So I was reading this other thread >>44482959 and I noticed a lot of people expressing a lot of hate for pointbuy. Which kind of confused me. Rolling is fun but I see most groups using pointbuy for the sake of honesty and balance.
What do you guys think? Is point buy that distasteful to you?
Why or why not?
>>44487894
Almost all characters end up in the few most powerful stat builds that have been theorycrafted by mouthbreathing neckbeards.
Both point buy and rolling have their pros and cons and it honestly depends on what kind of player you are.
Pointbuy
>Pros
•Completely balanced, nobody will ever be exceptionally powerful over the other characters stat-wise
•Allows an easier time to balance a character in a system as you always know what the most powerful characters will look like vs your monsters
>Cons
•Point buy encourages sameness in characters. People will talk about how they can totally venture out of their comfort zone to make interesting characters, but almost none of them ever do, and many who encourage a point buy system will be quicker to admonish you for taking sub-optimal characters. "What? You want a tiefling monk in 5e? Enjoy ruining literally all of the fun in the world ever because of your retarded choices".
Rolling
>Pros
•Encourages truly randomized characters. People will be forced out of their comfort zone at some point. "I have a wizard with a high wisdom and strength? Maybe he multiclasses into fighter or ranger at some point..." or "My Cleric has a crazy low dexterity? Maybe he's crippled..."
•Rolling methods are more fun and open up more discussion amongst the players during character creation.
>Cons
•Can be very swingy. If the DM enforces keeping your rolls, you might well wind up with 1 guy in the part who is insanely overpowering on every skill check standing next to a guy with 3s across the board.
Generally, roleplayers and gamers tend to prefer rolling, whereas powergamers tend to prefer point buy. So outside of generals and theorycrafting sessions, people tend to hate point buy.
>>44488625
In systems where the only way to make a character is by using points, usually they can avoid the cons.
Though it requires the DM to sort of corral the players more than usual during the character design process, so some people dislike it.
>>44488625
>Generally, roleplayers and gamers tend to prefer rolling, whereas powergamers tend to prefer point buy
Woah there buddy. You know what they say about. Broad generalizations. It makes you a retard.
I prefer point buy systems in general, but if it's a d20 derivative or Warhammer (Fantasy or the half dozen 40k RPGs) then I'll roll dem bones unless the GM really, REALLY doesn't want me to.
>>44488683
Usually those systems are set up for it. Currently I'm in love with the SRS's way of doing it, in that you get to pick three classes, and those determine your stats.
>>44488742
It's true though. The most common complaint about rolling is "my character may wind up on a different power level than the other characters". In general, most roleplayers (of the ones I've met) don't really care about that because they know that sometimes people are more powerful than others and adjust their play accordingly. If it really becomes a problem, then they can just reroll to get a new result (I've also met very few DMs who force you to keep your rolls).
Powergamers don't like it when someone else gets too far ahead of them. I mean, that's really all there is to it, I think.
>people need to roll for stats to come up with interesting characters
>mfw I am playing 3 Battlemaster Fighters in 5e that are completely different to each other built with PB
In my experience, people who advocate rolling are pretentious motherfuckers who are too retarded to get their head around the concept that optimization =/= powergaming and making the same character over and over again.
Like being good at your job is a bad thing.
>>44488625
>"I have a wizard with a high wisdom and strength?
>Picking a class before rolling for stats
>Point buy encourages sameness in characters.
Horse shit.
>and many who encourage a point buy system will be quicker to admonish you for taking sub-optimal characters
And rolling for stats makes those Tiefling monks work so much better, right?
Point buy is better when abilities are going to have an enduring effect on gameplay. Being unlucky once is no big thing, being reminded that you were unlucky once EVERY SESSION is obnoxious.
If abilities not very important (e.g. serve mainly as gatekeepers for character options), then rolling is superior for setting the tone of the game. It's fairly rare in an RPG that you can simply pick and choose from a smorgasboard of options - instead, the players tend to be given some tools and have to make it work.
