Rolling dice Vs point buy

[Agita]

I can see what you mean by that and relate to it. Not only that, I kinda find bizarre that the rest of the party have the same stats as me, only arranged in a different order, so one dumped on Charisma, the other on wisdom, someone on Int... So, somehow, this group of adventurers managed to find someone crippled in a specific area? Okay....

I fail to see what's wrong with that.

[Arturick]

I dislike point buy because it creates characters with stupid stats. Dump stats are stupid. Having my character lack any personality, force of will, or sense of self just so I can survive is stupid.

That being said, rolling shitty stats is just as stupid. I've done both.

Really I lean toward the view that having bad stats is really lame, and they aren't that big a deal anyway, so I tend to favor rolling with a very high-power arrangement (Like roll 12 times, take the best 6). It's never that I want mad power, I just get sick of roleplaying retards or otherwise wildly one-dimensional characters. If you use point buy, you are going to dump one or two stats and if you roleplay that stats you end up being a one-dimensional dweeb, which is usually going to make you comically bad in one area. I would rather just have a 10 or 11 in those areas.

If point-buys started at 10, I don't think I'd have a problem with it. Starting at 8 creates all kinds of annoying issues with how you roleplay and how your character interacts with the world. Everyone plays differently, but generally speaking they all let a character's stats influence their view of the character in different ways. So it sucks having that 6 or that 8 right there, because everyone zeroes in on it and gives you shit when you don't act that stupid or that reserved. Everyone also has a different idea of what each stat means, so that 6 in Charisma means you're ugly to one group but just means you have no personality in another group. It doesn't matter who's wrong, because you aren't going to waste the group's time arguing with them. Give me "average" any day, please, because at least then people don't expect anything of you. Point buy almost guarantees that people will look at your stats and decide how THEY want you to roleplay, and you're going to catch shit at one point or another.   Like the view or not, what you end up with is a waste of time.

Or you could, you know, spend the two points to bump that 8 up to a 10.

[Bauglir]

When your party tells you how to roleplay, I'm gonna blame the party for that. Not the stat generation method. Unless you're rolling stats in order, point buy results in no more choice of dump stats than rolling does, so that is also a silly criticism. It does tend to reduce the number of odd results (it doesn't completely eliminate them, due to situations where you're not playing to 20 and the point buy works out to be cheaper if you just use magic items or level bonuses to meet that even score). It also lends itself more easily to building a 1-dimensional character defined entirely by how you want them to perform in combat, since your good stats do come at a cost to your bad stats.

Personally, though, if a player wants to do the latter, they're not going to be any more heavily invested in roleplaying the character who had rolled stats. The freedom to play the character you want to play, and one in a party that had relatively even starting points (class still throws things off, obviously), is tremendously more valuable to me than the freedom to sabotage part of the game that I enjoy.

[10d10]

I can see what you mean by that and relate to it. Not only that, I kinda find bizarre that the rest of the party have the same stats as me, only arranged in a different order, so one dumped on Charisma, the other on wisdom, someone on Int... So, somehow, this group of adventurers managed to find someone crippled in a specific area? Okay....

I fail to see what's wrong with that.

Maybe nothing's wrong, is just the way I feel about it.

[Arturick]

Is it just me, or do the majority of the pro-rollers seem to be "fake rollers?"

"I want a high powered stat array, but instead of just using a high powered stat array, we're going to roll 30d6, drop the lowest 27 rolls, 18 times, and take the best six results.  As a result, everyone in the group will have 18, 18, 18, 18, 18, 17 (for Charisma), except for one guy who will somehow end up with one 15.  We will spend the rest of the campaign calling that guy the retard, and he will whine every day for the next two years about the shameful curse laid upon him by the dice gods."

If your DM actually let's you reroll a character that you don't like, then why not just give your character whatever stats you think are appropriate?  If you don't take what you roll the first time, then it's no longer a random process.  You're just wasting time.

[X-Codes]

I think you're taking it a bit to the extreme.  Sometimes you roll 5 18's and a 17 like you said, and sometimes you roll the stats of that guy that fell off the front end of a donkey cart as a kid and got shit on, trampled, and run over before almost dying of his injuries.  Generally speaking, we want to avoid playing that guy.

[Arturick]

I think you're taking it a bit to the extreme.  Sometimes you roll 5 18's and a 17 like you said, and sometimes you roll the stats of that guy that fell off the front end of a donkey cart as a kid and got shit on, trampled, and run over before almost dying of his injuries.  Generally speaking, we want to avoid playing that guy.

Yeah, and nobody wants to play that guy (hell, several pro-rollers have basically said an 8 in ONE STAT is "crippled"), so you ask the DM to let you reroll.  And he let's you, because this is a game.  So the whole exercise was pointless.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Wizard 20 with straight 9s to every stat,
but invested all stat increasers into Int,
and bought a few items for that purpose too.

vs.

Fighter 20 with straight 13s to every stat ... and whatever.

It's not a fair fight at level 20.


BUT


Wizard 1 v Fighter 1 and the above stats,
the Fighter has the equivalent of 6 2nd level
spells with Persist on them, and even a
better than (su) anti-anti-magic on each.

