Also, tell me more about how I need to change my playstyle to have more fun with my group. What exactly do you think went well in our last session and what do you think went poorly? What do you think about my wife's decision at the start of the game and how do you think it impacted everything going forward for the rest of the game?
Ok. Now you are just actively being hostile by jumping to something like this
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
What headache? There is no headache for me. 4d6 drop lowest doesn't make me do anything I might not do anyway.
To have an 18 point swing in ASI between characters can be a headache for quite a few people and to not even see that as a potential problem is incredibly disingenuous.
So many other things can be problems, and are actually hard to deal with.Using the standard array guarantees practically nothing other han everyone having the same potential - certainly not comparable outcomes. A group with a couple of players who really optimize their characters and a couple of others who make choices on a whim can result in similar discrepancies as random statlines, but with a much bigger impact and no easy solutions. Taking uneven statlines into account on the other hand is just part of evaluating complete character builds and party compositions to see who excells at what and who has trouble with what.
Different statlines are not the problem, differences in character effectiveness are. Different statlines can lead to differences in character effectiveness, but if they do there are several easy as pie solutions for that and other character aspects have an impact that's much harder to mitigate. Pointing at stat generation as the big bad is what's disingenuous.
All those things are compounded by a large stat difference though.... So yes those still exist but they can just be amplified.
In which case the stat difference is still the easy part to address, and the effort of checking the character is the same either way. That's my point. Using random stat generation doesn't significantly increase my workload as a DM, or make it meaningfully harder.
That is why it is flawed. If the DM has to correct for an issue stemming from how you determine stats, then that method of determining stats is flawed. Again, the fact that you have to correct for it for the sake of balance makes it flawed. You cant control how experienced your players are or whether they will make good choices in a game, but you can control that player not also starting with a character that's drastically above or below the expected value.
You don't have to make any balance corrections for point buy or standard array, and therefor they are not flawed. Even if it is easy for you as a DM to balance around the flaws of 4d6, that does not make the flaw nonexistent nor insignificant.
That's like saying pastry is flawed because it's a more exacting way of cooking, or that car tyres are flawed because you might get a flat. Neither of those things matter to anyone who enjoys eating pastry or driving comfortably. Similarly, we don't like that a lack of randomness can result in cookie-cutter characters or doesn't pose an interesting challenge to players or rarely results in character flaws or even just that it doesn't let us use our shiny dice. That doesn't make the standard array 'flawed' in my eyes necessarily, just less good for my purposes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Also, tell me more about how I need to change my playstyle to have more fun with my group. What exactly do you think went well in our last session and what do you think went poorly? What do you think about my wife's decision at the start of the game and how do you think it impacted everything going forward for the rest of the game?
I never thought that advocating for being honest and transparent about how choices (Such as how you determine stats) has an affect on the players experience would be seen as telling you how to play the game or would invoke such an obviously frustrated response.
All I ask is for honest discussion about a system....which includes incorporating the negative aspects of our favorite features sometimes.
Also, tell me more about how I need to change my playstyle to have more fun with my group. What exactly do you think went well in our last session and what do you think went poorly? What do you think about my wife's decision at the start of the game and how do you think it impacted everything going forward for the rest of the game?
Ok. Now you are just actively being hostile by jumping to something like this
"Just be honest with the pros/cons of each method and you will have a lot better time with your group."
This statement directly implies that our group needs to change to make it better.
Also, tell me more about how I need to change my playstyle to have more fun with my group. What exactly do you think went well in our last session and what do you think went poorly? What do you think about my wife's decision at the start of the game and how do you think it impacted everything going forward for the rest of the game?
Ok. Now you are just actively being hostile by jumping to something like this
"Just be honest with the pros/cons of each method and you will have a lot better time with your group."
This statement directly implies that our group needs to change to make it better.
No its a general statement that honesty is the best policy....nothing more.
Reading too far into it I would say you are projecting but I don't want to make that assumption. Instead I think its just a misunderstanding of intent in a text based medium.
What headache? There is no headache for me. 4d6 drop lowest doesn't make me do anything I might not do anyway.
To have an 18 point swing in ASI between characters can be a headache for quite a few people and to not even see that as a potential problem is incredibly disingenuous.
