That was the joke. I did actually build that Paladin though, a fallen Aasimar. She was badass.
Don't get me started on Fallen Aasimar, especially the Conquest Paladin flavour. That combination is one of the reasons I don't allow Aasimar at my table.
Well I did Frankenstein Conquest with Vengeance to make it, and it was a Fallen Aasimar. Also Haunted One background for extra emo, and I would have tacked on Hollow One too just ‘cause.
That can be the topic of an entirely different thread: "Why Paladin's at 7th level and beyond are OP."
I'm gonna call that "Why paladins at 7th level and above are competitive with primary spellcasters".
a guy with nearly unlimited regenerative powers, superhuman dexterity, an adamantium skeleton, enhanced senses, martial arts training, and claws that go "snikt."
The standard short/long rest system, Dex anything 14+, we don’t use the optional injuries stuff, expertise in Perception, at least 1 level in Monk, or at least the unarmed fighting style, Tabaxi reskin. But honestly, he’s gotta have at least a couple levels of Barbarian because he’s literally a berserker, and you know he also got 2nd-wind and Action Surge, and he has rogue levels too.
Okay, that one was kind of a gimme.
Ghost Rider was much harder, but once I reskinned find steed for the bike, a Halberd that did bludgeoning damage and a judicious application of such spells as Spiritual Weapon and the Channel Divinity powers as the Penance Stare, Vengeance Paladin all the way.
Standard array and point buy just screams "boring" to me. To me and only me. If you feel differently, then it's perfectly fine.
Actually, my character creation rules are:
Free 18
Roll 4d6 drop lowest
Minimum global bonus of +1
You can lower a roll by 2 to increase another by 1
I personally don't find fun in having a character with average stats or a weak one. Some do and that's perfectly fine. So yeah rolling brings higher stats, but that's not why I prefer it. I prefer it because I find it more fun. Plus lower stats are always nice. Low mental stats are often super funny, low physical stats are less funny, but can be funny anyway. But lots of low stats are not fun, thus my +1 minimum total bonus rule. Finally, regarding official modules, even with my super generous rules they are brutal to the point where it sometimes feels more than unfair. So I don't want to imagine using standard array.
Standard array and point buy just screams "boring" to me. To me and only me. If you feel differently, then it's perfectly fine.
Actually, my character creation rules are:
Free 18
Roll 4d6 drop lowest
Minimum global bonus of +1
You can lower a roll by 2 to increase another by 1
I personally don't find fun in having a character with average stats or a weak one. Some do and that's perfectly fine. So yeah rolling brings higher stats, but that's not why I prefer it. I prefer it because I find it more fun. Plus lower stats are always nice. Low mental stats are often super funny, low physical stats are less funny, but can be funny anyway. But lots of low stats are not fun, thus my +1 minimum total bonus rule. Finally, regarding official modules, even with my super generous rules they are brutal to the point where it sometimes feels more than unfair. So I don't want to imagine using standard array.
To me this really represents the strange behavior of modern D&D players. They want to be part of the "hey we are old school too" approach to the game, so they do things like "roll for stats", but then invent systems that totally circumvent the purpose of it.
To be fair, that's old school too. *Cough*Unearthed Arcana for 1e, where you might be rolling something like 8k3 for stats...
A system I have been rattling around in my head is that every PC starts with a 16, a 6, and roll the other 4 Abilities as 2d6+6 each.
Well, that would end up with an expected value of 74, compared to the 72 of the Standard Array, and 73.44 of 4d6, drop. I assume you are talking before any species specific bonuses are applied. I would still be concerned with the ability to to score an 18. The odds of any one roll of 2d6 rolling 12 is 1/36. The probability of one of those 4 rolls producing an 18 is higher than 4/36, based on probability distribution.
Fundamentally, I don't want any player to have a raw 18 that can be converted into a 20 at level 0.
