|
Post by makofan on Mar 12, 2015 8:44:30 GMT -6
How can you tell a character who wants to suicide, from the average D&D adventurer?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 8:56:05 GMT -6
I've never, ever seen anybody suicide a character in 42 years. There are many things you have to do to survive in D&D: run from nasty monsters, investigate before touching suspicious looking things, avoid obvious traps, etc. All it takes to die is to dial back your caution just a bit. This situation happened in a game just a few months ago: DM: "You see a rotten corpse holding a curiously preserved shield. The entire room is covered in a strange yellow dust. A failed save later and the party has a magic shield and the player gets a new, hopefully better, character. OTOH, the characters with lucky high stats are always hovering at the back, choosing bows over melee weapons, and refusing to touch anything. It's kinda funny actually. I've seen first level characters with 2 hit points running point for a party of 3rd and 4rth level characters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2015 17:55:52 GMT -6
How can you tell a character who wants to suicide, from the average D&D adventurer? Which says more about the poor level of play of some groups, I guess. We played D&D as a wargame. Stupidity would get the character killed, and the player mocked for poor play.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Mar 12, 2015 18:08:46 GMT -6
If somebody rolls a character and manages to average less than a 9, I'll let them reroll, because that's pretty awful. I wouldn't even ask to re-roll. I would like playing such a character. It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World is a D&D movie, after all. What's the highest intelligence score in that show? A score of 7, maybe?
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Mar 12, 2015 19:37:42 GMT -6
I agree with gronan. To me, D&D is a wargame. None of my players think this way
|
|
Torreny
Level 4 Theurgist
Is this thing on?
Posts: 171
|
Post by Torreny on Mar 12, 2015 22:19:23 GMT -6
Of course, just about no one that plays D&D these days started out as a wargamer, never mind gets into them afterward, alas.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Mar 13, 2015 8:24:15 GMT -6
Kesher ran an OD&D game a number of years ago in our friendly local game shop. A few of the players were taken aback by the 3d6 in order. They were more used to later editions. One guy honestly truly rolled an 18 for Intelligence, right in front of me, but there were also 4s and 5s out there.
But once we started playing, they realized it didn't matter. It was just the character fate had handed them, and nobody whined about it. By the end of the first session they were reveling in how crap some of their stats were -- and they (we) were roleplaying the characters better than I had seen in a long time.
And that's kind of the point: It's not the hand life deals you that matters, but what you do with it.
|
|
|
Post by rastusburne on Mar 14, 2015 15:11:23 GMT -6
If I'm okaying OD&D I want 3d6 down the line. I may allow a re-roll occasionally of a poor prime, or switch two scores with each other - but that's rare.
Other games I'm more thank happy with the 4d6, drop lowest, arrange to taste. It's about what system I'm playing and the mechanics/assumptions within.
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Mar 14, 2015 15:44:41 GMT -6
Kesher ran an OD&D game a number of years ago in our friendly local game shop. A few of the players were taken aback by the 3d6 in order. They were more used to later editions. One guy honestly truly rolled an 18 for Intelligence, right in front of me, but there were also 4s and 5s out there. But once we started playing, they realized it didn't matter. It was just the character fate had handed them, and nobody whined about it. By the end of the first session they were reveling in how crap some of their stats were -- and they (we) were roleplaying the characters better than I had seen in a long time. And that's kind of the point: It's not the hand life deals you that matters, but what you do with it. That's the reason why I suggest rolling on some random background event table if a player chooses ability scores instead of accepting 3d6 in order. I'm OK with players getting something they want, but getting everything they want is boring. What's more interesting: a fighter who is strong, or a fighter who wants to be strong, and looks for ways to become stronger?
|
|
|
Post by Fearghus on Mar 14, 2015 15:54:19 GMT -6
And that's kind of the point: It's not the hand life deals you that matters, but what you do with it. This is so true, and I have only recently embraced this style of play. OSR has been on my radar for four or five years, but I love it. The simplicity of the stats in the 3 books is great, and I find it unfortunate so much of the rules have been inflated. The concept of escapism is not lost to me, so I 100% understand the opposing view point to 3d6 in order. Several of my players approach the game as a fantasy adventure story, not a board game. They know the hero they want to play, and it is typically a Conan type. A character that is physically and mentally capable. My role is simply to facilitate their fantasy, and it does not bother me. Sometimes they get crazy and want to play a simple peasant quest. Low stats, running around in the clothes on their back with a sturdy stick in their hands. I am playing in an online game now where the characters were rolled 3d6 in order. I have played in 4d6/drop games where I was left with a 9 high (everyone realizes that 4d6 drop the lowest just increases the average roll from a 10.5 to an 11, right? Not intending to take away anyone's street cred). 4d6/drop never came off as game-breaking to me, or such a ludicrous player request that I would say "F-it, just pick your stats if you won't roll 3d6 straight down!". However, many players will feel like they have an insane advantage and edge on survivability with 4d6/drop. /shrug, let'em. One thing to consider with stat arrays and point buys of later systems (3.0+). The monsters are scaled in the same manner, and scaled to the characters having certain gear at certain levels. So these editions did not put crazy power into the hands of the players. They put perceived power into the hands of the players with tons of convoluted rules. TPK's still happen all the time, and stupid players lose character's constantly. Just like they did in the 70's.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Mar 14, 2015 18:11:43 GMT -6
In later editions, game balance was a big deal and it was baked into the rules. In the older editions, game balance was (as far as it was even a thing) in the hands of the players and DM at the table.
