The point of rolling is to get something I wouldn't think to do normally. I like building characters, and like having new things to solve. Trying to assign stats through point buy such that it puts me at a novel starting point is incredibly unnatural and artificial.
Look, if a DM wants to use a standard pt allotment or array, more power to them. I do sometimes, but I am quite a bit more generous to my players. And no 27 pts is just not enough. Kinda weak, and not my cup of tea. And ya, I like higher powered stuff, so that's my bias. That said, I see a lot saying 4d6 roll, drop lowest and if its crap you can always select the standard array. Hell, game I am starting to play in did 4d6 no drop and man that is TASTY, but its meant to be a very high powered game, so this will hell of a lot of fun. Different types for different stripes right??
No it doesnt. And you know it. People dont play the game to be mike the weak ass fighter who can barely pick up a short, is out of breath in two steps and has the intelligence of a tangerine. DnD, even old school 3d6 roll in order, was still about power fantasy. Yes the stats really did direct the class you would want to play cause if you went with something else it was pretty terrible and you were likely to die. And hint...the pt of the game is to survive the adventure, not die to a slip on a rock at the entrance.
If you want to play low powered games, or if you want to have some enforced balance, fine. Not my cup of tea, but fine. But its perfectly legit to want to actually have customization, power, and you know escapism in your roleplaying game....
This "hate" on power reminds me so much of how people have hated rich folks...it used to be the thing we wanted, collectively, but more and more, success, status, power, etc all getting a bad rep....lol. Anyway, you do your table...and others will enjoy in their own way.
"Look, if a DM wants to use a standard pt allotment or array, more power to them. I do sometimes, but I am quite a bit more generous to my players. And no 27 pts is just not enough. Kinda weak, and not my cup of tea. "
Well, if standard point buy is "weak" that would suggest you are dm'ing far above and beyond the recommended encounter balance formulas. My current campaign is point buy, and based off even thr "dangerous" encounter formula in the dmg, my players are rocking it.
And you know it. People dont play the game to be mike the weak ass fighter who can barely pick up a short, is out of breath in two steps and has the intelligence of a tangerine.
Well, ignoring the third point because some people do choose to play that, if you think 17 strength/14 con is weak ass, can barely pick up a short sword, and gets out of breath in two steps... you have an odd perspective on what stats actually mean.
The point of rolling is to get something I wouldn't think to do normally. I like building characters, and like having new things to solve. Trying to assign stats through point buy such that it puts me at a novel starting point is incredibly unnatural and artificial.
That's completely the opposite way I come up with characters, lol. Stats are the least important part of character creation for me. They're not something to "solve", because there's no right answer
There are some ideas I have that are fairly MAD that I wouldn't be able to make with some spreads, but otherwise if I'm looking to make (consults list of unused character concepts) Orlop, a kobold bladesinger with a nautical background whose bladesong is a cross between a haka and a frilled lizard's threat display, I'm not going to sweat exactly what his INT is at 1st level, just so long as it's decent
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
If you are using 4d6 drop highest, the stats will be terrible. And ya I think 27 pt buy is incredibly low. I know it feeds into this idiotic, modern, notion of oo its great to have a ton of flaws and weaknesses and shitty stats so I can be all sensitive....but man no. Just doesnt appeal to me in the least. And sure, that might make me a filthy power gamer to some...dont care. Also, by having the opportunity for more generous stats, whether a much greater number of pts OR rolling OR a more generous array, you open up builds that might not have been really viable. For instance, a Paladin/Monk build could be great, but its going to be severely limited if the stats cant support it. BUT if you can reasonable stats across all those attributes you'd need, well, that could make for a very nice build over time.
That said, I also hate the ASI/Feats tied to class levels..so I toss that and give a feat at 1, 3, 6, etc, and ASI at 4, 8, 12, 16, 19 CHARACTER levels. This way you get more optimization/customization AND not penalized for multiclassing. And people seem to dig it. Plus I run a LOT of encounters in a day, and rests are hard to come by and the players need every advantage they can get cause I dont fudge dice and people die. Glorious. None of the real house dwarves crap...lol.