>>44488625
>Generally, roleplayers and gamers tend to prefer rolling, whereas powergamers tend to prefer point buy.
So the vast majority of players of other systems (which DON'T use point buy default) are powergamers?
Shit, even all those "narrative" systems don't use randomized chargen by default.
>>44489082
> My characters are built differently.
> Stats make a better character.
> No reference to any actual characters, just stat blocks.
Boring rollplaying powergamer confirmed.
0/10 would not game with.
>>44489082
>>Picking a class before rolling for stats
Yes, most people in general will have an idea of what they want to play before rolling.
>Horse shit.
It's true. Take a point buy fighter, and in general, you will see Dex build or Str build. It's very rare and unusual to see someone doing point buy and putting high stats in both of those stats.
>And rolling for stats makes those Tiefling monks work so much better, right?
Actually, yes. With 4d6 drop lowest, your usual stat will be a 12-13. The common complain with tiefling monks is they can't get good armor class as Monks use both Dex and Wis. Without the stat limit of point buy in 5e, you're more likely to get two higher stats to use on those builds.
>>44489132
You should read my other post here: >>44488799
Specifically the first part.
>>44489169
>someone's arguing along the same lines as someone upthread
>except now it's bad
Considering that the argument he was responding to is "different stats make interesting characters, thus rolling is better," I don't think you've got much of an argument here, pal.
I enforce the elite array.
>>44489257
What's the elite array, anon?
>>44489277
15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8
>>44489210
If the system is point buy by default, then people DON'T powergame just because it's point buy?
What kind of fucked up logic is this?
>>44489169
>Stats make a better character.
Never said that.
-5/10, pretentious shitnigger that can't actually make a coherent argument detected.
>>44489210
And then rolling down the line shits all over that. Who wants a Wizard with an 8 in INT?
>>44489210
>Take a point buy fighter, and in general, you will see Dex build or Str build
How dare they build efficiently.
Rolled 2, 16, 11, 5, 13, 11 = 58 (6d20)
>>44488625
>rolling encourages creativity
Let's test that. Class me, /tg/
>>44489220
> Randomized stats make more interesting characters and can encourage players to try creating more varied personas.
> Better stats make better characters.
> These are the same argument.
Fullretard.bmp
>>44489347
In systems where point buy is the only option, this is because they've placed several trap options into the system, such as Flaws, or whatever that system is in Savage Worlds where you buy character flaws for more points.
In games like D&D, where you have a choice, there is usually no longer a flaw option for the character to take.
>>44489349
>And then rolling down the line shits all over that.
No it doesn't. Even Gary Gygax said if you don't like your stats, just reroll them. 1e DMG.
>How dare they build efficiently
Building efficiently is fine. There is nothing really wrong with powergaming or efficiency. But you kind of proved a point there, anon.
>>44489393
So where you going to put that 2, and why is it there?
>>44489393
2 STR
16 INT
11 WIS
5 DEX
13 CON
11 CHA
Cryowizard imo
>>44489411
>why is that 2 there
Dice, bro
>>44487894
>What do you guys think? Is point buy that distasteful to you?
it's not, I hold no ill-will toward either.
I always figured the issue was always bringing point-buy into systems that were intended for you to roll stats.
My thought process was that some systems were meant to have the players roll for their stats as it added an inherent challenge for players to work with and develop fun and interesting characters using what they rolled and the game is then catered to that. Conversely a game that was already oriented toward a point-buy system was designed around this and finds other ways to challenge players and spur-on character development and creativity from the players.
so jamming any character-generation system into a game not meant for it would have a jarring and disruptive effect to the game that may not be at first identified but its effects would still be felt in a negative way for someone.
So as far as I'm concerned if a game was meant to have players point-buy then they should point-buy, if a game was meant to have players roll stats (regardless of whether or not it provides alternate char-generation) then you should roll for your stats. doing anything else would break the game.
>>44489528
No, I mean story wise. Why is your character below average to such a large degree on strength AND dex?