So many other things can be problems, and are actually hard to deal with.Using the standard array guarantees practically nothing other han everyone having the same potential - certainly not comparable outcomes. A group with a couple of players who really optimize their characters and a couple of others who make choices on a whim can result in similar discrepancies as random statlines, but with a much bigger impact and no easy solutions. Taking uneven statlines into account on the other hand is just part of evaluating complete character builds and party compositions to see who excells at what and who has trouble with what.
Different statlines are not the problem, differences in character effectiveness are. Different statlines can lead to differences in character effectiveness, but if they do there are several easy as pie solutions for that and other character aspects have an impact that's much harder to mitigate. Pointing at stat generation as the big bad is what's disingenuous.
All those things are compounded by a large stat difference though.... So yes those still exist but they can just be amplified.
In which case the stat difference is still the easy part to address, and the effort of checking the character is the same either way. That's my point. Using random stat generation doesn't significantly increase my workload as a DM, or make it meaningfully harder.
That is why it is flawed. If the DM has to correct for an issue stemming from how you determine stats, then that method of determining stats is flawed. Again, the fact that you have to correct for it for the sake of balance makes it flawed. You cant control how experienced your players are or whether they will make good choices in a game, but you can control that player not also starting with a character that's drastically above or below the expected value.
You don't have to make any balance corrections for point buy or standard array, and therefor they are not flawed. Even if it is easy for you as a DM to balance around the flaws of 4d6, that does not make the flaw nonexistent nor insignificant.
That's like saying pastry is flawed because it's a more exacting way of cooking, or that car tyres are flawed because you might get a flat. Neither of those things matter to anyone who enjoys eating pastry or driving comfortably. Similarly, we don't like that a lack of randomness can result in cookie-cutter characters or doesn't pose an interesting challenge to players or rarely results in character flaws or even just that it doesn't let us use our shiny dice. That doesn't make the standard array 'flawed' in my eyes necessarily, just less good for my purposes.
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Also, tell me more about how I need to change my playstyle to have more fun with my group. What exactly do you think went well in our last session and what do you think went poorly? What do you think about my wife's decision at the start of the game and how do you think it impacted everything going forward for the rest of the game?
Ok. Now you are just actively being hostile by jumping to something like this
"Just be honest with the pros/cons of each method and you will have a lot better time with your group."
This statement directly implies that our group needs to change to make it better.
No its a general statement that honesty is the best policy....nothing more.
Reading too far into it I would say you are projecting but I don't want to make that assumption. Instead I think its just a misunderstanding of intent in a text based medium.
I am willing to believe that as well.
Now, I also want to make clear that my group knows our options. We selected the one we liked best. That is our fun. The things that you are pointing out as problems, are not important to us as a group. If we don't care about those issues, then they are not problems for us.
Again, addressing the issues of 4d6 is the point of the thread, so anyone giving their opinion or analysis of why they think that is or is not should not be treated like "pushing your own problems" Addressing problems you do or do not have with the system is the point of the thread.
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Again, addressing the issues of 4d6 is the point of the thread, so anyone giving their opinion or analysis of why they think that is or is not should not be treated like "pushing your own problems" Addressing problems you do or do not have with the system is the point of the thread.
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
I can certainly agree to everything you say here, as long as the disadvantages or advantages of one system aren't dismissed as unimportant or not impactful, which is the vibe I was getting from the discussion centered around +1 vs +2 vs +3.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
That analogy applies to every method, including standard array or point buy. Every method has the flaw of not being the other methods.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Also, tell me more about how I need to change my playstyle to have more fun with my group. What exactly do you think went well in our last session and what do you think went poorly? What do you think about my wife's decision at the start of the game and how do you think it impacted everything going forward for the rest of the game?
Ok. Now you are just actively being hostile by jumping to something like this
"Just be honest with the pros/cons of each method and you will have a lot better time with your group."
This statement directly implies that our group needs to change to make it better.
No its a general statement that honesty is the best policy....nothing more.
Reading too far into it I would say you are projecting but I don't want to make that assumption. Instead I think its just a misunderstanding of intent in a text based medium.
I am willing to believe that as well.
Now, I also want to make clear that my group knows our options. We selected the one we liked best. That is our fun. The things that you are pointing out as problems, are not important to us as a group. If we don't care about those issues, then they are not problems for us.
Again, addressing the issues of 4d6 is the point of the thread, so anyone giving their opinion or analysis of why they think that is or is not should not be treated like "pushing your own problems" Addressing problems you do or do not have with the system is the point of the thread.