|
|
|
Post by TheObligatorySQL on Mar 14, 2015 19:55:11 GMT -6
If handled properly, having players pick their own scores works fine.
I've actually ran games before where I had different players using different methods of getting ability scores, including picking their own.
I allowed players who wanted to roll for them to do so. For those that wanted to customize their scores, I allowed them 75 points to distribute among all their scores, with certain floors and ceilings (this was a 3rd Edition game); I knew these players and that they sometimes (luckily, not all the time) optimized, so it gave them leeway without going overboard.
I also had a couple of players who were completely new to the game. I had the advantage of having time before the first session to meet with them and work one-on-one explaining the game and character creation. For these players, I asked them before we met up to think about a character they would like to play. I then questioned them about what they thought each of their abilities should be. I tied adjectives to the modifiers to give them a better idea, much like FUDGE (-2 = hampered, -1 = below average, +0 = average, +1 = above average, +2 = heroic, etc.), then further defined the individual score (i.e. odds or evens for those who've player d20 System games).
Even with all of these players using different methods of generating abilities at the table together, the game worked really well.
As a note, I've allowed picking scores with an "experienced" player as well (one of my normal group). He picked his scores in front of me, and I was much more strict about his numbers than with the new player, going as far as to have him explain his reasoning for the score and adjusting it as needed if it seemed like he was trying to squeeze a point here or there for a boost.
|
|
|
Post by Fearghus on Mar 17, 2015 15:14:39 GMT -6
This thread has made me think more about the campaign I want to run. I was planning for 3d6 straight down 7 times (including gold). But that might put off some people from even attempting D&D. The pool of available players is already small, so I am also reaching out to gamers from modern systems.
Something like the following could be used to keep some sense of normalcy but still let someone play what they want (like a paladin). This is how the d20 variants handle point buys. Normally the cost of the negative score would provide more points since scores under 10 provide a penalty. I kept the cost the same for each direction. The cost in parens would be considered standard for d20. This is because in d20 a 3 incurs a -4 penalty to die rolls where 18 grants a +4 bonus. The cost is based on the modifier applied to the previous scores cost.
The thought is that all scores start at 10 and the player has 3 points to spend. This allows for an 11,11,11,10,10,10 and the 13,12,11,10,9,8 which are even splits for the 3-18 range.
Or just create a stable of pre-mades and allow the player to pick like in the case of a paladin suggested in another thread.
The following are all three (3) point buys. Arrange the scores to taste. 11,11,11,10,10,10: The super-average character. 13,12,11,10,9,8: Simple bell curve. Fighting-man and cleric can min max a 15 PR with this. Probably over powered compared to the previous array. 17,11,8,8,7,5: Be a paladin. 18,18,8,7,3,3: Here you can finagle it and be a magic-user with 3 int and wis (Schmendrick), or a magic-user with 18 int and wis (Gandalf), or whatever else you want to do. By all means, some players like to take it seriously while others like to screw around.
Attribute Cost (d20 cost) Score 3 -13 (-16) 4 -10 (-12) 5 -7 (-9) 6 -5 (-6) 7 -3 (-4) 8 -2 9 -1 10 0 11 1 12 2 13 3 14 5 15 7 16 10 17 13 18 17
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Mar 17, 2015 15:45:48 GMT -6
How is that "just pick", though?
Just. Let. Them. Pick.
It's faster, no one can legitimately complain about not getting the scores they want, and you don't need a complicated balancing system. Weren't you the one complaining about people calling newer gamers " power gamers" and min-maxers? Just go with it. And maybe roll on the random table I linked to further up thread to make things interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Mar 17, 2015 16:19:11 GMT -6
You could probably use the 5e standard array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) as an alternative without much problem. But no stat adjustment if it is picked.
The PCs would end up with just a few +1s for the stats in the 13-15 range. If you want a higher bonus, take the chance and roll.
