Rolling for stats

[SlashRunner]

Hello Playground!
I have a dispute that I need to solve.
For generating stats, I tend to use 4d6 drop lowest, with all the stats rerolled if they turn out really badly. I'm currently pushing to start using point buy, but that's besides the point.
One of my players seems to think it's fair to repeatedly roll his stats until he gets the results he wants. He sees no problem with this.

Is he right?

[MesiDoomstalker]

No, just no. It takes away the randomness if you can just keep rerolling. Theres a reason PH mentions WHEN you can reroll.

[Knaight]

If parity between players in regards to stat generation is viewed as a desirable trait of the game, rolling and taking your rolls is probably the best method. If parity between players in regards to quality of statistics is viewed as a desirable trait of the game, point buy is probably the best method. If players having access to whatever set of traits they feel best fits their character is viewed as a desirable trait of the game, then either choosing statistics to fit or rolling until something comes up that is viewed as acceptable are good methods. In the event that all three of these are wanted, prioritize. In the event of the group as a whole preferring one, and a single player preferring another, there may be an issue, though this only applies if the players care about the methodology other players use to generate their stats in the event of the first case being prioritized, or the quality of their stats in the event of the second case being prioritized.

The short version: That one player may be right, or may be wrong, depending on the general dynamic of the group, and what they want and view as important in character generation.

[Bhaakon]

That depends on what the result he wants is.

But if the rest of the group accepted their rolls, then the rolls he wants are almost certain t be higher than everyone else's, and he's wrong.

[SlashRunner]

The problem is that after rolling for 20 minutes, his stats are now at something like 59 points whereas everyone else is at 32 or below.

[Herabec]

Tell him - NO.

You roll once, and if they aren't terribad, you take them. The end.

Even the rulebook says you can't reroll whenever you want. He has to deal. Smack the bad munchkin. >:/

[Engine]

Hello Playground!
I have a dispute that I need to solve.
For generating stats, I tend to use 4d6 drop lowest, with all the stats rerolled if they turn out really badly. I'm currently pushing to start using point buy, but that's besides the point.
One of my players seems to think it's fair to repeatedly roll his stats until he gets the results he wants. He sees no problem with this.

Is he right?

Nope. Let him roll the stats once or twice, nothing more. Everyone should have the same chances, so he.

[Urpriest]

He has the burden of proof. If he wants to do something completely counter to the concept of rolling stats, he needs to justify why he can do it.

[SlashRunner]

By the way, I expect the player in question to comment on this thread within the next 5 minutes. I actually made this thread just to prove a point.

[excruciarch]

That depends on what the result he wants is.

That's obvious: he want's like all 18s. =)
Rolling 6x4d6 drop lowest represents that we are not born the same. And we are born only once, so no rerolling for that particular taken character.

[Scaliburn]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

[Engine]

That's obvious: he want's like all 18s. =)
Rolling 6x4d6 drop lowest represents that we are not born the same. And we are born only once, so no rerolling for that particular taken character.

If a character has some MAD (maybe from the class, maybe from the build) or the rolls are really terrible (like no stat above 13) I let the player reroll the stats if she wants: it's a game, not a simulation.


Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

To me, it's unreasonable if you get them rerolling hundred times. To me, it's min\maxing. To me, the game will be affected a lot.
Sorry, mate: you're not convincing, you could have a cool character with a standard 32 point buy or rolling your stats once or twice. And by the way it's not right for your fellow players.

[excruciarch]

so the stats arent being used for any cheese.
What are they being used for then? Oo

If a character has some MAD (maybe from the class, maybe from the build) or the rolls are really terrible (like no stat above 13) I let the player reroll the stats if she wants: it's a game, not a simulation.
That is understandable. But no rolling till tips of your fingers are bleeding which we are speaking of. =)

[MesiDoomstalker]

A way me and my group did was roll for stats (how depends on the campaign, such as 4d6 drop lowest and 1s) but do so 6 times and put each in a 6x6 table in the order you roll them. THus if you roll 18, 8, 12, 13, 17, and 4 would be in the first row, then you roll another row, till you have 6 rows. Then you can choose any combination of of stats that are in a line (vertical, horizontal, diagonal). We all do this and it gives us more variety and generally higher stats. But let me point this out again, "We all do this". If everybody in your group does what he does, and your ok with it, ok hes fine. But if no one else is, hes in the wrong.

[SlashRunner]

What are they being used for then? Oo

A Rogue 2/Ranger 4.