Wizard 7 got a nifty spell to even things out most of the way.

[10d10]

Yeah, and nobody wants to play that guy (hell, several pro-rollers have basically said an 8 in ONE STAT is "crippled"), so you ask the DM to let you reroll.  And he let's you, because this is a game.  So the whole exercise was pointless.

From what I understand, Bloody Initiate mention 8 as dump stat because it'll have the racial -2... As in, Charisma 6 dwarf.

But either rolling or PB you'll have one or two dump stats.

[Complete4th]

I like point buy and static HPs. And playing 4e really helps with the dump stat issue for those who think it's a problem.

[b100d_arrowz]

I personally love dice rolling, that is what this game is based on right  I've always felt a better connection to the characters for whom I've rolled dice for their stats as opposed to just pulling them from a predetermined array, it just feels more personal for me. Our usual system was 4d6 re-rolling ones for stats, and roll twice for health. One of my former players who served as the DM of our group once I graduated from college had dice for HP but not for stats, he decided to stick with an overall mod of +X before racial adjustments, and the players seemed to like it well enough, the +X varied from 8 to 10 depending on the campaign.

[veekie]

Rolling works best when everyone knows what they're doing. Assuming certain minimums, rolling actually favors mild MAD(but not severe MAD) somewhat over monostat, since its easier to get many stats at 14-16 than single high stats. Of course, it does mean you tend to play more unexpected characters(some would not be feasible at all in point buy, due to the number of stats you need, but you can luck into the required stats). Practically all groups actually using rolls allow rerolling batches of universally terrible stats, with the 'minimum high stat' line usually set at 1 stat at least at 16.

Its definitely not for all groups, those who play it more competitively than casually would be against it. It has its place though.

[caelic]

I like point buy, but I don't like it as a graft to a fundamentally random system.  I much prefer a system where EVERYTHING is governed by point buy--stats, abilities, skills, the works.

That tends to reduce the number of carbon-copy stat arrays, because there are other things to spend points on.  One player may have overall lower stats, because he wanted to invest more heavily in spells or skills.  Another may have chosen to go with very high stats, and only a few powers or skills.

Hero and GURPS both take this to the extreme; Hackmaster Basic is an interesting example of a middle-ground system where the point buy system is more thoroughly integrated into the overall mechanics.  (Stats are rolled, but you can use points to modify them upwards; those same points, however, are used to purchase your class and skills, so you don't want to overdo it.)

[10d10]

I like point buy, but I don't like it as a graft to a fundamentally random system.  I much prefer a system where EVERYTHING is governed by point buy--stats, abilities, skills, the works.

I'm not very familiar with GURPs and Hero, but would you consider nWoD as this type of system you mentioned?

[Agita]

I like point buy, but I don't like it as a graft to a fundamentally random system.  I much prefer a system where EVERYTHING is governed by point buy--stats, abilities, skills, the works.

I'm not very familiar with GURPs and Hero, but would you consider nWoD as this type of system you mentioned?

I don't think so. Reading caelic's post, I'm fairly sure he means systems where everything comes from the same pool of points. Mutants and Masterminds is another system of this type. Or Das Schwarze Auge, for something no-one here probably knows. In nWoD, all advancement comes from the same pool of (experience) points, but at character creation the pools are separate.

[liquid150]

I prefer point buy and use maximum hit points.

[Tiltowait]

It's much easier to get a single high stat and a decent stat (say 18 and 14) than it is to get multiple decent to good stats (say 4 14-16s) when rolling.

On a decent PB both are possible.

The more stats you need to worry about the less likely all will fall into line.

Rolling heavily favors SAD characters.

[X-Codes]

It's much easier to get a single high stat and a decent stat (say 18 and 14) than it is to get multiple decent to good stats (say 4 14-16s) when rolling.

On a decent PB both are possible.

The more stats you need to worry about the less likely all will fall into line.

Rolling heavily favors SAD characters.

Four stats is really extreme MAD, and that is really already factored into the relative weakness of the classes that need all those abilities (read: Paladins and Monks).

Rolling does more for characters that only need 2 or 3 stats than point buy does.  What's more, if you roll bad, you can always just keep a wizard around as a back-up plan.

[Tiltowait]

2 stats would mean... Wizards. 3 would mean... ray Wizards?

4 would be a typical Fighter (Str and Con for obvious reasons, Dex and Int for tripping).

Paladin and Monk need 4 or 5.

[X-Codes]

By the time a Tripper has an extra feat to drop on Combat Reflexes, he has the money to buy a +Dex item.

Likewise, the Int modifier is completely circumventable by taking Wolf Totem Barbarian levels, which many trippers do, anyway, because it's awesome.

Also, Wizards don't *need* two stats, even though that second stat really does help.  It's more like if you roll one high stat, you make a Wizard or Druid.  If two, roll a Cleric.  You can also roll a decent Fighter with two, although your 3rd should be at 13 in this case (for Dex and Elusive Target, not Int).  If three, then you can reasonably pull off something a little more interesting like a Duskblade, Psywar, etc.