Yeah I don't really care about stats, as long as everyone's characters are close enough nobody feels overshadowed, it works fine. I admit at that point i might as well use a array to 100% make sure of that, but people enjoy the rolling process and it helps them design their character and get through the first bit.
Edit: I find people are a lot more excited when Session 0 involves rolling dice. People like rolling dice, and like it more when they feel it has a huge impact on their character, of course it doesn't really (none of my players are the type to go full in on feats which helps), but I'm not going to ruin their fun.
Yeah I don't really care about stats, as long as everyone's characters are close enough nobody feels overshadowed, it works fine. I admit at that point i might as well use a array to 100% make sure of that, but people enjoy the rolling process and it helps them design their character and get through the first bit.
Edit: I find people are a lot more excited when Session 0 involves rolling dice. People like rolling dice, and like it more when they feel it has a huge impact on their character, of course it doesn't really (none of my players are the type to go full in on feats which help), but I'm not going to ruin their fun.
Yeah, we really like it. It is just part of the fun for us.
Never said Memory was horribly handicapped, did I Vince? Other than actually being handicapped to an extent, in the game world.
I said I rolled for her stats and took what I rolled. One anecdote of "Accepts rolls even though they're not Superheroic" to one anecdote of "This guy on Facebook pitched a fit". And my story was direct from the source, for whatever that counts for.
Is it the worst array ever? Nah. Does it have the same '4' that you cited No Evil Powergamer Would Ever Accept in it? Sure does. Does it have a second sub-ten number in it? Also yes, though patched in a slightly annoying way by tiffle bonus numbers. Frankly if I were rebuilding Memory right now with that array I'd probably put her together on a Feral tiefling basis, or use Tasha's rules to swatch her bonuses around. Depends on the campaign she's playing in.
The fact that she lines up with expanded Point Buy? Heh, hey - that kinda reinforces the point rather than detracts from it. Means Memory is in line with the expected resource pool of a new character. Yes, she has a stronger strength and a weaker weakness than most first-level characters, but you also ignored overlooked the part where I'd specifically ask the DM to make sure Memory feels that -3 in Strength. I actively dislike people who don't play their weaknesses. I am not allocating a 'dump stat'; I am using the numbers to build a story the way everyone keeps telling me to.
Even my artificer, with her 6 Wisdom in an otherwise powerful array, plays her weakness. I willingly forego many Sense checks the DM calls for; depending on what Star is doing I'll simply say "Nah, Star fails" due to what I've decided that deep cut represents. Namely, her tendency to over-focus on things which grab her interest and a general lack of situational awareness - weaknesses she shares with Yurei-the-person, which makes it very easy to be quite convincing as an ADD Science Gal. She bears a combination of situation blindness and reckless confidence that has nearly gotten her killed on a few different occasions now.
Not that you'll believe me, of course. But hey - maybe I'm helping other folks step out of their shells a bit with these stories of successfully playing characters with very low numbers and/or real issues. If I can turn my real-life WIS 6 into interesting character decisions and roleplay, other folks can take their weaknesses and turn them into stories too. Maybe it'll help them master those weaknesses, even just a little bit. And that would be worth all the horrible things you and the L-Man there accuse me of every time you speak to me.
The problem is annoying players and DMs with rulelawyering and twisting the game to get more power instead of playing the game collectively (instead of individually because powergaming is selfish at its core).
4d6 drop lowest is an official rule. No need to equate it to ruleslawyering or twisting the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I get where the OP is coming from but it was put in a pretty hostile method to start which sets a tone.
I dont mind 4d6 drop the lowest and plug em where you want, I dont mind standard array (probably my favorite) and dont mind points buy either. BUT what I do find fairly.. I guess funny.. or perhaps hypocritical is when people defend 4d6 by saying stuff like it prevents characters from being the same, and it prevents power gaming.
It doesn't stop samness because your plugging those stats into the same scores anyway, its just a matter to what degree are they different than say standard array. and it doesn't stop power gaming either because I can't remember the last time I saw someone roll their 4d6 and that was the end of it. It's always ooh. let me reroll, or drop that sub 8 or if your score doesn't total something reroll or roll 3 arrays pick the best.
And then how wrong is it to accuse a method of being wrong when you don't even apply it properly ?
And note that, even in case of a re-roll, unless you are applying the stupid lineage rule, it will still be harder to conform to a build with nice even scores all over, so it still counters powergaming, at least a bit.
There's always some POWER GAMER caveat to 4d6, and as OP stated using 4d6 is really just about getting those sweet sweet 18s, its not about diversity of build you can do that with either SA or PB, its not about "the gamble" as everyones got rules to mitigate the gamble, its just about getting those max stats at lvl 1. AND if they are just made to accept it what happens? LEEEEEROOOOY JEEENKINS!!! The lvl 1 wizard with a death wish or the character that purposely smooth talks his way into getting the guards or bar patrons to attack to die in a brawl. or the classic get into 1 fight "oh man.. I I think Ill go back to farming"
I won't lie when we do 4d6 the only thing im thining while rolling is I want my primary stat to be 18 and hope my secondary can be around 16. I'm not rolling going 'man I hope I can play a fighter with a 5 in my dump stat!"
Thanks for confirming this, it is at least totally honest. As for me, and a few others, it's not only the dump stat(s) (if any) that I look at, but the combination of stats, they usually can give an interesting idea bout personality or fighting style, etc. Something like average int but below average wis, he is not an idiot, but he has a tendency to jump into things, etc. And you don't get it as well when you simply assign numbers by min--maxing 27 points.