So Pick: (1) Standard Array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) arranged as desired, no stat adjustment (2) 3d6 in order plus stat adjustment by class.
|
|
|
Post by Fearghus on Mar 17, 2015 19:53:08 GMT -6
I admit I am feeling a little off put from your post. It comes off as rude. I just got home from work and feeling high-strung, so I am likely being sensitive. My apologies for not first commenting on your PDF, which is excellent. My above post was not an attempt to hijack your thread, but an attempt at conversation. How is that "just pick", though? Because the player gets to choose how the points are spent and then put the desired score at any attribute. It is an option and thinking out loud. Absolutely an option, talysman. I was presenting a thought on on idea. Think of it as an attempt at mixing both 3d6 and still having a say in the attributes. It's faster, no one can legitimately complain about not getting the scores they want, and you don't need a complicated balancing system. Weren't you the one complaining about people calling newer gamers " power gamers" and min-maxers? Just go with it. And maybe roll on the random table I linked to further up thread to make things interesting. Absolutely faster, I can't deny that. For me it was fun to play with some arithmetic and numbers and present another option. About my complaining in this "3d6 or Just Pick" thread? No. I reread my last two posts in here and don't recall complaining about power gaming and min-maxing. I did point out that 4d6 drop the lowest is not terribly over the top, and that players do know what they want to play. This was my way of saying "yes", to letting the players pick. My regulars have a standard they almost always use: 18,17,16,15,14,13 and assign to taste. You could probably use the 5e standard array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) as an alternative without much problem. But no stat adjustment if it is picked. The PCs would end up with just a few +1s for the stats in the 13-15 range. If you want a higher bonus, take the chance and roll. So Pick: (1) Standard Array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) arranged as desired, no stat adjustment (2) 3d6 in order plus stat adjustment by class. Absolutely. I had a player state he was disappointed that his character sheet meant nothing when I first tried the original edition. He really enjoyed having a lot of maintenance and numbers with which to work. With the proposed point-buy I was trying to find a balance between a set of players that come from different play-style backgrounds.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Mar 17, 2015 20:17:28 GMT -6
My family was raised on 3e. The kids are really happy to play face-up instead of face-in-the-sheet. My daughter never bothered too much with the numbers (and despite this is already a competent referee). My son loves trying new stuff and new games.
My wife... Ach she can't get her head out of modern games. Her main complaint is that not having any "real" info on her character sheet limits her. That not being able to "build" her character limits her. No skills, no feats, no standard array, no prestige classing, etc. She also hates initiative by sides. She says its not fair because she can't maximize her ability to get a jump on the opposition. That she can't count on going at the same time in rolling initiative order. She also hates having henchmen because they "steal" her XP and gold LOL
I know the counter-arguments to all of these objections. I bring it up to show just how hard it is to bring someone who is "stuck" in modern games back to the older ways. TBH here's nothing wrong with the modern games. We still play 3.X too.
It's not just the 3d6 in order. That's the tip of the iceberg. Try telling a modern player he can't play an elf cleric of Elhonna with Zen Archery...!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 6:33:04 GMT -6
I roll up all the characters IMCs 3d6 in order and then either hand each player a sheet or have them pull one out of the pile. I have used different methods on occasions depending on what I as the ref wanted to do. I have also just picked the numbers out of the air and made up the sheets. I have never had a player complain about the sheet they ended up with whether I did 3d6 in order and gave them each a sheet or something else. I hand them the sheet and they pick the class, although sometimes I pick the class too. I have a couple of players that I am confident I could hand either of them a sheet with all 3's and they not only would not complain, they would have fun and help everyone else have fun, just like they always do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 6:39:10 GMT -6
OTOH, the characters with lucky high stats are always hovering at the back, choosing bows over melee weapons, and refusing to touch anything. It's kinda funny actually. I've seen first level characters with 2 hit points running point for a party of 3rd and 4rth level characters. If that happened IMC, all manner of things would begin to happen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 8:32:05 GMT -6
Just. Let. Them. Pick. It's faster, no one can legitimately complain about not getting the scores they want, and you don't need a complicated balancing system. It's about offering the player a difficult choice, with benefits and drawbacks for each decision. Just like in Borderlands or Call of Duty, there are dozens of different guns available but only a handful are actually used. If you are truly allowing the players to pick whatever they want, then there is only one logical choice. That's not really a choice at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 9:34:47 GMT -6
It's about offering the player a difficult choice, with benefits and drawbacks for each decision. Just like in Borderlands or Call of Duty, there are dozens of different guns available but only a handful are actually used. If you are truly allowing the players to pick whatever they want, then there is only one logical choice. That's not really a choice at all. Isn't it more "old school" for meaningful decisions to arise during gameplay rather than character creation? Difficult choices during character creation, appeals to optimal weapon selection in recent video games, the idea that no player will select sub-optimal options, these sound to me like character optimization from more recent editions, not OD&D.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 9:37:36 GMT -6
For clarity's sake: Everyone is welcome to play OD&D however they enjoy. I'm not saying "You're doing it wrong" or anything like that. This just seemed relevant to one of the distinguishing elements of play which has varied between editions.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Mar 18, 2015 9:51:02 GMT -6
Suppose I was a player in a D&D campaign that allowed me to pick my scores, or roll 4d6, or arrange scores to taste, etc. You know what I'd do? I'd roll 3d6 in order, set in stone.