The monsters in 5e are weak as crap and the encounters are terribly calculated. So ya, I toss that. I tend to run a lot of older modules, and allow them to keep some of their more powerful features, but I havent put back in Level Drain ..... I thought about, but even though my players are better than average on their attitude I just dont think they could handle it well...lol. Still, maybe one day....hahaha....your players are rockin it cause 5e is a very very easy game on the players, very forgiving. Doesnt make it powerful. In fact, I find 5e to be super weak, its just that they put in features/mechanics that basically stop the players from failing...like Death Saves...man I hate them. Tossed those a long time ago. Worst mechanic, with Attunement right there as second worst...
The point of rolling is to get something I wouldn't think to do normally. I like building characters, and like having new things to solve. Trying to assign stats through point buy such that it puts me at a novel starting point is incredibly unnatural and artificial.
That's completely the opposite way I come up with characters, lol. Stats are the least important part of character creation for me. They're not something to "solve", because there's no right answer
There are some ideas I have that are fairly MAD that I wouldn't be able to make with some spreads, but otherwise if I'm looking to make (consults list of unused character concepts) Orlop, a kobold bladesinger with a nautical background whose bladesong is a cross between a haka and a frilled lizard's threat display, I'm not going to sweat exactly what his INT is at 1st level, just so long as it's decent
When we rolled back in the day stats helped me make my characters, but I rolled down the line and whatever that spread ended up being needed an explanation. Now, its still somewhat important. Like in the game where I am playing, not DMing im playing a monk with a 10 endurance. Not because I wanted that but because I was giving him a solid intelligence for his background, and I just ran out points. Your stats, background, class choice create a story.
The monsters in 5e are weak as crap and the encounters are terribly calculated.
Um... if you think 5e is too easy, why are you giving the players monty haul stats to make it even easier? Give them an NPC array of 13/12/11/10/9/8, make it a real challenge.
If you are using 4d6 drop highest, the stats will be terrible. And ya I think 27 pt buy is incredibly low. I know it feeds into this idiotic, modern, notion of oo its great to have a ton of flaws and weaknesses and shitty stats so I can be all sensitive....but man no. Just doesnt appeal to me in the least. And sure, that might make me a filthy power gamer to some...dont care. Also, by having the opportunity for more generous stats, whether a much greater number of pts OR rolling OR a more generous array, you open up builds that might not have been really viable. For instance, a Paladin/Monk build could be great, but its going to be severely limited if the stats cant support it. BUT if you can reasonable stats across all those attributes you'd need, well, that could make for a very nice build over time.
That said, I also hate the ASI/Feats tied to class levels..so I toss that and give a feat at 1, 3, 6, etc, and ASI at 4, 8, 12, 16, 19 CHARACTER levels. This way you get more optimization/customization AND not penalized for multiclassing. And people seem to dig it. Plus I run a LOT of encounters in a day, and rests are hard to come by and the players need every advantage they can get cause I dont fudge dice and people die. Glorious. None of the real house dwarves crap...lol.
Interesting take. I do not feel like making this some kind of argument, but imo the more modern take is less weaknesses. Like your racial choice used to have a stat it was good in but one where it also was weaker in like halflings would lose strength. And when you roll, sure you will average a decent spread but you will also frequently get a 6 or something, even with roll 4 drop lowest. I've been gaming since the 70s, and in my experience weaknesses have been getting phased out. And not just in gaming but in books, manga, anime etc. The entertianment I grew up on mostly was about people succeeding despite being weaker than the enemy due to perseverance, wit, hard work etc Now everything seems to be they think he is weak but he is actually a level 99 SS class wizard. Which I am not a fan of as I think weaknesses define your character as much or more than your strengths.