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Also when people do take those low stats your often met with the most reckless characters in existence so they can quickly die and roll up a new one looking for better stats.
What does it all lead to? The vast majority of people using 4d6 aren't looking for diverse, or challenging builds.. they want 18s. Is that EVERYONE? No there's plenty of groups that do 4d6 and play it as you'd play any other character but simply looking at threads about it your bombarded with house rules and death wish characters when rolled subpar
Never said Memory was horribly handicapped, did I Vince? Other than actually being handicapped to an extent, in the game world.
I said I rolled for her stats and took what I rolled. One anecdote of "Accepts rolls even though they're not Superheroic" to one anecdote of "This guy on Facebook pitched a fit". And my story was direct from the source, for whatever that counts for.
Is it the worst array ever? Nah. Does it have the same '4' that you cited No Evil Powergamer Would Ever Accept in it? Sure does. Does it have a second sub-ten number in it? Also yes, though patched in a slightly annoying way by tiffle bonus numbers. Frankly if I were rebuilding Memory right now with that array I'd probably put her together on a Feral tiefling basis, or use Tasha's rules to swatch her bonuses around. Depends on the campaign she's playing in.
The fact that she lines up with expanded Point Buy? Heh, hey - that kinda reinforces the point rather than detracts from it. Means Memory is in line with the expected resource pool of a new character. Yes, she has a stronger strength and a weaker weakness than most first-level characters, but you also ignored overlooked the part where I'd specifically ask the DM to make sure Memory feels that -3 in Strength. I actively dislike people who don't play their weaknesses. I am not allocating a 'dump stat'; I am using the numbers to build a story the way everyone keeps telling me to.
Even my artificer, with her 6 Wisdom in an otherwise powerful array, plays her weakness. I willingly forego many Sense checks the DM calls for; depending on what Star is doing I'll simply say "Nah, Star fails" due to what I've decided that deep cut represents. Namely, her tendency to over-focus on things which grab her interest and a general lack of situational awareness - weaknesses she shares with Yurei-the-person, which makes it very easy to be quite convincing as an ADD Science Gal. She bears a combination of situation blindness and reckless confidence that has nearly gotten her killed on a few different occasions now.
Not that you'll believe me, of course. But hey - maybe I'm helping other folks step out of their shells a bit with these stories of successfully playing characters with very low numbers and/or real issues. If I can turn my real-life WIS 6 into interesting character decisions and roleplay, other folks can take their weaknesses and turn them into stories too. Maybe it'll help them master those weaknesses, even just a little bit. And that would be worth all the horrible things you and the L-Man there accuse me of every time you speak to me.
Honestly I feel like a lot of people would welcome it if WotC didn't arbitrary limit the RAW point buy to 8-15. I remember reading PHB for the first time and looking at stat generation and I was like "huh, where is the point price for 16,17 and 18? Weird".
I get where the OP is coming from but it was put in a pretty hostile method to start which sets a tone.
I dont mind 4d6 drop the lowest and plug em where you want, I dont mind standard array (probably my favorite) and dont mind points buy either. BUT what I do find fairly.. I guess funny.. or perhaps hypocritical is when people defend 4d6 by saying stuff like it prevents characters from being the same, and it prevents power gaming.
It doesn't stop samness because your plugging those stats into the same scores anyway, its just a matter to what degree are they different than say standard array. and it doesn't stop power gaming either because I can't remember the last time I saw someone roll their 4d6 and that was the end of it. It's always ooh. let me reroll, or drop that sub 8 or if your score doesn't total something reroll or roll 3 arrays pick the best.
And then how wrong is it to accuse a method of being wrong when you don't even apply it properly ?
And note that, even in case of a re-roll, unless you are applying the stupid lineage rule, it will still be harder to conform to a build with nice even scores all over, so it still counters powergaming, at least a bit.
There's always some POWER GAMER caveat to 4d6, and as OP stated using 4d6 is really just about getting those sweet sweet 18s, its not about diversity of build you can do that with either SA or PB, its not about "the gamble" as everyones got rules to mitigate the gamble, its just about getting those max stats at lvl 1. AND if they are just made to accept it what happens? LEEEEEROOOOY JEEENKINS!!! The lvl 1 wizard with a death wish or the character that purposely smooth talks his way into getting the guards or bar patrons to attack to die in a brawl. or the classic get into 1 fight "oh man.. I I think Ill go back to farming"
I won't lie when we do 4d6 the only thing im thining while rolling is I want my primary stat to be 18 and hope my secondary can be around 16. I'm not rolling going 'man I hope I can play a fighter with a 5 in my dump stat!"
Thanks for confirming this, it is at least totally honest. As for me, and a few others, it's not only the dump stat(s) (if any) that I look at, but the combination of stats, they usually can give an interesting idea bout personality or fighting style, etc. Something like average int but below average wis, he is not an idiot, but he has a tendency to jump into things, etc. And you don't get it as well when you simply assign numbers by min--maxing 27 points.
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Also when people do take those low stats your often met with the most reckless characters in existence so they can quickly die and roll up a new one looking for better stats.
What does it all lead to? The vast majority of people using 4d6 aren't looking for diverse, or challenging builds.. they want 18s. Is that EVERYONE? No there's plenty of groups that do 4d6 and play it as you'd play any other character but simply looking at threads about it your bombarded with house rules and death wish characters when rolled subpar
If D&D 5e were so great there wouldn't be a bunch of House Rules, it would be able to stand on it's own merits.
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Depends on why they are doing it.