We are currently playing in a game where a guy got worse rolls than the OP. The 4 went into Wisdom. He is a Warlock. There has been so much hilarity because of his disparity in characteristics and the player is doing an AWESOME job. That's the interesting part of doing Roleplay. Sometimes (just in like in theatre) you get a challenging part. Make the best of it and go on and find a way to make those stats shine in a Character. Cause let's face it, if all we're ever playing is just great rolls, we're not learning much about roleplaying... we're just playing the stats lotto. Every now and then you get a chance to truly do something unusual. And if you want to make it happen more often than not, follow Matt Colville's system of rolling 4d6 (drop the lowest) and the scores are the stats you get in the order they were rolled. That way you take the stats you get and the abilities you are given and make a character that works with it instead of just taking your go-to archetype and working with the stats you got that time.
A system I have been rattling around in my head is that every PC starts with a 16, a 6, and roll the other 4 Abilities as 2d6+6 each.
This at least has a strength and a weakness. Some of these other ones are all strengths.
Thats my main issue with "rolling" for stats is that its never for the actual random nature of the stats its always to try to get really good stats and if you roll poorly you usually get an out like Standard Array or Point Buy.
If you want to give your players a higher score just do it...don't make all these convoluted steps to make higher scores to justify it.
Just give them a higher standard array or more points for point buy.
We are currently playing in a game where a guy got worse rolls than the OP. The 4 went into Wisdom. He is a Warlock. There has been so much hilarity because of his disparity in characteristics and the player is doing an AWESOME job. That's the interesting part of doing Roleplay. Sometimes (just in like in theatre) you get a challenging part. Make the best of it and go on and find a way to make those stats shine in a Character. Cause let's face it, if all we're ever playing is just great rolls, we're not learning much about roleplaying... we're just playing the stats lotto. Every now and then you get a chance to truly do something unusual. And if you want to make it happen more often than not, follow Matt Colville's system of rolling 4d6 (drop the lowest) and the scores are the stats you get in the order they were rolled. That way you take the stats you get and the abilities you are given and make a character that works with it instead of just taking your go-to archetype and working with the stats you got that time.
The Covillie method works well for established players/DMs but its horrible for new players. I would never suggest a new player do this method and instead opt for the suggested layout for abilities for the class they are interested in.
Like having an 8 for your CHA but wanting to play a warlock is one of the worst ways to learn about warlock. Its perfectly fine for someone who has experience and wants to challenge themselves but is god awful for a new player.
A system I have been rattling around in my head is that every PC starts with a 16, a 6, and roll the other 4 Abilities as 2d6+6 each.
Well, that would end up with an expected value of 74, compared to the 72 of the Standard Array, and 73.44 of 4d6, drop. I assume you are talking before any species specific bonuses are applied. I would still be concerned with the ability to to score an 18. The odds of any one roll of 2d6 rolling 12 is 1/36. The probability of one of those 4 rolls producing an 18 is higher than 4/36, based on probability distribution.
Fundamentally, I don't want any player to have a raw 18 that can be converted into a 20 at level 0.
Then add a houserule that no ability can be higher than 18 after character creation. Why get hung up on probabilities when you can simply rule out stuff you don't want altogether? Or make it 4+2d6 (and maybe turn everything lower than 8 into an 8) before racial mods if you don't like high numbers, that way every stat is in standard array ballpark. Do whatever works for you and your players.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
This is out of a facebook character optimizing channel I keep tabs on.
The original post:
"Got dealt the worst stat roll I've ever seen and DM won't let us roll again. 14 13 11 9 9 4. What do you even do with that other than cry?"
Various responses:
"Kill it and start over. "
"Just get your character killed as soon as you can."
"Make a deal with your DM talk to them about that you'll try it but if it's not fun you want to reroll it."
"Purposefully get your character killed so you can roll a new one."
"Decide if you want to play with that DM. Someone like that, enjoys controlling his players. Any DM i have played with, would let you reroll."