Is he will chair bound? Parapalegic perhaps? Is he the Stephan Hawking of the Magical world?
Maybe he's in his twilight years and doesn't believe in extending his age through unnatural means, and requires bed rest? But with that above-average con, he might be like that for awhile...
>>44489411
>Building efficiently is fine
But wait, according to you
>Point buy encourages sameness in characters.
it's a terrible thing.
>But you kind of proved a point there, anon.
The joke is that you think the characters ARE their stat blocks, and don't like it when people make efficient characters because they're all the same to you.
And you somehow think that you're the "roleplayer" and I'm the "powergamer".
Judge not, lest ye be judged.
>>44489587
*wheel chair bound. My bad.Or maybe he invented a chair that moves based on his will, and his sense of humor shows up through his invention name?
>>44489607She's 89 years old.
>>44489409
You're the full retard, cunt.
>Better stats make better characters.
Literally didn't say that. Better stats make /efficient/ characters. You don't need shit stats to come up with something interesting for a character. You do, because you're a fucking idiot with no imagination.
Take your meds and stop posting, dumbass.
>>44489606
>it's a terrible thing.
Not really, but seeing the same character over and over again can be boring, and encouraging people to get out of their comfort zones can create new designs.
Also, building efficiently does not necessarily mean they're force to stick to pre-made blueprints. There is an actual benefit to having a high dex and str fighter, as they'll be able to utilize high-powered long range and short range weapons efficiently. You can also have a high int fighter that doesn't know magic who knows a lot of skills
>The joke is that you think the characters ARE their stat block
They are, anon. A character is made up of 6 traights combining their different attributes. They have backgrounds and personalities, but you don't seem to be even considering the idea of "how does my character's low wisdom shape his growth or personality?"
You honestly seem kind of like a power gamer if you are telling people things like "How dare you build efficiently" and not at all worrying about who the character is or what defines them. But hey, you do you.
>>44489665
Haha. God damn you're retarded. Thanks for the laugh.
>>44489703
*traits. My spelling is god awful today.
Okay, look, I'm new to the whole RPG thing, but hear me out. What if I've got a character concept in mind? Why should I have to roll and hope that it supports my concept? Sure, some people will powergame, but my concern with rolling is that it will screw over the concept I have. Point buy, in contrast, lets me build what I want with reasonable limits.
>>44489703
>same character
You keep saying that.
>they're force to stick to pre-made blueprints
Never said that. That was an assertion that you made, not me. I was just saying it makes sense for a Fighter to have a high offensive stat and high Con.
>They are, anon
>and not at all worrying about who the character is or what defines them.
Great self-contradiction there, cunt. Well done.
>but you don't seem to be even considering the idea of "how does my character's low wisdom shape his growth or personality?"
D'you know what a dump stat is? And do you realize how well I play the ditzy 8 Wis Sorcerer I have?
No, you don't. But you'll just assume that everyone who uses PB pulls builds straight off of the net without putting any thought into them, so you'll just keep talking shit.
>You honestly seem kind of like a power gamer if you are telling people things like "How dare you build efficiently"
I never said that, either. YOU had the problem with people building efficiently.
But hey, you're a pretentious motherfucker, and clearly you can't argue without trying to attempt to strawmen into my mouth.
>>44490129
>You keep saying that.
I do keep saying that. Your point?
>Never said that. That was an assertion that you made, not me. I was just saying it makes sense for a Fighter to have a high offensive stat and high Con.
That is an assertion I made since the begging. And it does make sense for a fighter to have a high con. Again, I'm not particularly seeing your point here?
>Great self-contradiction there, cunt. Well done.
I honestly don't see the contradiction?
Is this some virt posting here? I'm honestly not sure I should bother reading the rest of your post to be frank.
>roll 1d20 for each stat
>reduce anything above 18 to 18
>multiply all stats by (6*18*0.5) / (sum of all stats)
>move points from any stat above 18 into whatever stat is lowest
>optionally, you can switch scores for any two stats of the player's choice
Would this work? It should give characters that are both varied and balanced.