That being said I at least sort of agree with your ASI/feat point though I would not give that many out as feats are stronger than 3e. But I think they should have balanced it and multiclassing around it being based on character level not class level. But I also think they should have done more to weaken dips, like make sure some ow level abilities scaled on class level not character level.(eldritch blast)
"If you are using 4d6 drop highest, the stats will be terrible."
Stasitically speaking, 4d6 has a average high score of 16 and a 10% chance of rolling an 18. Point buy cant get above 15.
"levels..so I toss that and give a feat at 1, 3, 6, etc, and ASI at 4, 8, 12, 16, 19 CHARACTER levels."
Ok. Nothing you are doing as dm is stamdard. So the efficacy of point buy or 4d6 in that world is itrelavent.
"cause I dont fudge dice and people die. Glorious. None of the real house dwarves crap...lol."
. Being a powerbuilder dm who kills players doesnt make some folks "tough" and others "real house dwarves". In the end its just a bunch of people having fun nerding out over rules and rolling dice. Usually in airconditioned rooms. I dont think anyone is connecting in from some actual front lines warzone somewhere.
Pretty much every where ive played we get uber eats to deliver pizza. At least where we play, we"ve got iy pretty easy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The point of rolling is to get something I wouldn't think to do normally. I like building characters, and like having new things to solve. Trying to assign stats through point buy such that it puts me at a novel starting point is incredibly unnatural and artificial.
Look, if a DM wants to use a standard pt allotment or array, more power to them. I do sometimes, but I am quite a bit more generous to my players. And no 27 pts is just not enough. Kinda weak, and not my cup of tea. And ya, I like higher powered stuff, so that's my bias. That said, I see a lot saying 4d6 roll, drop lowest and if its crap you can always select the standard array. Hell, game I am starting to play in did 4d6 no drop and man that is TASTY, but its meant to be a very high powered game, so this will hell of a lot of fun. Different types for different stripes right??
No it doesnt. And you know it. People dont play the game to be mike the weak ass fighter who can barely pick up a short, is out of breath in two steps and has the intelligence of a tangerine. DnD, even old school 3d6 roll in order, was still about power fantasy. Yes the stats really did direct the class you would want to play cause if you went with something else it was pretty terrible and you were likely to die. And hint...the pt of the game is to survive the adventure, not die to a slip on a rock at the entrance.
If you want to play low powered games, or if you want to have some enforced balance, fine. Not my cup of tea, but fine. But its perfectly legit to want to actually have customization, power, and you know escapism in your roleplaying game....
This "hate" on power reminds me so much of how people have hated rich folks...it used to be the thing we wanted, collectively, but more and more, success, status, power, etc all getting a bad rep....lol. Anyway, you do your table...and others will enjoy in their own way.
"Look, if a DM wants to use a standard pt allotment or array, more power to them. I do sometimes, but I am quite a bit more generous to my players. And no 27 pts is just not enough. Kinda weak, and not my cup of tea. "
Well, if standard point buy is "weak" that would suggest you are dm'ing far above and beyond the recommended encounter balance formulas. My current campaign is point buy, and based off even thr "dangerous" encounter formula in the dmg, my players are rocking it.
Well, ignoring the third point because some people do choose to play that, if you think 17 strength/14 con is weak ass, can barely pick up a short sword, and gets out of breath in two steps... you have an odd perspective on what stats actually mean.
That's completely the opposite way I come up with characters, lol. Stats are the least important part of character creation for me. They're not something to "solve", because there's no right answer
There are some ideas I have that are fairly MAD that I wouldn't be able to make with some spreads, but otherwise if I'm looking to make (consults list of unused character concepts) Orlop, a kobold bladesinger with a nautical background whose bladesong is a cross between a haka and a frilled lizard's threat display, I'm not going to sweat exactly what his INT is at 1st level, just so long as it's decent
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
If you are using 4d6 drop highest, the stats will be terrible. And ya I think 27 pt buy is incredibly low. I know it feeds into this idiotic, modern, notion of oo its great to have a ton of flaws and weaknesses and shitty stats so I can be all sensitive....but man no. Just doesnt appeal to me in the least. And sure, that might make me a filthy power gamer to some...dont care. Also, by having the opportunity for more generous stats, whether a much greater number of pts OR rolling OR a more generous array, you open up builds that might not have been really viable. For instance, a Paladin/Monk build could be great, but its going to be severely limited if the stats cant support it. BUT if you can reasonable stats across all those attributes you'd need, well, that could make for a very nice build over time.
