Or for a particularly lethal killer-DM campaign, if there were players who enjoyed that sort of thing.

>>50854960
Yes, but /tg/ is full of people who want to plot out their character progression all the way to 20th level for optimization.

They don't really enjoy the experience of playing games with others, they just enjoy trying to "beat:" the game mechanics.

>>50854993
Optimizing allpws you to enjoy the game without avoidable mechanical failings getting in the way. Unless you're a mascohist and enjoy fighting the game to have fun

>>50854993
To be fair, some of that can be the system's fault. In Shadowrun and Exalted (and a bunch of other systems) the XP cost for increasing your skills and/or stats escalates the higher you go, but at character creation the costs are flat. This very heavily encourages you to minmax at chargen and fill up the gaps with XP later, rather than making a generalist first and specializing later. In Shadowrun in particular it's VERY difficult to grow upwards rather than outwards.

If a player finds out it could going to take them either 10 sessions or 25 sessions to get their character to the same good balance of versatility and power, that's some pretty solid motivation to optimize.

>>50854695
And that's exactly what point buy advocates make: with point buy you don't... shouldn't need (if the game is balanced) to talk to your gm or to retire your character, you'll always be able to make sure that your character can fill his niche and so on.

File: blazing-saddles-gun4.jpg (39KB, 205x215px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 205x215px

>>50855028
Back in the day, we used to use in-game cleverness and ingenuity to overcome the mechanical challengers present in each game.

Reading this entire thread, you get the overwhelming sense that all of this is nothing more than worry that "Little Billy sitting next to me has a better character!" when you want to have the "best" character mechanically at the table.

It has nothing to do with fun, and everything to do with dick measuring. It's a bunch of people who sit there looking constipated if they feel they aren't at least tied for best attributes at the table. Buncha Tha/tg/uys.

>>50855103
You keep thinking chargen is a competition. The point is to be effective. You don't compete with your teammates, you compliment them. You do that by being good at your role, not by being a handicapped retard that needs special consideration just to make it through the dungeon in one piece, let alone aid your teammates in any significant way

>>50854377
That's...not how bane's venom supply works at all

>>50855255
There is also the fact that some groups, like mine, engage in social, mental and/or physical pvp from time to time without (shocking, i know) anyone get butthurt. And that lack of butthurt also come from the fact that the pvp was as fair as possible for every side involved.

Rolled 2, 6, 6, 5, 2, 6, 4, 6, 4, 5, 1, 4, 5, 6, 1, 5, 3, 6 = 77 (18d6)

3d6 down the line baby

>>50855341
Str: 14
Dex: 13
Con: 14
Int: 10
Wis: 12
Cha: 14

Rolled 1, 2, 2, 6, 1, 6, 1, 5, 4, 1, 3, 6, 3, 4, 2, 3, 6, 3 = 59 (18d6)

>>50855341
I will also be in this campaign, oh boy I sure hope my character can keep up

>>50855399
STR: 5
DEX: 13
CON: 10
INT: 10
WIS: 9
CHA: 12

Rolled 5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 6, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2, 5, 4, 1, 1, 3 = 47 (18d6)

>>50855341
>>50855399

Mom said I could play too

>>50855359
>mildly competent paladin
>>50855446
>deadwieght rogue

>>50855313
>pvp was as fair as possible for every side involved.
So, point buy.
>>50855255
So, point buy.

File: IMG_0130.jpg (96KB, 900x472px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 900x472px

>>50855509
Str: 9
Dex: 6
Con: 10
Int: 6
Wis: 11
Cha: 5

O-okay, maybe I'll reconsider this "adventuring" thing after all

>>50855563
You'll make a very fine Adept. Maybe an Expert?

>>50855556
Maybe i was unclear, that's exactly my point..

File: IMG_0353.png (1MB, 1024x1001px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x1001px

>>50855359
>>50855446
>>50855563
Theorycrafting and debating is fun and all - hell, it's practically the lifeblood of /tg/, but I think in practice the debate starts and ends here. Three players sit down at the table:

one rolls up a character that gets a +2 to their STR, CON, and CHA, a +1 to DEX and WIS, and takes no WIS penalties.

One is going to have to play a race that gets a bonus to DEX, because Rogue is the only thing he has a hope at being good with.

The third player is completely useless. Underwhelming in almost every regard: a penalty to thier STR, DEX, CHA, and INT. He is suited to do nothing. He should probably stay at home and never, ever adventure.

All things equal, would any sane GM actually make the third player here keep their character? Could anyone on /tg/ make a sound argument as to why Player 3 should have to keep his crippled fucking mess of an underachiever in the same game as Player 1's Paladin? If so, do they actually expect the player to enjoy playing this for more than one session for the sheer novelty of it? If not, what's the point of even rolling out characters if someone like player 3 gets a do over?

>>50855692
Player three could drop his arm in bane's venom vat.

>>50844919
roll ability score
roll class
roll race
roll gender
roll everything
YOU CAN'T CHOOSE HOW YOU ARE BORN.

>>50855814
>roll everything
Fatal please

You can choose your profession, how you cut your hair, and some other stuff

>>50855833
>You can choose your profession
Not in the middle ages.

>>50855855
This mean this fatal rule was right?

>>50855814
>Roll Attributes AND roll class

Okay, there's an okay argument to be made for rolling your attributes in some games, but this is the best way to get literally unplayable characters

I think we can agree that while rolling for stats isn't the most balanced approach to game design, it can potentially lead to unexpected fun.

>>50856374
Or aggravation.

And honestly, you can buy "fun" stats with Point buy, if that's your thing.

>>50856374
No.

>>50856374
A game that has a good character creation allows you to play any archetype allowed by that game effectively with the randomness coming from the rolls being something to make the character interesting.

Take SWN for example, you roll down the line for your stats but you can boost one of your main stats to a baseline minimum. 40k rpgs have a different kind of approach that also works. You can buy cheap upgrades for your main stats so even if you're starting at a slightly lower value you can "be good" in no time.

>>50855692
I can only imagine how sad and unfulfilled your life is with an attitude like this.

>>50856530
Well, D&D IS pretty terrible.

Low stats weren't too bad with OD&D with how little rolling there was, but 3.PF with it's ROLL FOR EVERYTHING really ruined a bunch of people.

>>50856598
Nice counterargument friendo. I've seen the light now. I'm sure player 3 will have a fucking blast with his rolling penalties to everything he could conceivably want to do.

>>50855778
You made my Arm-Fall-Off-Boy hyperbole/strawman worth it. Thank you.

>>50855814
>roll gender
I've had two groups look at me funny for this
I don't see why it's such a big deal
Even if I end up a chick 3/4 of the time

File: 126546305.png (156KB, 576x540px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 576x540px

>>50844919
>rolling for ability scores
>in the 2017th year of our Lord
>mfw

Rolled 424, 684, 853, 22, 288, 24, 308, 235, 756, 257, 77, 444, 468, 78, 269 = 5187 (15d1000)

>>50844919
Rolling always rolling unless Gurps.

>>50862557
What would a game with d1000s even look like

File: tumblr_n7sfinABIw1qaqbato6_1280.jpg (223KB, 670x503px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 670x503px

>>50845020
My knee grow