[Scaliburn]

If a character has some MAD (maybe from the class, maybe from the build) or the rolls are really terrible (like no stat above 13) I let the player reroll the stats if she wants: it's a game, not a simulation.

My character is going to be moderately MAD. I am a multiclassed ranger/rogue, so...And don't tell me that the build is bad or anything, because I dont care.

[HappyBlanket]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

Oh wow. I was going to scold the OP for exaggerating, but... that's literally equivalent to a 59 point buy. Note that standard point buy is 28; less than half of that.

[excruciarch]

A Rogue 2/Ranger 4.
Oh, then if that's ok by you he can have it his way.

[Salanmander]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

If you put more time into your character, then it will probably already be higher powered than the rest of the group (on average). I understand the desire to have high stats, but unless this is something your whole group can do, it's not okay, especially since your DM is not on board.

You don't earn many re-rolls by investing in your character. You just earn investment in your character.

[Engine]

My character is going to be moderately MAD. I am a multiclassed ranger/rogue, so...And don't tell me that the build is bad or anything, because I dont care.

I would let you roll twice if your build has MAD, nothing more. I don't care if your build is optimized or not, that's your call: but your fellow players get one roll, why you should have more? Even if you put a lot of efforts in creating your character, it's no justification to pretend to roll so many times.

[El Dorado]

Go to point buy. Level this playing field pronto!

[Engine]

Go to point buy.

Probably the best advice.

[HappyBlanket]

I would let you roll twice if your build has MAD, nothing more. I don't care if your build is optimized or not, that's your call: but your fellow players get one roll, why you should have more? Even if you put a lot of efforts in creating your character, it's no justification to pretend to roll so many times.

Actually, there is one reason for him to roll instead of using point buy. Point buy gives a player control, but sacrifices the potential to have 18/18/18/18/18/18 at level 1. Rolling sacrifices control, but gives the potential to have those stats. By rolling multiples times and ignoring poor rolls, he gets the benefits of both and sacrifices nothing :)

At least he's only partways a munchkin, with a build like that xD. Still, point buy is really what your group needs.

[JaronK]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

If you don't think the game is effected at all, then don't do it.

Seriously, you're not allowed to do it (the rules only allow it if you have less than a total +1 stat mod or if nothing is higher than IIRC a 13) so you're just cheating and then claiming it doesn't matter because it won't effect the game. But obviously it does or you wouldn't do it.

Really, you should just be playing point buy, because that works far better.

JaronK

[Scaliburn]

Really, in our campaigns we need all the help we can get. We fought a lich at level 1 and an entire village full of elves and a treant at level 4. The boosted stats will have no change on our gameplay, and the other two players that we have dont care if my character is a little more powerful than them.

[excruciarch]

Go to point buy. Level this playing field pronto!
Better solution is roll once and if you're all unhappy you can go point buy. Bickering players are pain in the arse, don't make exceptions or you gonna regret it. =)

[HappyBlanket]

Really, in our campaigns we need all the help we can get. We fought a lich at level 1 and an entire village full of elves and a treant at level 4. The boosted stats will have no change on our gameplay, and the other two players that we have dont care if my character is a little more powerful than them.

Before we continue: explain both of these stories?
Why were you fighting a lich and a village? And why didn't you run?

[excruciarch]

We fought a lich at level 1
A lich has an ECL of at least 12. How did that one go for you?

[SlashRunner]

Before we continue: explain both of these stories?
Why were you fighting a lich and a village? And why didn't you run?

Ok, first of all, the Lich part was misleading. The Lich was when we had pretty much just started playing by real 3.5 rules and I had NO IDEA that the Lich template even existed. I just took a 3rd level Wizard, removed the Mindless descriptor, and slapped on the Skeleton template.

The whole village thing is also misleading. The village itself was tiny, and mainly consisted of ~12-13 1st level warrior mooks. The party consisted of 2 4th level characters and about 6-7 1st level warriors.

[Salanmander]

Really, in our campaigns we need all the help we can get. We fought a lich at level 1 and an entire village full of elves and a treant at level 4. The boosted stats will have no change on our gameplay, and the other two players that we have dont care if my character is a little more powerful than them.

Do you think it would be reasonable for you to play a drow with no LA? Have one or two levels more than the rest of the party? Have a bonus 20,000 gold of wealth? If yes, then we have fundamental disagreements about playstyle. That doesn't really matter, but you seem to also have disagreements with your DM. Sit down with your gaming group and talk about your assumptions, motivations, and playstyles.

If no, then how is rolling stats until you're happy any different?