"If you really want to play with DM and willing to be a little trolly. Charisma 4, talk to EVERYONE. Increase risk of starting a scenario that gets you killed through lack of social ability.
Wisdom 4, make many unwise and dangerous decisions that increase likely hood of fatality.
Intelligence 4, character makes really stupid decisions that quickly lead to their demise.
Better luck on the reroll of a new character."
"4 in charisma and say your character is a huge jerk. Make racial slurs at everyone and get into bar fights. "
"CON 4, and hope to get killed outright in one hit?"
I could go on, but the point has been made beautifully, and finally, by all these power-gamers. The reason people want to use the 4d6 system is to get better stats than the standard array or the 27 point buy. There is no other reason. And if they can't get their way, the idea is to wreck the game for everyone else.
A few things.
Rolling stats isn't necessarily about getting more than point buy, it can be about getting options that are impossible with the point buy system. There are builds that are very MAD that people might want to try. So indirectly "more points than point buy" may be needed.
People may enjoy that not all characters are equal.
There's nothing wrong with being a power gamer. It is not "bad" to be a power gamer, it's another way to enjoy the game, just like roleplaying is. Roleplaying is not "better" than powergaming is. It's all preference and each table play their own way.
You seem to take some quotes from a forum and then you pronounce that these quotes represent the opinion of everyone that likes rolling for stats. This is called generalizing.
I love the 4d6 system, because it keeps a first level human fighter from being the same as every other first level human fighter. With SA and PB, there's always a best set of ability scores for a powergamer to use and EVERYONE IS THE SAME.
There is one reason, and one reason only: To get better starting stats.
Even if this was true, then there would be absolutely nothing wrong with playing the game that way. D&D is a power fantasy for many.
A system I have been rattling around in my head is that every PC starts with a 16, a 6, and roll the other 4 Abilities as 2d6+6 each.
This at least has a strength and a weakness. Some of these other ones are all strengths.
Thats my main issue with "rolling" for stats is that its never for the actual random nature of the stats its always to try to get really good stats and if you roll poorly you usually get an out like Standard Array or Point Buy.
If you want to give your players a higher score just do it...don't make all these convoluted steps to make higher scores to justify it.
Just give them a higher standard array or more points for point buy.
4d6 choose ability scores is a power gaming method, its really as simple as that. I mean people can sugar coat it anyway they like and offer up the consolation prize excuse of "its because of RP", but the two things you have to realize about being a DM is first and foremost you are always going to be outnumbered. So at any table, there is one DM and many players. If everyone at the table has same amount of influence on how the game is setup, the DM will always lose. Secondly, equally important, players will very happily swindle the DM and themselves, ruin a campaign and run OP characters if you let them. Not some of them.. all of them. Every player will do this, even the guys who will swear until they are blue in the face that its "for RP". Its never for RP, its ALWAYS for power and though I would not excuse all players of being power gamers, all gamers have a tendency towards power gaming.
As the DM its your duty to ensure a good quality of the game and there is no place you can screw a campaign more then at character creation. I mean the ability score array's and point buy systems have been going up since 1st edition. The average ability score for a character was 8-14 in the 80's. Today a 15 in anything is considered by players to be average at best and if that is your prime score for your class your character is considered ******. This is what happens when you hand the reigns of game design over to players.
3d6 down the pipe, if you don't like it, feel free to gripe!
Not all players are power gamers, but all players will happily swindle the DM if given the chance. Right. That clarifies where everyone stands.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I swear the scores people are expecting on to be 'viable' as a character have been creeping up over time. I don't understand the expectation to be starting with amazing scores. Part of what I love about DnD is the character getting gradually stronger over time, going from zero to hero. Feels a bit pointless when you're practically demigods at level 1.
If that's the case, then I think the problem stems from the fact that you have to choose between interesting feats or increasing ability scores. If you didn't have to choose between these things then it would be ok. I for one loathe taking ability score increases as it is extremely boring and does nothing to expand the feel or scope of my character.