For instance, if you are doing it like Coleville, randomly generating them in order so that people cannot come to the table with a pre-made character concept (that more than likely won't fit into a specific setting or game world), then the merit is not the quality of the scores but the randomness of which ones are best. Homebrewing a system to prevent the 4D6/dl method from breaking the character in other ways (like too many 4s or 18s) is meant to keep the character reasonable, while still being something you couldn't show up at the table already knowing you were going to play.
I agree, if you allow assignment of 4D6 and say it's just as good as or better than the stat array or point buy for just generating the numbers themselves from 3-18, and then have a bunch of kludges to fix it, you're right that this doesn't sound like someone who likes 4D6.
So I think it depends on why you are doing it. The ONLY reason I would EVER do 4D6 would be if we did them IN ORDER. I would never do them just to generate numbers -- the purpose of putting them IN ORDER is to force players to "play the hand they are dealt." If players had significant objections to the 4D6 method, I would allow them to randomly place the standard array (or more likely my "better array") into stats they did not pre-allocate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Heh. Actually Sposta, there's a problem I've had for ages that "Trust your DM" is exactly the wrong answer for.
I love omnicompetent characters. Not "Oh I have a 95-point stat array I can do anything" characters, those are obnoxious, but characters like artificers, Lore bards, Arcane Trickster rogues, or others with a huge and diverse pool of options and solutions available to them. I'm at my happiest when I have 8+ skill proficiencies, at least two Expertise points, access to 6+ cantrips, worthwhile combat options, and enough tools both magical and mundane to accomplish what I need accomplished.
DMs hate that shit. They tell me I'm being a spotlight-hogging *******, or that I'm not leaving room for anybody else to shine, or that I don't/won't/can't trust my fellow players to do their share, or that I don't trust the DM not to hose me. None of that is true. I just really love the Ace character archetype, the adventurer who can do at least a little of everything, and have a strong preference for a larger pool of at-will abilities than a smaller pool of stronger but limited-use abilities. I don't want to cast "Solve Problem" at eighth level, I want to use a combination of skill, smarts, proper gear selection, and low-level magic to Solve the Problem in a particularly clever or impressive way. It's just how I like to play.
But no DM outside my gaming group is ever going to let me be that character, because they don't trust me to use that character for the Greater Good and the betterment of the game. They refuse to hear "Trust me, I know what I'm doing, I won't wreck your game" and insist I Be a Team Player(C) and restrict myself to a narrowly-focused expert who has nothing to contribute to the game outside her specific field of interest, because that's what a DM is expecting and prepared to handle.
It's similar to all the horror stories certain DMs like to tell about how their player who rolled super-good stats is totally going to Ruin Their Game Forever(C) because now the Horrible Optimizer Munchkin Dood has the ammo he needs to wreck games. No DM ever seems willing to trust their players in turn and accept that the optimizer with too-big numbers can restrain themselves, or that the jack-of-all-trades skillmonkey can step back and let other players exploit their own specialties. Many DMs say "trust me, it'll be fine" when a player or group of players does something less than optimal, but that DM then flips schittes when the players opt to make exceptionally competent characters instead. Or roll an obnoxiously high stat array that puts them in a position to dominate their table, if they're a bad player.
Trust has to go both ways, and it does not eliminate the need for conversation or understanding.
Note the key phrase there: "DMs hate that shit. They tell me I'm being a spotlight-hogging *******..." Other DMs say this. Not my fellow players, and not my DMs in specific. DMs on this forum tell me, in theads I post in rather than games I play in, that they hate skillmonkeys and consider them to be spotlight-thieving jackholes who wreck games. In point of fact, one of our two non-me DM-type people shares my love of omnicompetent skillmonkey characters and is similarly reticent to use them. We both fight like cats over the chance to play an Arcane Trickster, on the exceedingly rare occasions (in fact, exactly once so far) when it comes up.
Personally? I'm of the opinion that limited, sharply delineated roles in an adventuring party is a fantastic way to ensure your party sucks at adventuring. IF every character in that party can do one thing and one thing only, and those things are sharply divided between your various PCs, what you have is an extremely fragile recipe for disaster. If even a single member of the party goes down, the party is left with gaping, unpluggable holes in their capabilities. Hell, if even a single member of the team is even just out of position for some reason, the team cracks and crumbles.
My ideal party composition is one where everybody is a skillmonkey, everybody can heal, everybody can handle themselves in both melee combat and ranged battles, and so forth. A wolfpack of self-reliant, competent heroes that can reinforce each other ad-hoc as needed, responding to situations fluidly with whoever's on the spot. I find that such a configuration makes for a much more dynamic party in all situations, since everybody is contributing to each scene, and furthermore it actually creates real teamwork. "Teamwork" is not "we all stand around while the one guy who knows what he's doing does the thing". Teamwork is "this is our best guy for this thing so he'll take the lead, but the rest of us know enough to help him out or do some supporting work that makes it easier for him to do his thing."
An Adventurer should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, helm a ship, design a keep, write a saga, balance their purse, build a palisade wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, execute orders, give orders, cooperate, act solo, cast a spell, analyze a problem, solve the problem, pitch manure, counter a spell, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, and die heroically over a mountain of their dead enemies. Specialization is for NPCs.
That’s right. I was the one who called Yurei a prima donna in my response to that post.
I personally prefer the SA method, as it feels like you're molding the character, it's completely your own, you choose the strong points, as well as it's flaws, but 4d6 is totally solid and I used to use it on all my characters.