[Ursus the Grim]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

Those are absurdly good stats. You could play a Monk and manage to bump it up a tier just based on those ability scores. Playing a MAD character isn't an excuse for rolling until you get these scores, its a reason NOT to. You will have better scores for fighting than the fighter, and better mental stats too,

I have a player who does a similar thing, on top of just 'rounding up' to ten if anything is negative.

I put more time into my characters than most of my group, too. That's no reason to power game. If I did, it would take all the fun out of the game for the other players. If anything, its a reason not to. You'll have an edge by virtue of your planning alone. The build planned is irrelevant, especially because if the other players 'don't put much time in' their characters will likely be low-op. With those rolls, you will have a huge edge, and Slashrunner has to be a saint not to just laugh in your face and force Elite array on you.

[King Atticus]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

Well, no you aren't min/maxing because there is no min, you're just maxing. With my DM we have a 26 point buy. I've never had a character with anything near those stats. My latest build has one 18 and nothing else higher than a 12. Take stats from an average roll and be happy with it.

[Engine]

Ok, first of all, the Lich part was misleading. The Lich was when we had pretty much just started playing by real 3.5 rules and I had NO IDEA that the Lich template even existed. I just took a 3rd level Wizard, removed the Mindless descriptor, and slapped on the Skeleton template.

The whole village thing is also misleading. The village itself was tiny, and mainly consisted of ~12-13 1st level warrior mooks. The party consisted of 2 4th level characters and about 6-7 1st level warriors.

You know, I'm starting to think you'll probably better without him.=P

[Scaliburn]

Before we continue: explain both of these stories?
Why were you fighting a lich and a village? And why didn't you run?

Well, we fought the village because we joined the army. And we had 4 first level warriors in our squad to destroy the village, and it was easy so the dm had a giant tree turn out to be a sleeping treant that woke up. We didnt tpk because I climbed onto the treant so when it hit me we decided it hit itself too. Still almost killed me and we barely survived because one of the first level warriors crit on a longbow shot.

[SlashRunner]

Well, we fought the village because we joined the army. And we had 4 first level warriors in our squad to destroy the village, and it was easy so the dm had a giant tree turn out to be a sleeping treant that woke up. We didnt tpk because I climbed onto the treant so when it hit me we decided it hit itself too. Still almost killed me and we barely survived because one of the first level warriors crit on a longbow shot.

A bit ruined in the retelling. The tree was actually a treant the whole time, remember? I sort of dropped a few hints, mainly that the treehouses weren't attached to the tree directly and that the tree was Huge.

[Ursus the Grim]

Really, in our campaigns we need all the help we can get. We fought a lich at level 1 and an entire village full of elves and a treant at level 4. The boosted stats will have no change on our gameplay, and the other two players that we have dont care if my character is a little more powerful than them.

Just because they say that doesn't mean its true. The fact that you asked "hey, I'm going to be better than you in most conceivable ways" is kind of your answer in and of itself. You're being silly to think that the boosted stats will have no effect on your gameplay. Misinterpreting what the DM has done and metagaming to justify high-power without his content is similarly silly.

[Herabec]

Well, we fought the village because we joined the army. And we had 4 first level warriors in our squad to destroy the village, and it was easy so the dm had a giant tree turn out to be a sleeping treant that woke up. We didnt tpk because I climbed onto the treant so when it hit me we decided it hit itself too. Still almost killed me and we barely survived because one of the first level warriors crit on a longbow shot.

{{scrubbed}}

[Deimess]

Still, what's the point of even rolling if you just wanted high stats?

I completely agree with this, and that's why I use point buy. Nobody really wants low stats, and there is NO point in rolling if you are just going to keep doing it until you roll godlike stats. Even if your campaign has difficult fights, the first way to go about that is not to pimp your character.

[aquaticrna]

Well, we fought the village because we joined the army. And we had 4 first level warriors in our squad to destroy the village, and it was easy so the dm had a giant tree turn out to be a sleeping treant that woke up. We didnt tpk because I climbed onto the treant so when it hit me we decided it hit itself too. Still almost killed me and we barely survived because one of the first level warriors crit on a longbow shot.

that sounds like fairly standard fare to me... our party is pretty solidly mid-op and by level 4 cr 10's are pretty common. If someone doesn't come close to dieing on a day it means we either did something really smart or the dm was going easy on us. We once took on ~100 goblins with our party of 4 and 10 random commoners, quick thinking and the fact that bards are awesome with large groups of people to buff were the only thing that made that happen, granted by the end we were down to about 2/3 our numbers and the dm made them flee when they were down to 20 people and their leader got wasted in a round! if only we'd had someone with an aoe attack...

edit: level 3

[SlashRunner]

So..

