Your post hadn't showed up while I was writing. It was in response to jl8e. I'm stat agnostic. Whatever the DM/players want in terms of stat generation (from the "official" choices and a few variants) I'm ok with as long as everyone uses the same method.
My current players (duo) rolled stats (4d6 drop lowest) and both dumped INT. They think they are brothers. One is a gnome and the other is a dwarf.
Hilariously, they are also both valor bards and couldn't play those characters more differently. One melees with his spiked metal lute (reliving his glory days from Gloomhaven) and the other went all in with an animal companionship schtick at range.
Rolls don't matter. Pick whatever method players find attractive. It's the GM's job to provide a challenge, so whether your stat is a 16 or a 20 doesn't make any difference - the challenge will meet the ability, because that's the GM's job. Higher stats mean more dangerous foes. Maybe, just maybe, if you have better stats, your first encounter is upgraded from rats to goblins.
As an aside, the point of the game as a whole is to have fun. If players have more fun with higher stats, then that's the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
i started out using the point buy system and it actually made me more of a power player. i tried optimizing the stats and i only had characters that were average to good in all stats. no weaknesses. it was boring and i hated it. do i love it if i get a high number with the 4d6 method? yes. do i love it when all my numbers are high? no, i actually hate it. and in that case if i can i will make at least one stat worse on purpose to balance it out. i like the 4d6 method because yes it can get my main stat higher than 15 but it can also get my dump stat lower than 8 and make my character have an actual weakness. i also like the randomness and i like rolling dice. for me personally it helps me create more interesting characters.
that being said, i have no problem using other methods if required and i get why some people don‘t want to use the 4d6 method at their tables. but not all people using the 4d6 method are power players and power players don‘t need the 4d6 method to power play.
With point buy, it's easier to min max than rolling, because you can dump some stats and push those points into others. It's one of the reasons why there's a cap to how high you buy stats. With rolling, it will push for more average values (although it does allow for a wider range - you can get 3-7 and 16-18 via rolling but with not point buy).
That said, as long as the table is happy, any method is fine. The are only issues that I see. The first is if one person gets very good stats (at least in what matters) while another gets poor stats, and do the first eclipses the second. Point buy reduces the likelihood of that, and also places the responsibility onto the player - if the stats are poor for your character, that's your own fault, not the dice. It's also pretty easy to adjust scores fairly afterwards if it's that much of an issue.
The second is if someone is suspected of cheating, you can verify that their stats are fair at any time. It takes a bit of work, but you can see and replicate how they got to where they are by allocating points, doing ASIs etc.
After some thought, for my next campaign, I'm going to offer three options. Point Buy, Standard Array (as a specific case of Point Buy), or get them all to roll 4d6k3 and form a matrix with the results. They then get to pick a line (up, down, left, right, diagonally) and use those as their array, they can't use the same line twice (so each character will generally have a unique array).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Your post hadn't showed up while I was writing. It was in response to jl8e. I'm stat agnostic. Whatever the DM/players want in terms of stat generation (from the "official" choices and a few variants) I'm ok with as long as everyone uses the same method.
My current players (duo) rolled stats (4d6 drop lowest) and both dumped INT. They think they are brothers. One is a gnome and the other is a dwarf.
Hilariously, they are also both valor bards and couldn't play those characters more differently. One melees with his spiked metal lute (reliving his glory days from Gloomhaven) and the other went all in with an animal companionship schtick at range.
This thread is 5 years old? Wow.
Rolls don't matter. Pick whatever method players find attractive. It's the GM's job to provide a challenge, so whether your stat is a 16 or a 20 doesn't make any difference - the challenge will meet the ability, because that's the GM's job. Higher stats mean more dangerous foes. Maybe, just maybe, if you have better stats, your first encounter is upgraded from rats to goblins.
As an aside, the point of the game as a whole is to have fun. If players have more fun with higher stats, then that's the game.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
as someone who prefers the 4d6 method:
i started out using the point buy system and it actually made me more of a power player. i tried optimizing the stats and i only had characters that were average to good in all stats. no weaknesses. it was boring and i hated it. do i love it if i get a high number with the 4d6 method? yes. do i love it when all my numbers are high? no, i actually hate it. and in that case if i can i will make at least one stat worse on purpose to balance it out. i like the 4d6 method because yes it can get my main stat higher than 15 but it can also get my dump stat lower than 8 and make my character have an actual weakness. i also like the randomness and i like rolling dice. for me personally it helps me create more interesting characters.
that being said, i have no problem using other methods if required and i get why some people don‘t want to use the 4d6 method at their tables. but not all people using the 4d6 method are power players and power players don‘t need the 4d6 method to power play.
With point buy, it's easier to min max than rolling, because you can dump some stats and push those points into others. It's one of the reasons why there's a cap to how high you buy stats. With rolling, it will push for more average values (although it does allow for a wider range - you can get 3-7 and 16-18 via rolling but with not point buy).
That said, as long as the table is happy, any method is fine. The are only issues that I see. The first is if one person gets very good stats (at least in what matters) while another gets poor stats, and do the first eclipses the second. Point buy reduces the likelihood of that, and also places the responsibility onto the player - if the stats are poor for your character, that's your own fault, not the dice. It's also pretty easy to adjust scores fairly afterwards if it's that much of an issue.
The second is if someone is suspected of cheating, you can verify that their stats are fair at any time. It takes a bit of work, but you can see and replicate how they got to where they are by allocating points, doing ASIs etc.
After some thought, for my next campaign, I'm going to offer three options. Point Buy, Standard Array (as a specific case of Point Buy), or get them all to roll 4d6k3 and form a matrix with the results. They then get to pick a line (up, down, left, right, diagonally) and use those as their array, they can't use the same line twice (so each character will generally have a unique array).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.