I think this thread has a needlessly confrontational tone, if you start off a thread as basically a call-out tovvards people you disagree vvith, obviously you'll get nothing but hostile responses from those people... Eventually just devolving into arguments.
Anyvvay.. I think this vvhole business is a result of having ASIs and Feats tied together into the same mechanic. I believe Yurei already sort of made the point, but taking attribute increases instead of an interesting feat is super boring.. So I think a lot of people roll dice hoping for that one key stat to be very high so that they can have more fun customizing their character through feats, instead of taking boring ASIs.. Most classes get so fevv that it can be months and months before you ever get to pick a feat.
I'm very much of tvvo minds vvhen it comes to rolling.. I honestly don't like hovv big of a povver gap it can create betvveen the players, but on the other hand.. I personally love to get a high dex or something so I have the freedom to use feats instead.
If the tvvo vveere split into feat levels and ASI levels, I think I'd never roll for attributes.
We are currently playing in a game where a guy got worse rolls than the OP. The 4 went into Wisdom. He is a Warlock. There has been so much hilarity because of his disparity in characteristics and the player is doing an AWESOME job. That's the interesting part of doing Roleplay. Sometimes (just in like in theatre) you get a challenging part. Make the best of it and go on and find a way to make those stats shine in a Character. Cause let's face it, if all we're ever playing is just great rolls, we're not learning much about roleplaying... we're just playing the stats lotto. Every now and then you get a chance to truly do something unusual. And if you want to make it happen more often than not, follow Matt Colville's system of rolling 4d6 (drop the lowest) and the scores are the stats you get in the order they were rolled. That way you take the stats you get and the abilities you are given and make a character that works with it instead of just taking your go-to archetype and working with the stats you got that time.
The Covillie method works well for established players/DMs but its horrible for new players. I would never suggest a new player do this method and instead opt for the suggested layout for abilities for the class they are interested in.
Like having an 8 for your CHA but wanting to play a warlock is one of the worst ways to learn about warlock. Its perfectly fine for someone who has experience and wants to challenge themselves but is god awful for a new player.
I've played using this for years and it was sort of OK because I was playing a lot (like really a lot) and I could create adventurers by the score and lose them or forget about them the next day if I wanted to, but for a long campaign it's not fun, and neither is it fun to have to pick a class based on really random stats in order.
This is a good point too....if you plan on running a lot of short games or games that are overtly deadly its actually a fun way to roll as it encourages you to try new classes/builds.
But as for a method of a long campaign with the same character I agree....its one of the worst ways to roll.
I swear the scores people are expecting on to be 'viable' as a character have been creeping up over time. I don't understand the expectation to be starting with amazing scores. Part of what I love about DnD is the character getting gradually stronger over time, going from zero to hero. Feels a bit pointless when you're practically demigods at level 1.
If that's the case, then I think the problem stems from the fact that you have to choose between interesting feats or increasing ability scores. If you didn't have to choose between these things then it would be ok. I for one loathe taking ability score increases as it is extremely boring and does nothing to expand the feel or scope of my character.
Nothing stops you from taking a Feat with every ASI. The issue is you want both high scores AND then all the buffs from Feats, which usually are taken to enhance primary abilities. You are the perfect example of what Lyxen just described.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm gonna call that "Why paladins at 7th level and above are competitive with primary spellcasters".
Beast barbarian would probably explain the claws.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
I like rolling and have my players roll because:
Actually, my character creation rules are:
I personally don't find fun in having a character with average stats or a weak one. Some do and that's perfectly fine. So yeah rolling brings higher stats, but that's not why I prefer it. I prefer it because I find it more fun. Plus lower stats are always nice. Low mental stats are often super funny, low physical stats are less funny, but can be funny anyway. But lots of low stats are not fun, thus my +1 minimum total bonus rule. Finally, regarding official modules, even with my super generous rules they are brutal to the point where it sometimes feels more than unfair. So I don't want to imagine using standard array.