Your reason for 'I should be allowed to reroll until I have uber stats' is because you *almost* lost a fight at one point?

...REALLY!?

You, sir, are a horrible Dungeons and Dragons player and I am glad I don't have you in my own group.

Ok, be gentle on him. He's actually probably the best player in my group, he just has some powergaming tendencies. Actually, the fact that he's the only person in our group who's knowledgeable enough to be able to understand any of this uber-cheese floating around on the internet and yet constrains himself to rogue 2/ranger 4's proves that he's a half-decent D&D player.

EDIT: Well, besides me, that is...

[ericgrau]

This thread needs more facepalm.

Your stats need to be similar to everyone else to be fair, and more or less similar to what the monsters expect to be balanced b/c ability scores don't determine everything and thus not everything goes up with them. That's what levels and treasure do. You'd make a lot more sense if you claimed that the DM should give you an extra level, and that still wouldn't make sense.

[HappyBlanket]

Lich and army story

Oh, Slash is the dm?

Scaliburn; for the sake of humoring this discussion, I won't push Rule Zero; that the DM has the final say in... Everything, really. If you don't like it, I hope your friendship is better than your gaming etiquette.

A 3rd level Wizard Skeleton is pathetic, and any melee character with a bludgeoning weapon should probably take it down in two or three hits.
Lv1 Warriors are a joke. Your party could've taken them down without the help.

The treant is rather above the CR level, but I'm not very well versed in... Anything above level 5.


A bit ruined in the retelling. The tree was actually a treant the whole time, remember? I sort of dropped a few hints, mainly that the treehouses weren't attached to the tree directly and that the tree was Huge.

Hey... Did you ever mention that on these forums? That kinda sounds like something I heard in one of the threads here. One of the threads where people talk about what happened in their campaign and stuff, or plan for it.

ANYWAY: You know our opinion. You know your group the best, so I really want to say that this is something you should work out between the two of you, and determine based on that if action is necessary. Without any of this publicity.

[Scaliburn]

So..

Your reason for 'I should be allowed to reroll until I have uber stats' is because you *almost* lost a fight at one point?

...REALLY!?

You, sir, are a horrible Dungeons and Dragons player and I am glad I don't have you in my own group.

You, sir, have made me quite sad face. I am a decent player, and if the other players dont care that my stats are better than theirs, why should the anyone else?

[SlashRunner]

Oh, Slash is the dm?

Scaliburn; for the sake of humoring this discussion, I won't push Rule Zero; that the DM has the final say in... Everything, really. If you don't like it, I hope your friendship is better than your gaming etiquette.

A 3rd level Wizard Skeleton is pathetic, and any melee character with a bludgeoning weapon should probably take it down in two or three hits.
Lv1 Warriors are a joke. Your party could've taken them down without the help.

The treant is rather above the CR level, but I'm not very well versed in... Anything above level 5.



Hey... Did you ever mention that on these forums? That kinda sounds like something I heard in one of the threads here. One of the threads where people talk about what happened in their campaign and stuff.

I might have, but probably as a question where the story was context.

[Scaliburn]

Oh, Slash is the dm?

Scaliburn; for the sake of humoring this discussion, I won't push Rule Zero; that the DM has the final say in... Everything, really. If you don't like it, I hope your friendship is better than your gaming etiquette.

A 3rd level Wizard Skeleton is pathetic, and any melee character with a bludgeoning weapon should probably take it down in two or three hits.
Lv1 Warriors are a joke. Your party could've taken them down without the help.

The treant is rather above the CR level, but I'm not very well versed in... Anything above level 5.



Hey... Did you ever mention that on these forums? That kinda sounds like something I heard in one of the threads here. One of the threads where people talk about what happened in their campaign and stuff.

Yeah, about that dm rule zero? Our friendship is probably a little stronger than my etiquette. I once spent almost an hour with him arguing about the cause fear spell. And as level 1s, a third level wizard skeleton with 30+hp is quite scary.

[HappyBlanket]

I might have, but probably as a question where the story was context.