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
I think the intent was to show that there are a lot of groups who roll less with the idea that randomness is fun and interesting and instead its a way to get crazy high stats.
The same could be said with point buy and floating ASI as they create fairly "optimized" characters as it allows more flex than standard array.
Standard array is boring to some because it offers the lowest amount of choice with any of the options.
Each method has its own pros/cons and its up to the group to decide how to best move forward.
Again, addressing the issues of 4d6 is the point of the thread, so anyone giving their opinion or analysis of why they think that is or is not should not be treated like "pushing your own problems" Addressing problems you do or do not have with the system is the point of the thread.
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
I can certainly agree to everything you say here, as long as the disadvantages or advantages of one system aren't dismissed as unimportant or not impactful, which is the vibe I was getting from the discussion centered around +1 vs +2 vs +3.
But that is kind of the problem with this discussion though. What is important to one group may not be important to another. That is exactly why there are multiple methods in the book and hundreds of other homebrew methods. The things that you think are a problem and creates too much work for the DM, is not a problem or too much work for me.
Again, addressing the issues of 4d6 is the point of the thread, so anyone giving their opinion or analysis of why they think that is or is not should not be treated like "pushing your own problems" Addressing problems you do or do not have with the system is the point of the thread.
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
I think the intent was to show that there are a lot of groups who roll less with the idea that randomness is fun and interesting and instead its a way to get crazy high stats.
The same could be said with point buy and floating ASI as they create fairly "optimized" characters as it allows more flex than standard array.
Standard array is boring to some because it offers the lowest amount of choice with any of the options.
Each method has its own pros/cons and its up to the group to decide how to best move forward.
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
That analogy applies to every method, including standard array or point buy. Every method has the flaw of not being the other methods.
I think this might be where our differences are coming from. I have been mostly looking at "flaws" being related to mechanical aspect. I think 4d6 is flawed because it introduces the possibility of a large point difference between party members, which (without correction) can be mechanically messy. The other two systems I don't consider to be mechanically flawed. Sure, everyone having the same or similar scores is boring, but I consider that to be an opinion on how it appears, not a mechanical flaw. Mechanically its balanced to have everyone at least start around the same area. If there are mechanical issues with the other two beyond just being too similar, then I genuinely would like to hear them, because as far as I can tell they are mechanically perfect (but boring).
Otherwise, when it comes to what your group considers the most fun or least boring, then balance can be thrown out. But if I am approaching the discussion of the pros/cons of 4d6, I am approaching it from a purely mechanical aspect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Again, addressing the issues of 4d6 is the point of the thread, so anyone giving their opinion or analysis of why they think that is or is not should not be treated like "pushing your own problems" Addressing problems you do or do not have with the system is the point of the thread.
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
I can certainly agree to everything you say here, as long as the disadvantages or advantages of one system aren't dismissed as unimportant or not impactful, which is the vibe I was getting from the discussion centered around +1 vs +2 vs +3.
That's just a matter of perspective. Correct me if I'm wrong but I suspect things like lacking more diverse stat arrays or being too convenient to challenge players, disadvantages of non-random systems, aren't very important or impactful to you because they are outweighed by the things you like about standard array or point buy and don't really create any issues for you. Similarly for me though, the disadvantages of random stat generation are outweighed by the benefits and don't really cause me any problems. I totally get it can be very different for other people but a) person A having a different experience than person B doesn't invalidate either person's experience and b) this means that if we acknowledge person C can share person A's experience we should also acknowledge they might share person B's experience instead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A very large portion of this thread has been less about mechanics and more about making unfounded accusations about why people choose to use 4d6kh. I can't speak for everyone but I don't choose to roll for stats for the sake of optimization but for the fun of seeing what I get and what can be made with it.
I know that there are people out there that are just looking for those high numbers and will whine and complain when the gamble doesn't pay off, but it is unfair to say that anyone that enjoys the system is just trying to game the system.
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
That analogy applies to every method, including standard array or point buy. Every method has the flaw of not being the other methods.
I think this might be where our differences are coming from. I have been mostly looking at "flaws" being related to mechanical aspect. I think 4d6 is flawed because it introduces the possibility of a large point difference between party members, which (without correction) can be mechanically messy. The other two systems I don't consider to be mechanically flawed. Sure, everyone having the same or similar scores is boring, but I consider that to be an opinion on how it appears, not a mechanical flaw. Mechanically its balanced to have everyone at least start around the same area. If there are mechanical issues with the other two beyond just being too similar, then I genuinely would like to hear them, because as far as I can tell they are mechanically perfect (but boring).