I get where the OP is coming from but it was put in a pretty hostile method to start which sets a tone.
I dont mind 4d6 drop the lowest and plug em where you want, I dont mind standard array (probably my favorite) and dont mind points buy either. BUT what I do find fairly.. I guess funny.. or perhaps hypocritical is when people defend 4d6 by saying stuff like it prevents characters from being the same, and it prevents power gaming.
It doesn't stop samness because your plugging those stats into the same scores anyway, its just a matter to what degree are they different than say standard array. and it doesn't stop power gaming either because I can't remember the last time I saw someone roll their 4d6 and that was the end of it. It's always ooh. let me reroll, or drop that sub 8 or if your score doesn't total something reroll or roll 3 arrays pick the best.
And then how wrong is it to accuse a method of being wrong when you don't even apply it properly ?
And note that, even in case of a re-roll, unless you are applying the stupid lineage rule, it will still be harder to conform to a build with nice even scores all over, so it still counters powergaming, at least a bit.
There's always some POWER GAMER caveat to 4d6, and as OP stated using 4d6 is really just about getting those sweet sweet 18s, its not about diversity of build you can do that with either SA or PB, its not about "the gamble" as everyones got rules to mitigate the gamble, its just about getting those max stats at lvl 1. AND if they are just made to accept it what happens? LEEEEEROOOOY JEEENKINS!!! The lvl 1 wizard with a death wish or the character that purposely smooth talks his way into getting the guards or bar patrons to attack to die in a brawl. or the classic get into 1 fight "oh man.. I I think Ill go back to farming"
I won't lie when we do 4d6 the only thing im thining while rolling is I want my primary stat to be 18 and hope my secondary can be around 16. I'm not rolling going 'man I hope I can play a fighter with a 5 in my dump stat!"
Thanks for confirming this, it is at least totally honest. As for me, and a few others, it's not only the dump stat(s) (if any) that I look at, but the combination of stats, they usually can give an interesting idea bout personality or fighting style, etc. Something like average int but below average wis, he is not an idiot, but he has a tendency to jump into things, etc. And you don't get it as well when you simply assign numbers by min--maxing 27 points.
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Also when people do take those low stats your often met with the most reckless characters in existence so they can quickly die and roll up a new one looking for better stats.
What does it all lead to? The vast majority of people using 4d6 aren't looking for diverse, or challenging builds.. they want 18s. Is that EVERYONE? No there's plenty of groups that do 4d6 and play it as you'd play any other character but simply looking at threads about it your bombarded with house rules and death wish characters when rolled subpar
If D&D 5e were so great there wouldn't be a bunch of House Rules, it would be able to stand on it's own merits.
5e stands quite well without House Rules. IT DOES stand on its own merits. Then along came the abomination that shall not be named.
Do I use some House Rules? Yes. But always to make the game harder, not easier. I don't coddle to the " I want what I want, because I am special, and I went it now" crowd.
Not bad at all at level 1, looks a lot like a Wizard I was playing just last year actually. Would likely bump Int at level 4 then maybe a Half Feat at 8. I would likely have taken a Half Feat at level 1 because everyone gets a Feat at level 1 in our groups, but that doesn't matter here.
Not sure which School though, probably Transmutation or Divination.
You mention last year as it was a long time ago, well that's how I perceive it. I think perhaps a factor here is for how long people are stuck with their characters. I'm tied to the same character, and only that character, on time scales of 5 years per campaign. Perhaps that changes the perception of what people are willing to bend to when it comes to stats.
That campaign lasted about a year and a half and only ended because the DM moved cross country for a job. I have played a character for as long as 7 years, though that was in 2nd edition. Most of our campaigns seem to last about 2 years or less these days. Stats have never been a factor in my enjoyment of a character. I enjoy the story and the RP, which isn't reliant upon stats at all in my experience. A fun game only requires a good DM and a good group of players.
Yeh I just used your post to spur off with a thought that hadn't been covered.
I get where the OP is coming from but it was put in a pretty hostile method to start which sets a tone.
I dont mind 4d6 drop the lowest and plug em where you want, I dont mind standard array (probably my favorite) and dont mind points buy either. BUT what I do find fairly.. I guess funny.. or perhaps hypocritical is when people defend 4d6 by saying stuff like it prevents characters from being the same, and it prevents power gaming.
It doesn't stop samness because your plugging those stats into the same scores anyway, its just a matter to what degree are they different than say standard array. and it doesn't stop power gaming either because I can't remember the last time I saw someone roll their 4d6 and that was the end of it. It's always ooh. let me reroll, or drop that sub 8 or if your score doesn't total something reroll or roll 3 arrays pick the best.
And then how wrong is it to accuse a method of being wrong when you don't even apply it properly ?
And note that, even in case of a re-roll, unless you are applying the stupid lineage rule, it will still be harder to conform to a build with nice even scores all over, so it still counters powergaming, at least a bit.
There's always some POWER GAMER caveat to 4d6, and as OP stated using 4d6 is really just about getting those sweet sweet 18s, its not about diversity of build you can do that with either SA or PB, its not about "the gamble" as everyones got rules to mitigate the gamble, its just about getting those max stats at lvl 1. AND if they are just made to accept it what happens? LEEEEEROOOOY JEEENKINS!!! The lvl 1 wizard with a death wish or the character that purposely smooth talks his way into getting the guards or bar patrons to attack to die in a brawl. or the classic get into 1 fight "oh man.. I I think Ill go back to farming"
I won't lie when we do 4d6 the only thing im thining while rolling is I want my primary stat to be 18 and hope my secondary can be around 16. I'm not rolling going 'man I hope I can play a fighter with a 5 in my dump stat!"