Could be. Don't pay it any attention though; I'm just thinking aloud :smallwink:

[aquaticrna]

You, sir, have made me quite sad face. I am a decent player, and if the other players dont care that my stats are better than theirs, why should the anyone else?

your dm cares that's one more than 0 people in your group. From a dm's perspective having one player that is very far above the other players causes lots of problems like making encounters that are challenging without killing all but the superman character in a round and making sure everyone has fun; no one likes being out shown up all the time, it will wear on the other players regardless of what they say now.

edit:
Yeah, about that dm rule zero? Our friendship is probably a little stronger than my etiquette. I once spent almost an hour with him arguing about the cause fear spell. And as level 1s, a third level wizard skeleton with 30+hp is quite scary.

the only way a skeleton can have 30+ hp would be for it to roll almost max every time... it's average hp should be more in the 20's...

[Scaliburn]

Also, just for reference, the party is me, a level 4 soulknife, and two others, a level 4 cleric and a level 4 rogue. Sorry, the 4 key doesnt work on my keyboard and I forgot.

[King Atticus]

You, sir, have made me quite sad face. I am a decent player, and if the other players dont care that my stats are better than theirs, why should the anyone else?

Because the other players in the group are only being nice. Just because they don't spend 30 hours building a character like you or I do doesn't mean that they don't want to occasionally be the person that gets turned to to do something. Maybe once they get a chance to feel more integral to the group they'll start putting in the effort on their characters too.

[Urpriest]

Yeah, about that dm rule zero? Our friendship is probably a little stronger than my etiquette. I once spent almost an hour with him arguing about the cause fear spell. And as level 1s, a third level wizard skeleton with 30+hp is quite scary.

It wouldn't have had 30+ hp though, so that's not particularly relevant.

[Scaliburn]

It wouldn't have had 30+ hp though, so that's not particularly relevant.

Ah, but it did. I dont remember how Slash validated it, but I remember being shocked when we still hadn't killed it after 30 damage. It was something about adding different templates together, but I'm not sure.

[SlashRunner]

Oh, Slash is the dm?

Scaliburn; for the sake of humoring this discussion, I won't push Rule Zero; that the DM has the final say in... Everything, really. If you don't like it, I hope your friendship is better than your gaming etiquette.

A 3rd level Wizard Skeleton is pathetic, and any melee character with a bludgeoning weapon should probably take it down in two or three hits.
Lv1 Warriors are a joke. Your party could've taken them down without the help.

The treant is rather above the CR level, but I'm not very well versed in... Anything above level 5.



Hey... Did you ever mention that on these forums? That kinda sounds like something I heard in one of the threads here. One of the threads where people talk about what happened in their campaign and stuff, or plan for it.

ANYWAY: You know our opinion. You know your group the best, so I really want to say that this is something you should work out between the two of you, and determine based on that if action is necessary. Without any of this publicity.


It wouldn't have had 30+ hp though, so that's not particularly relevant.

It did. We have a houserule that all characters with class levels get +10 HP at 1st level. Plus the fact that we use averages for all HD rolls, that would equate to 28 HP. I seem to recall that I also arbitrarily increased the HP by a certain measure to make it scarier, meaning his estimate is actually accurate.

[aquaticrna]

It wouldn't have had 30+ hp though, so that's not particularly relevant.

skeleton template changes hd to d12s... so it's possible but unlikely

[Hiro Protagonest]

This thread needs more facepalm.

Moar facepalm!

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/562900/facepalm.jpg
http://www.straferight.com/photopost/data/500/medium/double-facepalm.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-leNf6VRGuww/TZOFwIlk-9I/AAAAAAAACK4/msVBuCf9zAo/s1600/181148-triple_facepalm_super.jpg
http://www.demotivationalposters.org/image/demotivational-poster/0909/epic-facepalm-when-you-just-know-you-messed-up-demotivational-poster-1253705267.jpg

Also, he was complaining about a third level wizard with 30+ HP when every member of the party has 14-22 HP and they outnumber him?

[erikun]

One of my players seems to think it's fair to repeatedly roll his stats until he gets the results he wants. He sees no problem with this.

Is he right?
If you make the same offer to the other players, and everyone is fine with not rolling anymore, then everything is alright. If one player gets to roll until straight-17s and everyone else is stuck with what they roll the first time, it is not. Your other players will likely feel it unfair (and with good reason).


Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all
I will agree with what someone else said: If it doesn't affect your game at all, then you don't need to use the high-rolled stats. You can make a new roll in front of everyone for your next session, and take what you get.

After all, if we don't think that the game will be affected by your stats, then merely average ones should be just fine. Right?


and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats.
Does how much time you put in matter in regards to fairness? Balance? Overshadowing other players at the table? You may really like your 17 STR 17 DEX 17 CON ranger, but is it very fair when the soulknife and rogue in the party are made useless because your ubercharacter is there?