Otherwise, when it comes to what your group considers the most fun or least boring, then balance can be thrown out. But if I am approaching the discussion of the pros/cons of 4d6, I am approaching it from a purely mechanical aspect.
Then, with all due respect, you're dismissing non-mechanical aspects of stat generation as unimportant or not impactful. Which I don't mind, I'm sure that's how they are to you, it's just that to others the same can be true for those mechanical aspects you value more.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
That analogy applies to every method, including standard array or point buy. Every method has the flaw of not being the other methods.
I think this might be where our differences are coming from. I have been mostly looking at "flaws" being related to mechanical aspect. I think 4d6 is flawed because it introduces the possibility of a large point difference between party members, which (without correction) can be mechanically messy. The other two systems I don't consider to be mechanically flawed. Sure, everyone having the same or similar scores is boring, but I consider that to be an opinion on how it appears, not a mechanical flaw. Mechanically its balanced to have everyone at least start around the same area. If there are mechanical issues with the other two beyond just being too similar, then I genuinely would like to hear them, because as far as I can tell they are mechanically perfect (but boring).
Otherwise, when it comes to what your group considers the most fun or least boring, then balance can be thrown out. But if I am approaching the discussion of the pros/cons of 4d6, I am approaching it from a purely mechanical aspect.
Yeah originally that was my intent to to show how impactful the differences in stats can be. This can be a good or bad thing depending on the group but it is an impact regardless of the perception of it. Some people see it and just don't care which is perfectly fine. I have a hard time with it simply because I care about encounter balance to a likely unhealthly degree....but thats me.
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
That analogy applies to every method, including standard array or point buy. Every method has the flaw of not being the other methods.
I think this might be where our differences are coming from. I have been mostly looking at "flaws" being related to mechanical aspect. I think 4d6 is flawed because it introduces the possibility of a large point difference between party members, which (without correction) can be mechanically messy. The other two systems I don't consider to be mechanically flawed. Sure, everyone having the same or similar scores is boring, but I consider that to be an opinion on how it appears, not a mechanical flaw. Mechanically its balanced to have everyone at least start around the same area. If there are mechanical issues with the other two beyond just being too similar, then I genuinely would like to hear them, because as far as I can tell they are mechanically perfect (but boring).
Otherwise, when it comes to what your group considers the most fun or least boring, then balance can be thrown out. But if I am approaching the discussion of the pros/cons of 4d6, I am approaching it from a purely mechanical aspect.
Then, with all due respect, you're dismissing non-mechanical aspects of stat generation as unimportant or not impactful. Which I don't mind, I'm sure that's how they are to you, it's just that to others the same can be true for those mechanical aspects you value more.
Thats a fair point as well...some people like it enough for the sake of a challenge that the mechanical balance is not an issue. That seems reasonable to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok. Now you are just actively being hostile by jumping to something like this
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
That's like saying pastry is flawed because it's a more exacting way of cooking, or that car tyres are flawed because you might get a flat. Neither of those things matter to anyone who enjoys eating pastry or driving comfortably. Similarly, we don't like that a lack of randomness can result in cookie-cutter characters or doesn't pose an interesting challenge to players or rarely results in character flaws or even just that it doesn't let us use our shiny dice. That doesn't make the standard array 'flawed' in my eyes necessarily, just less good for my purposes.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I never thought that advocating for being honest and transparent about how choices (Such as how you determine stats) has an affect on the players experience would be seen as telling you how to play the game or would invoke such an obviously frustrated response.
All I ask is for honest discussion about a system....which includes incorporating the negative aspects of our favorite features sometimes.
"Just be honest with the pros/cons of each method and you will have a lot better time with your group."
This statement directly implies that our group needs to change to make it better.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
No its a general statement that honesty is the best policy....nothing more.
Reading too far into it I would say you are projecting but I don't want to make that assumption. Instead I think its just a misunderstanding of intent in a text based medium.
Since stat array is a character generation thing, I think a closer analogy would be buying a tire that you know is used and already worn, so more likely to get a flat. Or buying a cookie cutter that you know is slightly bent out of shape. If thats fine with you, then thats great. But you cannot discount that those flaws exist, and your friends may not want to buy used tires for their cars or bent cookie cutters when you all spend the day cooking together.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I am willing to believe that as well.