Thanks for confirming this, it is at least totally honest. As for me, and a few others, it's not only the dump stat(s) (if any) that I look at, but the combination of stats, they usually can give an interesting idea bout personality or fighting style, etc. Something like average int but below average wis, he is not an idiot, but he has a tendency to jump into things, etc. And you don't get it as well when you simply assign numbers by min--maxing 27 points.
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Also when people do take those low stats your often met with the most reckless characters in existence so they can quickly die and roll up a new one looking for better stats.
What does it all lead to? The vast majority of people using 4d6 aren't looking for diverse, or challenging builds.. they want 18s. Is that EVERYONE? No there's plenty of groups that do 4d6 and play it as you'd play any other character but simply looking at threads about it your bombarded with house rules and death wish characters when rolled subpar
If D&D 5e were so great there wouldn't be a bunch of House Rules, it would be able to stand on it's own merits.
And if it's not so great, you are very welcome to go and play something else. But for those of us who love the game, and actually do read it, we understand why there are house rules, because it was even in the designers' intent, officially: "The direction we chose for the current edition was to lay a foundation of rules that a DM could build on, and we embraced the DM’s role as the bridge between the things the rules address and the things they don’t."
So once more, before criticising something, why don't you first understand it ?
I think they are saying that having "you figure it out" as the official stance is passing the buck a bit much to the DM....especially new DMs.
Indeed they wanted things to be "fluid" but that makes long discussions and conversations about how things interact with other things. Sage Advice was created due to the failure of the natural language approach and people still argue over the meaning of "Reasonable".
The 4d6 is the official rule simply because of tradition and not by the virtue of creating a good experience....which is unfortunately a re-occurring theme in this edition.
Fireball is way overtuned thanks to "Tradition" and so on.
I love 5e and I think its the best TTRPG system I have played on for a while but it was a big learning curve for me as a DM because I did not have clear cut examples to work from and the answer "well everyone does it differently so just do whats good for your table!" doesn't really give you a starting point to work from....its kind of a cop out.
Regarding whether "having house rules" means the game is bad...
... every single game group that I have ever played in has used house rules.
The rules are written generically, but no game group is generic. Some groups like going one way or another. A group that really likes to max things out and play "god level" will want to do stats one way, and a group that prefers playing more "street level" will do their stats another.
As a non-D&D example, I started watching a Call of Cthulhu stream. Now that game is known as being rather deadly to the PCs, and wipes are not uncommon (and far more common than in D&D). There is a version of it called Pulp Cthulhu which is more survivable. The Keeper (DM) at the start of the stream said, they were going to chart a middle course -- not be quite so "superhero-ish" as Pulp, but not quite as brutal as straight Call. Thus he houseruled CoC to be a little more "Pulpy". This does not make CoC a "bad game" nor Pulp a "good one" -- part of why he housruled it was for the stream (that the audience might have trouble keeping up if PCs went down like flies, even if the players didn't mind).
There are lots of reasons why people should houserule things... and I would bet it is probably the VERY rare game group that plays with zero house rules.
Regarding whether "having house rules" means the game is bad...
... every single game group that I have ever played in has used house rules.
The rules are written generically, but no game group is generic. Some groups like going one way or another. A group that really likes to max things out and play "god level" will want to do stats one way, and a group that prefers playing more "street level" will do their stats another.
As a non-D&D example, I started watching a Call of Cthulhu stream. Now that game is known as being rather deadly to the PCs, and wipes are not uncommon (and far more common than in D&D). There is a version of it called Pulp Cthulhu which is more survivable. The Keeper (DM) at the start of the stream said, they were going to chart a middle course -- not be quite so "superhero-ish" as Pulp, but not quite as brutal as straight Call. Thus he houseruled CoC to be a little more "Pulpy". This does not make CoC a "bad game" nor Pulp a "good one" -- part of why he housruled it was for the stream (that the audience might have trouble keeping up if PCs went down like flies, even if the players didn't mind).
There are lots of reasons why people should houserule things... and I would bet it is probably the VERY rare game group that plays with zero house rules.
Depends on the system. My PF2e games require 0 house rules as things are more clearly laid out.
5e played full by the book with little interpretation would be a nightmare.
I get where the OP is coming from but it was put in a pretty hostile method to start which sets a tone.
I dont mind 4d6 drop the lowest and plug em where you want, I dont mind standard array (probably my favorite) and dont mind points buy either. BUT what I do find fairly.. I guess funny.. or perhaps hypocritical is when people defend 4d6 by saying stuff like it prevents characters from being the same, and it prevents power gaming.
It doesn't stop samness because your plugging those stats into the same scores anyway, its just a matter to what degree are they different than say standard array. and it doesn't stop power gaming either because I can't remember the last time I saw someone roll their 4d6 and that was the end of it. It's always ooh. let me reroll, or drop that sub 8 or if your score doesn't total something reroll or roll 3 arrays pick the best.
And then how wrong is it to accuse a method of being wrong when you don't even apply it properly ?
And note that, even in case of a re-roll, unless you are applying the stupid lineage rule, it will still be harder to conform to a build with nice even scores all over, so it still counters powergaming, at least a bit.