Besides, I could see your character working just fine with 16 DEX, 14 CON, and the other values mostly irrelevant.


I am a decent player, and if the other players dont care that my stats are better than theirs, why should the anyone else?
Are you sure this is the case? You've mentioned more than once that the other players "don't care" that you have such better stats. Is that really the case? If the other players are as bad as you make them out to be, then I don't think being told to go play video games while you do their jobs as well will go over pleasantly.

And I've found that people newer to RPGs tend to be a lot more sensitive to failing badly. I wonder how the Rogue, especially, feels about another character that can do everything he can do, and does it better every time through superior stats and build choice and system mastery.

[Ursus the Grim]

It did. We have a houserule that all characters with class levels get +10 HP at 1st level. Plus the fact that we use averages for all HD rolls, that would equate to 28 HP. I seem to recall that I also arbitrarily increased the HP by a certain measure to make it scarier, meaning his estimate is actually accurate.

However, thanks to this revelation, it was actually far less dangerous. The party had +10 hp to each character which I think far outweighs the buff the skellie got. A first level wizard in your game has more HP than a fighter in mine. I don't think anything you've done warrants a knee-jerk powergame retaliation.

[Scaliburn]

Moar facepalm!

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/562900/facepalm.jpg
http://www.straferight.com/photopost/data/500/medium/double-facepalm.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-leNf6VRGuww/TZOFwIlk-9I/AAAAAAAACK4/msVBuCf9zAo/s1600/181148-triple_facepalm_super.jpg
http://www.demotivationalposters.org/image/demotivational-poster/0909/epic-facepalm-when-you-just-know-you-messed-up-demotivational-poster-1253705267.jpg

Also, he was complaining about a third level wizard with 30+ HP when every member of the party has 14-22 HP and they outnumber him?

The hps were 20, 18, and 16 vs the skeleton wizard plus two skeleton warriors, so we didnt outnumber him.

[HappyBlanket]

You guys, we are rapidly approaching the realm of "Let's play therapist" here. And frankly I'm not certified.

[aquaticrna]

the point everyone is making is: it's irreverent that you're facing hard things, you still need to stick to the same rules that the rest of the party does

[Scaliburn]

Does how much time you put in matter in regards to fairness? Balance? Overshadowing other players at the table? You may really like your 17 STR 17 DEX 17 CON ranger, but is it very fair when the soulknife and rogue in the party are made useless because your ubercharacter is there?



No, no, you misunderstand me. I am the soulknife. The cleric and the rogue are the other two players. The rogue/ranger with uberstats is for our next campaign. I like to plan ahead.

[Ursus the Grim]

You guys, we are rapidly approaching the realm of "Let's play therapist" here. And frankly I'm not certified.

Psh. Speak for yourself. I've got a PHD in Not Knowing What the Frell I'm Talking About. Spent 21 years of my life working towards it, too.

My issue is that the argument is becoming more "my DM throws things at us that we can't easily thrash!" rather than "I think its fair to keep rerolling until I'm better than everyone else!"

[Salanmander]

You guys, we are rapidly approaching the realm of "Let's play therapist" here. And frankly I'm not certified.

That's a fair point.

Scaliburn: You know our opinion. We think that you need to keep a level playing field, even if your fellow players claim to be fine with it. You are unlikely to persuade us that it's justifiable by being not a big deal.

SlashRunner: You've gotten all that you can out of this forum conversation. At this point if you and Scaliburn aren't in agreement, it's a conversation you need to have with each other, and possibly the rest of your group. Our opinions no longer matter.

[Lord Loss]

Hello Playground!
I have a dispute that I need to solve.
For generating stats, I tend to use 4d6 drop lowest, with all the stats rerolled if they turn out really badly. I'm currently pushing to start using point buy, but that's besides the point.
One of my players seems to think it's fair to repeatedly roll his stats until he gets the results he wants. He sees no problem with this.

Is he right?

No. Hell no. He's basically ensuring that he gains an immense advantage over the others. For instance, Player One rolls normally and gets a sixteen as his best stat and a fourteen as his secondary stat.

Player two, on the other hand uses the above method. He rolls repeatedly and winds up with two eighteens.

Both players roll a fighter. One of them gets two extra HP per level (putting his first 18 in CON) and the equivalent of an extra point of BAB (18 in Strength) when compared to the other character. This is acheived not through optimization, but rather by bending rules set up by the DM. This is not fair to the other players.