>>44490272
>I'm honestly not sure I should bother reading the rest of your post to be frank.
Why, because you'd have to admit you're wrong?
Let's try a reset then, because you've brought up a whole bunch of moot points in between because you want to hide the fact you talked stupid horse shit. You dumb motherfucker.
>Point buy encourages sameness in characters.
Horse shit.
Your turn. And try making a point worth addressing, instead obfuscating the point with stupid bullshit and then trying to accuse me of arguing in bad faith when it all goes tits up, or whatever dumb shit you were just trying to pull.
D&D isn't the only game with point buy.
It's however one of the shit games with point buy.
Rolling for stats isn't going to save it, it'll still be shit.
>>44488625
>standing next to a guy with 3s across the board.
this is literally impossible
>>44489642
If she was 89 years old, anon, the age penalties would put her at completely immobile.
So no, you're almost definitely not playing a paralyzed 89 year old "wizard", as wheeling you around, watching you fail to clutch spell components, and feeding you is not kosher for a dungeoncrawl.
My DM let people roll their stats:
4d6 7 times
Drop lowest roll per 4d6,
Drop lowest roll of those
Put 'em where you want 'em
People were putting 13s in "dump" stats.
At a certain point you might as well just give up and take all 18-20s. I started taking the point buy just to prove an 8 is not a death sentence. They're still pussing out.
If you're going to roll in 5e, don't roll 3d6, roll 1d8+7. Down the line.
>>44487894
>Rolling stats can be used as a tool to generate ideas you hadn't thought of.
>Point buy can be used to bring characters to life that you already have conceived.
Point buy, however, will always remain superior for the serious roleplayer when it comes to actually playing the game, and here is the reason why:
See above in the thread, where someone rolled a STR 2 DEX 5 character, and from that extrapolated the idea of a wheelchair-bound 89 year old wizard.
This form of inspiration is the positive of random rolls; it inspired an idea. However, as it stands, this idea has a problem. Age penalties bring the suggested character to -1 Strength, and thus make the character unconscious until they die of starvation or similar.
In this way, the inspired idea does not work, and to cling to the idea of "rolling stats" requires you to try to bend the rules for this character, or to frantically optimize around making a character who can survive this -1 STR deficit, regardless of how well it fits the initial concept.
However, with our idea in mind, it would not be difficult at all to play a pointbuy character, drop our STR down to 5 or 7, our dex down to 8, and
take the age penalties.
With pointbuy, we can accurately represent the idea in our heads, instead of *misrepresenting* the stats on the sheet with our ideas.
Furthermore, such "exotic" characters as a wheelchair-bound wizard can chafe on actual roleplay, as other players now have to justify why their competent character is wheeling around a frail, one-hit-from-death elderly man.
>>44489132
sleep, snug smug.
>>44488625
>"What? You want a tiefling monk in 5e? Enjoy ruining literally all of the fun in the world ever because of your retarded choices".
Or you could play a in a point-buy system that doesn't have trap options.
>>44491876
This:
If you can possibly play the character in pointbuy, it is better played in pointbuy.
If you can't, it's probably not right for the campaign anyways (some exceptions apply)
>>44489411
That's not what trap option means.
>>44492988
>>44488330
This. Do rolls. Relish your players struggle
>>44494499
So close to ultra quad-dubs.
But really WOTC is the only company to intentionally put trap options into an RPG, based on 'skill tester' cards from Magic.
>>44488625
>•Encourages truly randomized characters. People will be forced out of their comfort zone at some point.
This could be construed as a Con. It actually doesn't just fuck with "points" or "score"; you are forcing players to make nonsensical life stories for characters who somehow suck at what they do.
>>44495131
to follow up--
I've seen situations where the characters are generated, then "professions" or "classes" and backstory are chosen after the attributes are determined.
That development process is much more realistic and functional for gameplay.