This is just a heroic array with more steps.
To be fair, that's old school too. *Cough*Unearthed Arcana for 1e, where you might be rolling something like 8k3 for stats...
In your system, are stats rolled in order, or are the rolls assigned to stats in any order you like?
For the sake of balance, I offer a number of different arrays to choose from, or the player can roll which array they get randomly.
he / him
A system I have been rattling around in my head is that every PC starts with a 16, a 6, and roll the other 4 Abilities as 2d6+6 each.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well, that would end up with an expected value of 74, compared to the 72 of the Standard Array, and 73.44 of 4d6, drop. I assume you are talking before any species specific bonuses are applied. I would still be concerned with the ability to to score an 18. The odds of any one roll of 2d6 rolling 12 is 1/36. The probability of one of those 4 rolls producing an 18 is higher than 4/36, based on probability distribution.
Fundamentally, I don't want any player to have a raw 18 that can be converted into a 20 at level 0.
We are currently playing in a game where a guy got worse rolls than the OP. The 4 went into Wisdom. He is a Warlock. There has been so much hilarity because of his disparity in characteristics and the player is doing an AWESOME job. That's the interesting part of doing Roleplay. Sometimes (just in like in theatre) you get a challenging part. Make the best of it and go on and find a way to make those stats shine in a Character. Cause let's face it, if all we're ever playing is just great rolls, we're not learning much about roleplaying... we're just playing the stats lotto. Every now and then you get a chance to truly do something unusual. And if you want to make it happen more often than not, follow Matt Colville's system of rolling 4d6 (drop the lowest) and the scores are the stats you get in the order they were rolled. That way you take the stats you get and the abilities you are given and make a character that works with it instead of just taking your go-to archetype and working with the stats you got that time.
This at least has a strength and a weakness. Some of these other ones are all strengths.
Thats my main issue with "rolling" for stats is that its never for the actual random nature of the stats its always to try to get really good stats and if you roll poorly you usually get an out like Standard Array or Point Buy.
If you want to give your players a higher score just do it...don't make all these convoluted steps to make higher scores to justify it.
Just give them a higher standard array or more points for point buy.
The Covillie method works well for established players/DMs but its horrible for new players. I would never suggest a new player do this method and instead opt for the suggested layout for abilities for the class they are interested in.
Like having an 8 for your CHA but wanting to play a warlock is one of the worst ways to learn about warlock. Its perfectly fine for someone who has experience and wants to challenge themselves but is god awful for a new player.
Then add a houserule that no ability can be higher than 18 after character creation. Why get hung up on probabilities when you can simply rule out stuff you don't want altogether? Or make it 4+2d6 (and maybe turn everything lower than 8 into an 8) before racial mods if you don't like high numbers, that way every stat is in standard array ballpark. Do whatever works for you and your players.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A few things.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
Even if this was true, then there would be absolutely nothing wrong with playing the game that way. D&D is a power fantasy for many.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
Not all players are power gamers, but all players will happily swindle the DM if given the chance. Right. That clarifies where everyone stands.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
If that's the case, then I think the problem stems from the fact that you have to choose between interesting feats or increasing ability scores. If you didn't have to choose between these things then it would be ok. I for one loathe taking ability score increases as it is extremely boring and does nothing to expand the feel or scope of my character.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
I agree 100%.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
This is a good point too....if you plan on running a lot of short games or games that are overtly deadly its actually a fun way to roll as it encourages you to try new classes/builds.
But as for a method of a long campaign with the same character I agree....its one of the worst ways to roll.
Nothing stops you from taking a Feat with every ASI. The issue is you want both high scores AND then all the buffs from Feats, which usually are taken to enhance primary abilities. You are the perfect example of what Lyxen just described.