There's always some POWER GAMER caveat to 4d6, and as OP stated using 4d6 is really just about getting those sweet sweet 18s, its not about diversity of build you can do that with either SA or PB, its not about "the gamble" as everyones got rules to mitigate the gamble, its just about getting those max stats at lvl 1. AND if they are just made to accept it what happens? LEEEEEROOOOY JEEENKINS!!! The lvl 1 wizard with a death wish or the character that purposely smooth talks his way into getting the guards or bar patrons to attack to die in a brawl. or the classic get into 1 fight "oh man.. I I think Ill go back to farming"
I won't lie when we do 4d6 the only thing im thining while rolling is I want my primary stat to be 18 and hope my secondary can be around 16. I'm not rolling going 'man I hope I can play a fighter with a 5 in my dump stat!"
Thanks for confirming this, it is at least totally honest. As for me, and a few others, it's not only the dump stat(s) (if any) that I look at, but the combination of stats, they usually can give an interesting idea bout personality or fighting style, etc. Something like average int but below average wis, he is not an idiot, but he has a tendency to jump into things, etc. And you don't get it as well when you simply assign numbers by min--maxing 27 points.
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Also when people do take those low stats your often met with the most reckless characters in existence so they can quickly die and roll up a new one looking for better stats.
What does it all lead to? The vast majority of people using 4d6 aren't looking for diverse, or challenging builds.. they want 18s. Is that EVERYONE? No there's plenty of groups that do 4d6 and play it as you'd play any other character but simply looking at threads about it your bombarded with house rules and death wish characters when rolled subpar
If D&D 5e were so great there wouldn't be a bunch of House Rules, it would be able to stand on it's own merits.
5e stands quite well without House Rules. IT DOES stand on its own merits. Then along came the abomination that shall not be named.
Do I use some House Rules? Yes. But always to make the game harder, not easier. I don't coddle to the " I want what I want, because I am special, and I went it now" crowd.
Can you just say it? There is no book/release that going to come to life and kill you or keep you from playing....and those of us who aren't up to date on your personal opinions would know what the heck you are talking about (I'm assuming Tasha's, but heck do I know you could be talking about the DM's guide)
Now, I agree with you that 5e stands on its own fairly well...it stands with the option for homebrew and house rules/optional rules. They are features, not bugs.
Regarding whether "having house rules" means the game is bad...
... every single game group that I have ever played in has used house rules.
The rules are written generically, but no game group is generic. Some groups like going one way or another. A group that really likes to max things out and play "god level" will want to do stats one way, and a group that prefers playing more "street level" will do their stats another.
As a non-D&D example, I started watching a Call of Cthulhu stream. Now that game is known as being rather deadly to the PCs, and wipes are not uncommon (and far more common than in D&D). There is a version of it called Pulp Cthulhu which is more survivable. The Keeper (DM) at the start of the stream said, they were going to chart a middle course -- not be quite so "superhero-ish" as Pulp, but not quite as brutal as straight Call. Thus he houseruled CoC to be a little more "Pulpy". This does not make CoC a "bad game" nor Pulp a "good one" -- part of why he housruled it was for the stream (that the audience might have trouble keeping up if PCs went down like flies, even if the players didn't mind).
There are lots of reasons why people should houserule things... and I would bet it is probably the VERY rare game group that plays with zero house rules.
My comment was sarcasm.
House Rules are extremely common and expected. House Rules for character creation are no different. The argument that a House Rule being attached to 4d6kh proves that the rule has no merit, in a game deliberately designed to be House Ruled and adjusted to fit the table it is played at, is just silly.
What gets me is that certain people trumpet from the rooftops the idea that "The direction [Wizards] chose for the current edition was to lay a foundation of rules that a DM could build on, and we embraced the DM’s role as the bridge between the things the rules address and the things they don’t."
...but then, when a DM tries to create those rules the game designers didn't bother with - when they try and exercise that power to Do Their DM Thing by altering the game to suit their own needs and the needs of their table - that same subset of individuals lose their freaking minds, freak 110% of the way out, and spend twenty pages lambasting someone for daring to have the sheer, unmigitated gall to change 5e. As if that so-oft-quoted line up there is meant exclusively to force people to err on the side of a very specific style of play espoused by Certain People, and anyone who interprets it as "Okay. So we're free to reimpose some of the structure and mechanical systems you guys stripped out that we think would make our game run better, right?" is just Literally Worse Than [Insert Historic Villified Dictator Here] and should do everybody a favor and go extinguish themselves in a basement before they corrupt the D&D playerbase any further.
Can you just say it? There is no book/release that going to come to life and kill you or keep you from playing....and those of us who aren't up to date on your personal opinions would know what the heck you are talking about (I'm assuming Tasha's, but heck do I know you could be talking about the DM's guide)
I assume Vince is referring to
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Its worth pointing out that if you come to a D&D forum to discuss a house rule or really whatever, you should expect a certain amount of feedback, some of which will be criticism of whatever it is you have created. That is how discussion forums work. If I say 5e X mechanic is crap and here is how I fixed it... someone will come along and disagree with you.
The very act of creating a house rule and posting it online and saying "hey I fixed it" is effectively asking for a debate, I mean.. its a house rule. Why do you need feedback from complete strangers? The obvious answer is that you want the validation but you may not get it if people disagree with you. Its just how it is when you bring your house game to discuss it in a public place.
Which is fine, and expected. Whenever I post a homebrew fix down south in the Homebrew forum, I'm primarily looking for two things.
A.) to share the fix for someone having a similar issue to mine, but who may not have had the time or creative drive to effect repairs on their own, or B.) to gather feedback on the fix and see if I'm in the right headspace for it.