That said, I also hate the ASI/Feats tied to class levels..so I toss that and give a feat at 1, 3, 6, etc, and ASI at 4, 8, 12, 16, 19 CHARACTER levels. This way you get more optimization/customization AND not penalized for multiclassing. And people seem to dig it. Plus I run a LOT of encounters in a day, and rests are hard to come by and the players need every advantage they can get cause I dont fudge dice and people die. Glorious. None of the real house dwarves crap...lol.
The monsters in 5e are weak as crap and the encounters are terribly calculated. So ya, I toss that. I tend to run a lot of older modules, and allow them to keep some of their more powerful features, but I havent put back in Level Drain ..... I thought about, but even though my players are better than average on their attitude I just dont think they could handle it well...lol. Still, maybe one day....hahaha....your players are rockin it cause 5e is a very very easy game on the players, very forgiving. Doesnt make it powerful. In fact, I find 5e to be super weak, its just that they put in features/mechanics that basically stop the players from failing...like Death Saves...man I hate them. Tossed those a long time ago. Worst mechanic, with Attunement right there as second worst...
When we rolled back in the day stats helped me make my characters, but I rolled down the line and whatever that spread ended up being needed an explanation. Now, its still somewhat important. Like in the game where I am playing, not DMing im playing a monk with a 10 endurance. Not because I wanted that but because I was giving him a solid intelligence for his background, and I just ran out points. Your stats, background, class choice create a story.
Um... if you think 5e is too easy, why are you giving the players monty haul stats to make it even easier? Give them an NPC array of 13/12/11/10/9/8, make it a real challenge.
Interesting take. I do not feel like making this some kind of argument, but imo the more modern take is less weaknesses. Like your racial choice used to have a stat it was good in but one where it also was weaker in like halflings would lose strength. And when you roll, sure you will average a decent spread but you will also frequently get a 6 or something, even with roll 4 drop lowest. I've been gaming since the 70s, and in my experience weaknesses have been getting phased out. And not just in gaming but in books, manga, anime etc. The entertianment I grew up on mostly was about people succeeding despite being weaker than the enemy due to perseverance, wit, hard work etc Now everything seems to be they think he is weak but he is actually a level 99 SS class wizard. Which I am not a fan of as I think weaknesses define your character as much or more than your strengths.
That being said I at least sort of agree with your ASI/feat point though I would not give that many out as feats are stronger than 3e. But I think they should have balanced it and multiclassing around it being based on character level not class level. But I also think they should have done more to weaken dips, like make sure some ow level abilities scaled on class level not character level.(eldritch blast)
"If you are using 4d6 drop highest, the stats will be terrible."
Stasitically speaking, 4d6 has a average high score of 16 and a 10% chance of rolling an 18. Point buy cant get above 15.
"levels..so I toss that and give a feat at 1, 3, 6, etc, and ASI at 4, 8, 12, 16, 19 CHARACTER levels."
Ok. Nothing you are doing as dm is stamdard. So the efficacy of point buy or 4d6 in that world is itrelavent.
"cause I dont fudge dice and people die. Glorious. None of the real house dwarves crap...lol."
. Being a powerbuilder dm who kills players doesnt make some folks "tough" and others "real house dwarves". In the end its just a bunch of people having fun nerding out over rules and rolling dice. Usually in airconditioned rooms. I dont think anyone is connecting in from some actual front lines warzone somewhere.
Pretty much every where ive played we get uber eats to deliver pizza. At least where we play, we"ve got iy pretty easy.