Now, I also want to make clear that my group knows our options. We selected the one we liked best. That is our fun. The things that you are pointing out as problems, are not important to us as a group. If we don't care about those issues, then they are not problems for us.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think the point of the thread originally was to claim that 4d6 drop lowest is not a legitimate way of creating statlines, but that's not really a fruitful argument.
If a method has advantages other methods lack and some people like those advantages enough to prefer that method over others, it's a legitimate method. Period. Everything else is pretty much a non-argument. If method A has advantage X over B and method B has advantage Y over A, that automatically says method A has the disadvantage (the flaw, if you will) of lacking Y and method B has the disadvantage of lacking X. It's useless harping on about what you think A or B doesn't get right - if that's a big enough deal, you pick the other option - because all that's really pertinent is if there's anything to like about a method. And for every method there are people who like something about it.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I can certainly agree to everything you say here, as long as the disadvantages or advantages of one system aren't dismissed as unimportant or not impactful, which is the vibe I was getting from the discussion centered around +1 vs +2 vs +3.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
That analogy applies to every method, including standard array or point buy. Every method has the flaw of not being the other methods.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Then you are doing it the best way possible IMO.
I think the intent was to show that there are a lot of groups who roll less with the idea that randomness is fun and interesting and instead its a way to get crazy high stats.
The same could be said with point buy and floating ASI as they create fairly "optimized" characters as it allows more flex than standard array.
Standard array is boring to some because it offers the lowest amount of choice with any of the options.
Each method has its own pros/cons and its up to the group to decide how to best move forward.
But that is kind of the problem with this discussion though. What is important to one group may not be important to another. That is exactly why there are multiple methods in the book and hundreds of other homebrew methods. The things that you think are a problem and creates too much work for the DM, is not a problem or too much work for me.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I whole heartedly agree with this.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think this might be where our differences are coming from. I have been mostly looking at "flaws" being related to mechanical aspect. I think 4d6 is flawed because it introduces the possibility of a large point difference between party members, which (without correction) can be mechanically messy. The other two systems I don't consider to be mechanically flawed. Sure, everyone having the same or similar scores is boring, but I consider that to be an opinion on how it appears, not a mechanical flaw. Mechanically its balanced to have everyone at least start around the same area. If there are mechanical issues with the other two beyond just being too similar, then I genuinely would like to hear them, because as far as I can tell they are mechanically perfect (but boring).
Otherwise, when it comes to what your group considers the most fun or least boring, then balance can be thrown out. But if I am approaching the discussion of the pros/cons of 4d6, I am approaching it from a purely mechanical aspect.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
That's just a matter of perspective. Correct me if I'm wrong but I suspect things like lacking more diverse stat arrays or being too convenient to challenge players, disadvantages of non-random systems, aren't very important or impactful to you because they are outweighed by the things you like about standard array or point buy and don't really create any issues for you. Similarly for me though, the disadvantages of random stat generation are outweighed by the benefits and don't really cause me any problems. I totally get it can be very different for other people but a) person A having a different experience than person B doesn't invalidate either person's experience and b) this means that if we acknowledge person C can share person A's experience we should also acknowledge they might share person B's experience instead.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
A very large portion of this thread has been less about mechanics and more about making unfounded accusations about why people choose to use 4d6kh. I can't speak for everyone but I don't choose to roll for stats for the sake of optimization but for the fun of seeing what I get and what can be made with it.
I know that there are people out there that are just looking for those high numbers and will whine and complain when the gamble doesn't pay off, but it is unfair to say that anyone that enjoys the system is just trying to game the system.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Then, with all due respect, you're dismissing non-mechanical aspects of stat generation as unimportant or not impactful. Which I don't mind, I'm sure that's how they are to you, it's just that to others the same can be true for those mechanical aspects you value more.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yeah originally that was my intent to to show how impactful the differences in stats can be. This can be a good or bad thing depending on the group but it is an impact regardless of the perception of it. Some people see it and just don't care which is perfectly fine. I have a hard time with it simply because I care about encounter balance to a likely unhealthly degree....but thats me.
Thats a fair point as well...some people like it enough for the sake of a challenge that the mechanical balance is not an issue. That seems reasonable to me.