I've actually abandoned a few fixes in the past that didn't pan out well - still haven't figured out a good solution for making Counterspell and Dispel Magic suck less, but man. The last time I tried I dun got told, and a number of people had valid points. But one thing people forget when they tell me "I have a right to criticize your work!" is the corollary that I have a right to engage with the criticism and defend my work. Not hostilely, but in the manner of a scientist or philosopher defending their findings. I can point out things the critiquer may not have thought of, or pose them questions on what their suggested alterations might affect that they weren't aware of. I love it when people give me intelligent, well-reasoned feedback on homebrew rules and system fixes and are willing to engage with intelligent and well-reasoned critiques of their critique.
Intelligent and well-reasoned are key, however - the Usual Suspects telling me "YOUR SHIT SUCKS JUST PLAY RAW" because they personally hate me is not feedback, it's just pointless vitriol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah I don't really care about stats, as long as everyone's characters are close enough nobody feels overshadowed, it works fine. I admit at that point i might as well use a array to 100% make sure of that, but people enjoy the rolling process and it helps them design their character and get through the first bit.
Edit: I find people are a lot more excited when Session 0 involves rolling dice. People like rolling dice, and like it more when they feel it has a huge impact on their character, of course it doesn't really (none of my players are the type to go full in on feats which helps), but I'm not going to ruin their fun.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Yeah, we really like it. It is just part of the fun for us.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Never said Memory was horribly handicapped, did I Vince? Other than actually being handicapped to an extent, in the game world.
I said I rolled for her stats and took what I rolled. One anecdote of "Accepts rolls even though they're not Superheroic" to one anecdote of "This guy on Facebook pitched a fit". And my story was direct from the source, for whatever that counts for.
Is it the worst array ever? Nah. Does it have the same '4' that you cited No Evil Powergamer Would Ever Accept in it? Sure does. Does it have a second sub-ten number in it? Also yes, though patched in a slightly annoying way by tiffle bonus numbers. Frankly if I were rebuilding Memory right now with that array I'd probably put her together on a Feral tiefling basis, or use Tasha's rules to swatch her bonuses around. Depends on the campaign she's playing in.
The fact that she lines up with expanded Point Buy? Heh, hey - that kinda reinforces the point rather than detracts from it. Means Memory is in line with the expected resource pool of a new character. Yes, she has a stronger strength and a weaker weakness than most first-level characters, but you also
ignoredoverlooked the part where I'd specifically ask the DM to make sure Memory feels that -3 in Strength. I actively dislike people who don't play their weaknesses. I am not allocating a 'dump stat'; I am using the numbers to build a story the way everyone keeps telling me to.Even my artificer, with her 6 Wisdom in an otherwise powerful array, plays her weakness. I willingly forego many Sense checks the DM calls for; depending on what Star is doing I'll simply say "Nah, Star fails" due to what I've decided that deep cut represents. Namely, her tendency to over-focus on things which grab her interest and a general lack of situational awareness - weaknesses she shares with Yurei-the-person, which makes it very easy to be quite convincing as an ADD Science Gal. She bears a combination of situation blindness and reckless confidence that has nearly gotten her killed on a few different occasions now.
Not that you'll believe me, of course. But hey - maybe I'm helping other folks step out of their shells a bit with these stories of successfully playing characters with very low numbers and/or real issues. If I can turn my real-life WIS 6 into interesting character decisions and roleplay, other folks can take their weaknesses and turn them into stories too. Maybe it'll help them master those weaknesses, even just a little bit. And that would be worth all the horrible things you and the L-Man there accuse me of every time you speak to me.
Please do not contact or message me.
4d6 drop lowest is an official rule. No need to equate it to ruleslawyering or twisting the game.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
As I said I don't mind it when its 4d6 and accepted as those are your stats. My problem is the amount of ppl that say its an amazing system but than have a bunch of house rules to mitigate the downsides of 4d6. If its such a great system and how it should be done than it should stand on its own merit
Also when people do take those low stats your often met with the most reckless characters in existence so they can quickly die and roll up a new one looking for better stats.
What does it all lead to? The vast majority of people using 4d6 aren't looking for diverse, or challenging builds.. they want 18s. Is that EVERYONE? No there's plenty of groups that do 4d6 and play it as you'd play any other character but simply looking at threads about it your bombarded with house rules and death wish characters when rolled subpar
Honestly I feel like a lot of people would welcome it if WotC didn't arbitrary limit the RAW point buy to 8-15. I remember reading PHB for the first time and looking at stat generation and I was like "huh, where is the point price for 16,17 and 18? Weird".
If D&D 5e were so great there wouldn't be a bunch of House Rules, it would be able to stand on it's own merits.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Depends on why they are doing it.
For instance, if you are doing it like Coleville, randomly generating them in order so that people cannot come to the table with a pre-made character concept (that more than likely won't fit into a specific setting or game world), then the merit is not the quality of the scores but the randomness of which ones are best. Homebrewing a system to prevent the 4D6/dl method from breaking the character in other ways (like too many 4s or 18s) is meant to keep the character reasonable, while still being something you couldn't show up at the table already knowing you were going to play.
I agree, if you allow assignment of 4D6 and say it's just as good as or better than the stat array or point buy for just generating the numbers themselves from 3-18, and then have a bunch of kludges to fix it, you're right that this doesn't sound like someone who likes 4D6.