I had a player who did the same with his characters. Because one player is a dice god (seriously, if he doesn't wind up with 1/3 or 1/4 of his rolls as 20s and at least half his ability scores over fifteen he's been having a bad day for rolls), he seems to think that any stat under fifteen is horrible and that characters without an abundance of over 15 rolls sucks. He would spend a long time contantly rerolling his character and people would be done their characters before he finished rolling. Apart from that, though he was an amazing player.

Last time, I clearly stated: You roll your characters with four dice, remove the lowest die. If you don't like your stats, you can reroll them all. If you reroll them again, and I catch you, I'm giving you five eights and a ten. (I didn't use the same wording, but that was the gist of things).

[SlashRunner]

Ok, I'm just going to address everything that's been said and hope that this brings an end to it.

We've decided to just use point buy, with 40 points. High-powered, but since everyone's using it, it's fair.

The other two players ARE that bad and seriously don't care. The rogue cares more about RP than any kind of effectiveness in combat, and the other player is a Cleric (though he's playing it terribly, I think that a higher-level cleric will trounce a higher-level soulknife, no matter how badly the cleric is played.).

There seriously aren't any bad dynamics in our group (well, there might be, but those are totally unrelated to the issue at hand) and I'm not mad at Scaliburn. This whole thread was just an attempt to prove that he's wrong. Also, he's not a bad player, he's probably the best in my group and we'd be WAY worse off without him.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Scaliburn: You have the causality backwards. You don't need to get more powerful because the encounters are challenging. The encounters are more challenging because you're getting more powerful. And if there's a sudden sharp increase in a single character's power, that increase in encounter power is now much more deadly to the other players in the group. Perhaps they don't care because they don't realize this.

I mean, if there was a TPK and the DM was laughing maniacally, I could see trying to squeeze out a few ways to get a more powerful character, but even then I'd get the other players to shape up as well.

All that said, I think we're overreacting a little bit. If Scaliburn really wanted to gain an immense edge over the other players, he could just play a Druid with the frackin' nonelite array. It's not going to ruin the game due to balance, although allowing may seriously undermine the DM in other ways.

Which reminds me, Slashrunner, what keeps you from implementing point buy? Player aversion? Scaliburn aversion?

Agh, epic ninja'd

[Morph Bark]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

If they aren't being used for cheese and the game isn't affected at all in your opinion, why won't you play with average or low stats?

[DiBastet]

I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats

*Shakes head*

Now, really...

Edit: My gf, who rarely has something to say, just wanted me to post here that her opinion is more or less something that would give me a infraction warning even if I used symbols as "#$%$#!" to say it. Se says to the DM that he's right in using point buy, and that next time he should use a hard method of re-rolling, like "everyone get to roll two times max, except when stats are too low based on this standart: [insert standart, or use phb's one]".

[Anderlith]

Our group has the rule of if your total bonuses equal +5 or greater, you can't reroll anymore.

[Curmudgeon]

I had a Rogue character built using a generous rolling method, for a previous game. The DM said I could keep that character because the others were making spellcasters, but I chose to start over with the same point buy as everyone else. I really enjoy the challenge of making a character which suits my preferred style and is still effective; playing fair is part of that challenge.

If you really care about playing a character effectively, you won't need to cheat.

[NecroRick]

From a mechanical point of view the 59 point buy is almost exactly the same as as 46 point buy which is just those same stats rounded down to the nearest even number. (Of course, it jumps to 52 as soon as he puts his bonus point from 4th level into one of those 17s, but the other players also move up in power at that point, so their equivalent may also jump up by 6 points).

So I think a lot of people in this thread over-reacted.

Additionally I think the "so long as we're all having fun who cares?" point is perfectly valid.

Yeah, it's not 'RAW', but I've seen some perfectly respected members of this community do things to RAW (and then claim they've done nothing wrong) that if they did them in the real world to a small animal would get them locked up.

Apart from constitution (which scales with level) high stats make a proportionately bigger impact in the early game.

Reducing strength from say +3 to +1 can mean (at low levels) that you hit ~20-30% less often, and you deal ~20-30% less damage when you hit.

Note that represents a ~44 - 69% decrease in offensive power right there. (Because the effect is cumulative, not additive)

Increasing your chance of being hit by ~20-30% and simultaneously reducing your hit points by 20-30% makes you a lot more fragile.

Anyway - before people use a swift action to activate their bracers of panty-twisting, I just want to point out that I *do* know that each +1 translates to 5% on a d20 - but in turn point out that the numbers get wonky when they're around 20. If you need a 20 to hit, then an additional +2 bonus to hit triples your hits, not increases them by 10%.