It should also be noted, in some systems, your optimization doesn't change as many outcomes. More survivalistic scenarios demand more robust and mathematically sound characters.
>>44495211
>mathematically sound
The fuck do you mean by that? Do you even know what "mathematically sound" means?
>>44495211
Mathematically sound means, to put simply, any math pertaining to is accurate.
Don't use big words you don't understand to make yourself sound good to others who don't understand them.
>>44495773
>>44495697
Excuuuuuse me, princess.
I'm being more poetic here by saying the character doesn't "add up" to live in the world they're doomed to dungeon delve in.
>>44495801
Damn straight you'll excuse yourself.
There is no room for the misuse of terms in debate.
>>44495824
sorry, guv
In the end, I think I prefer point-buy for more handcrafted characters, anywayeven if I have to put up with my friend's need to make characters that perform 250% better than the others
I might be interested in rolling if so many people who advocate it weren't such elitsts.
>>44487894
luckly I play Mutants and Masterminds which does not allow rolling for stats, which is fucking shit in my opinion.
>>44489082
>In my experience, people who advocate rolling are pretentious motherfuckers who are too retarded to get their head around the concept that optimization =/= powergaming and making the same character over and over again.
This, jesus christ.
>>44487894
I don't like point buy because it let's people who know what their doing have a really strong start and people who have no clue what's going on feel stressed when making their character because they don't want to put things in the wrong place. This is just from my experience though.
>>44489082
>In my experience, people who advocate rolling are pretentious motherfuckers who are too retarded to get their head around the concept that optimization =/= powergaming and making the same character over and over again.
>Like being good at your job is a bad thing.
Well fucking said anon!
>>44498160
People who don't have the first clue of what they are doing are going to be shit even with rolling for stats though.
Soo... yeah, I don't see your point.
>>44488625
There's also the variance in rolling.
Assignable stats, versus down the line rolling.
Do you roll more than 3 and drop the lowest?
Do you roll all the dice at once then group them up as you wish?
Do you reroll 1s?
Most of those boost the attainable average, but they're generally common house rules.My irl games usually did assignable 4d6, drop lowest, reroll 1s. the roll20 group I've played with has done one game at 25pb, and the rest at 15pb. I kinda chafe at 15pb.
>In my experience, people who advocate rolling are pretentious motherfuckers who are too retarded to get their head around the concept that optimization =/= powergaming and making the same character over and over again.
>>44489169
Case in point.
>>44489393
>6d20
I don't think I've ever seen anyone roll for stats like that.
>2 Str
For what I assume are obvious reasons.
>>44487894
Point buy's balanced, yeah, but it's very sterile. It's playable, but there are piles of ways to roll that are balanced enough, and you can always just fiat "this character is too busted/too chump, try again".
And if you don't trust your players to be honest... don't play with them...? Pretty simple.
I like rolling, I think it's fun.
I've also had wild power level differences in my parties, and it made me feel bad for those who rolled low.
Even in my roleplaying-heavy supercampaign, the characters were created point buy as a result
>>44488742
You know what they say about failing to comprehend the meaning of the word "tend" and putting random periods in the middle of sentences.
It makes you a retard.
>>44489257
underrated fucking post. its the perfect solution. It has all the fairness and choice in distribution as point buy without the bullshit power buy can imply.
>>44487894
> not using a hybrid system like Dragonquest
Plebs, all of you.
>>44498311
>but there are piles of ways to roll that are balanced enough, and you can always just fiat "this character is too busted/too chump, try again".
Why the FUCK are you rolling when the implicit undertone of rolling for stats in your piece of shit method is "sorry but the method of RANDOMLY GENERATING STATS was too random in the positive direction, you better reroll everything." Why are you punishing success? This is as asinine and stupid as punishing for people succeeding by too much in-game.
>>44487894
What do you guys think of randomizing gender and race with dice/coin flips?
>>44498782
It'd be fun for short campaigns/one-shots, but I wouldn't want to use it all the time