So I think it depends on why you are doing it. The ONLY reason I would EVER do 4D6 would be if we did them IN ORDER. I would never do them just to generate numbers -- the purpose of putting them IN ORDER is to force players to "play the hand they are dealt." If players had significant objections to the 4D6 method, I would allow them to randomly place the standard array (or more likely my "better array") into stats they did not pre-allocate.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
That’s right. I was the one who called Yurei a prima donna in my response to that post.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I personally prefer the SA method, as it feels like you're molding the character, it's completely your own, you choose the strong points, as well as it's flaws, but 4d6 is totally solid and I used to use it on all my characters.
Mystic v3 should be official, nuff said.
5e stands quite well without House Rules. IT DOES stand on its own merits. Then along came the abomination that shall not be named.
Do I use some House Rules? Yes. But always to make the game harder, not easier. I don't coddle to the " I want what I want, because I am special, and I went it now" crowd.
Yeh I just used your post to spur off with a thought that hadn't been covered.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
I think they are saying that having "you figure it out" as the official stance is passing the buck a bit much to the DM....especially new DMs.
Indeed they wanted things to be "fluid" but that makes long discussions and conversations about how things interact with other things. Sage Advice was created due to the failure of the natural language approach and people still argue over the meaning of "Reasonable".
The 4d6 is the official rule simply because of tradition and not by the virtue of creating a good experience....which is unfortunately a re-occurring theme in this edition.
Fireball is way overtuned thanks to "Tradition" and so on.
I love 5e and I think its the best TTRPG system I have played on for a while but it was a big learning curve for me as a DM because I did not have clear cut examples to work from and the answer "well everyone does it differently so just do whats good for your table!" doesn't really give you a starting point to work from....its kind of a cop out.
Regarding whether "having house rules" means the game is bad...
... every single game group that I have ever played in has used house rules.
The rules are written generically, but no game group is generic. Some groups like going one way or another. A group that really likes to max things out and play "god level" will want to do stats one way, and a group that prefers playing more "street level" will do their stats another.
As a non-D&D example, I started watching a Call of Cthulhu stream. Now that game is known as being rather deadly to the PCs, and wipes are not uncommon (and far more common than in D&D). There is a version of it called Pulp Cthulhu which is more survivable. The Keeper (DM) at the start of the stream said, they were going to chart a middle course -- not be quite so "superhero-ish" as Pulp, but not quite as brutal as straight Call. Thus he houseruled CoC to be a little more "Pulpy". This does not make CoC a "bad game" nor Pulp a "good one" -- part of why he housruled it was for the stream (that the audience might have trouble keeping up if PCs went down like flies, even if the players didn't mind).
There are lots of reasons why people should houserule things... and I would bet it is probably the VERY rare game group that plays with zero house rules.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Depends on the system. My PF2e games require 0 house rules as things are more clearly laid out.
5e played full by the book with little interpretation would be a nightmare.
Can you just say it? There is no book/release that going to come to life and kill you or keep you from playing....and those of us who aren't up to date on your personal opinions would know what the heck you are talking about (I'm assuming Tasha's, but heck do I know you could be talking about the DM's guide)
Now, I agree with you that 5e stands on its own fairly well...it stands with the option for homebrew and house rules/optional rules. They are features, not bugs.
My comment was sarcasm.
House Rules are extremely common and expected. House Rules for character creation are no different. The argument that a House Rule being attached to 4d6kh proves that the rule has no merit, in a game deliberately designed to be House Ruled and adjusted to fit the table it is played at, is just silly.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
What gets me is that certain people trumpet from the rooftops the idea that "The direction [Wizards] chose for the current edition was to lay a foundation of rules that a DM could build on, and we embraced the DM’s role as the bridge between the things the rules address and the things they don’t."
...but then, when a DM tries to create those rules the game designers didn't bother with - when they try and exercise that power to Do Their DM Thing by altering the game to suit their own needs and the needs of their table - that same subset of individuals lose their freaking minds, freak 110% of the way out, and spend twenty pages lambasting someone for daring to have the sheer, unmigitated gall to change 5e. As if that so-oft-quoted line up there is meant exclusively to force people to err on the side of a very specific style of play espoused by Certain People, and anyone who interprets it as "Okay. So we're free to reimpose some of the structure and mechanical systems you guys stripped out that we think would make our game run better, right?" is just Literally Worse Than [Insert Historic Villified Dictator Here] and should do everybody a favor and go extinguish themselves in a basement before they corrupt the D&D playerbase any further.
It's wild. Just absolutely wild.
Please do not contact or message me.
I assume Vince is referring to
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Which is fine, and expected. Whenever I post a homebrew fix down south in the Homebrew forum, I'm primarily looking for two things.
A.) to share the fix for someone having a similar issue to mine, but who may not have had the time or creative drive to effect repairs on their own, or
B.) to gather feedback on the fix and see if I'm in the right headspace for it.
I've actually abandoned a few fixes in the past that didn't pan out well - still haven't figured out a good solution for making Counterspell and Dispel Magic suck less, but man. The last time I tried I dun got told, and a number of people had valid points. But one thing people forget when they tell me "I have a right to criticize your work!" is the corollary that I have a right to engage with the criticism and defend my work. Not hostilely, but in the manner of a scientist or philosopher defending their findings. I can point out things the critiquer may not have thought of, or pose them questions on what their suggested alterations might affect that they weren't aware of. I love it when people give me intelligent, well-reasoned feedback on homebrew rules and system fixes and are willing to engage with intelligent and well-reasoned critiques of their critique.
Intelligent and well-reasoned are key, however - the Usual Suspects telling me "YOUR SHIT SUCKS JUST PLAY RAW" because they personally hate me is not feedback, it's just pointless vitriol.
Please do not contact or message me.