Whereas at higher levels you might have a BAB of 10, a weapon enhancement bonus of +3, +2 from your buddy Sir Robin's cohort (a bard, of course), have an additional +2 from feats, and be under the effect of a +2 bonus from some spell. So on top of the +19 you already have, the difference between +1 and +3 to hit from 'high' or 'low' Strength is unlikely to make much difference.

It doesn't matter if you're a Monk or not, any kind of melee character (unless you burn a bunch of feats) is going to be very much a sufferer of multiple attribute disorder. High strength helps your offense, high dex and con help you tank more (and your saves), high wis helps with will saves (etc).

Having an attribute of 8 doesn't make you a 'good roleplayer'. Having an attribute of 18 doesn't make you a 'bad roleplayer'. Stormwind fallacy much?

[satorian]

Rick, I assume what you are getting at is that higher stats are more balanced, since it helps melee more than spellcasters. I agree. But that argument only works when everyone generates stats by the same method. Which these guys are now doing.

So, um. /derail of thread that should be done, I guess. Still, the discussion of high stats being more balanced (and fun, so you can play Roy-like fighters), while certainly discussed before, does still merit some banter.

[Kittenwolf]

**Commends removed by me as no longer necessary** :)

[satorian]

They already worked it out to their satisfaction. Nothing more to say.

[Vangor]

Hi, I am the player Slashrunner is talking about. Our group is pretty laid back, with several of the party not fully understanding the rules. Although the stats I eventually rolled are very good,(17,17,17,15,15,12) I dont think the game will be effected at all, and personally think that as I put more time into my characters than anyone else in the group, It isn't unreasonable if my character has high stats. I dont min/max, I just do whatever feels cool, so the stats arent being used for any cheese.

If you don't think the game will be affected at all by changing your stats...why did you?

[NikitaDarkstar]

Hello Playground!
I have a dispute that I need to solve.
For generating stats, I tend to use 4d6 drop lowest, with all the stats rerolled if they turn out really badly. I'm currently pushing to start using point buy, but that's besides the point.
One of my players seems to think it's fair to repeatedly roll his stats until he gets the results he wants. He sees no problem with this.

Is he right?
I haven't read the entire thread so sorry if I repeat anything.

Most DM's I've played with that roll for stats often offer a 32 or 36 points buy option if you don't like what you rolled, or let you roll a full set of stats 3-5 times and then pick the array you like best. In those cases you can get more rerolls if your dice are trying to seriously kill you. (like one memorable session when my d6's refused to roll anything but 1-2's... the highest number in any array I managed to get was a 6.. the DM took pity.)

But infinite amounts of rerolls? Take away his dice and point him to the point buy rules since he obviously won't settle with anything less than what he wants anyway.

[VinceColo]

Personally I've found my players completely hating their characters unless they had good stats, so we have EVERYONE take 18, 18, 16, 16, 14, 14. It's fair, and we don't waste an hour and a half rolling stats and someone always, ALWAYS gets hosed with a crappy roll, and end up pissed off and resentful over it...

[SlashRunner]

Personally I've found my players completely hating their characters unless they had good stats, so we have EVERYONE take 18, 18, 16, 16, 14, 14. It's fair, and we don't waste an hour and a half rolling stats and someone always, ALWAYS gets hosed with a crappy roll, and end up pissed off and resentful over it...

It's already over. We've worked out the issue a month ago. Please, no one else necro this thread.

In fact, how the heck did you find this thread? It would be like 10 pages back or more...

[big teej]

Hello Playground!
I have a dispute that I need to solve.
For generating stats, I tend to use 4d6 drop lowest, with all the stats rerolled if they turn out really badly. I'm currently pushing to start using point buy, but that's besides the point.
One of my players seems to think it's fair to repeatedly roll his stats until he gets the results he wants. He sees no problem with this.

Is he right?

in my group
individual numbers? no
stat blocks are typically okay

for instance, lets say I roll 4d6 drop lowest and end up with
11, 4, 12, 15, 9, 12
this gets a reroll (without consulting the DM) because the total modifiers are less than + 1

another statblock
11, 12, 10, 13, 10, 9,
this gets a reroll (without consulting the DM) because the highest number is 13.

my group is also okay with rolling statblocks in advance, but you can't pick and choose, you must use a statblock in it's entireity.

for instance, if you rolled 18, 15, 15, 4, 6, 8
you'd have to use that whole block, not keep the highs and reroll the lows.