|
|
|
Post by Lorgalis on Mar 18, 2015 10:01:12 GMT -6
I would pick every time, if allowed.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Mar 18, 2015 11:05:22 GMT -6
The Tic-tac-toe method tickles me.
|
|
|
Post by rastusburne on Mar 18, 2015 14:32:56 GMT -6
Suppose I was a player in a D&D campaign that allowed me to pick my scores, or roll 4d6, or arrange scores to taste, etc. You know what I'd do? I'd roll 3d6 in order, set in stone. iIn OD&D absolutely, but what if you're playing a system where modifiers mean far different things? Try doing that in AD&D or 3.x or whatever. Yes it's possible/playable, but if all the others are generating with an advantage you'll get left behind. I personally don't enjoy playing a comparitively underpowered character, especially if the campaign has any kind of longevity.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Mar 18, 2015 15:07:27 GMT -6
Most of the time, for myself, I take the scores of the example magic-user at the beginning of men and magic 6, 11, 13, 12, 9, 8
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Mar 18, 2015 15:33:09 GMT -6
I admit I am feeling a little off put from your post. It comes off as rude. I just got home from work and feeling high-strung, so I am likely being sensitive. My apologies for not first commenting on your PDF, which is excellent. My above post was not an attempt to hijack your thread, but an attempt at conversation. I'mm sorry if it sounded rude, but that was not my intention. I'm simply re-affirming the point of this thread. There are two options for character creation: no control of outcome (3d6 in order) and player control. My point is that if you are going to give players any control, there's no real point to laying down extra restrictions. It just complicates things and slows things down. Now, you might want to muddy up character creation for other reasons, like if you want the mix of characters to reflect the demographics of the setting. But if you don't have those concerns, if all you are worried about is player choice, then just let them choose. If an individual player is suffering a creative block and wants to use some system like point-buy or modified rolls on their own, that's fine, but there's no GM-side reason to restrict player choice if you are going to allow it at all. I was thinking specifically of this: I am playing in an online game now where the characters were rolled 3d6 in order. I have played in 4d6/drop games where I was left with a 9 high (everyone realizes that 4d6 drop the lowest just increases the average roll from a 10.5 to an 11, right? Not intending to take away anyone's street cred). 4d6/drop never came off as game-breaking to me, or such a ludicrous player request that I would say "F-it, just pick your stats if you won't roll 3d6 straight down!". However, many players will feel like they have an insane advantage and edge on survivability with 4d6/drop. /shrug, let'em. One thing to consider with stat arrays and point buys of later systems (3.0+). The monsters are scaled in the same manner, and scaled to the characters having certain gear at certain levels. So these editions did not put crazy power into the hands of the players. They put perceived power into the hands of the players with tons of convoluted rules. TPK's still happen all the time, and stupid players lose character's constantly. Just like they did in the 70's. It seemed awfully defense on behalf of people who use 4d6 or point-buy, as if we were accusing them of being munchkins. Just to reiterate: this thread is not about balance vs. power-gaming. It's about simplicity vs. complexity. I'm arguing that the two quickest, simplest methods are 3d6 in order and pick any scores you want, and anything else is more complex for little benefit. Although again, if you have some reason related to genre emulation to limited the possibilities, you can come up with alternative methods. I just can't see the point of alternative methods in OD&D if you are only concerned about how much freedom to give players during character creation.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 18, 2015 16:14:29 GMT -6
If players can choose their ability scores, then maybe invert XP bonuses/penalties due to prime requisites? Maybe also include the secondary/tertiary ability score contributions to prime requisiste score... that way, at least, high scores are not all upside, and low scores are not all downside
|
|
|
Post by Scott Anderson on Mar 18, 2015 16:28:19 GMT -6
The party game method:
Everyone sits at the table. Guy 1 rolls 3d6. Everyone assigns that number to one ability score.
Guy 1 passes the dice to Guy 2, who rolls the ability score directly below the first one, with STR obv. following Cha.
And so on.
That way, the party is born together and nobody can grouse about stats. And it's also 3d6 down the line random, with the exception of where to place the very first score.
|
|