Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lord Shonus]

The standard method is (4d6droplowest)x6, then put those six numbers at the stats of your choosing.

[GlyphGryph]

I was going to say that sounds like it would greatly encourage minmaxing and boring characters, but then I realized we're talking about D&D here, and that's what the whole game is about, so it makes sense

You should try something new and different different. Give each player a base of two dice per stat, and then allow them to assign 14 other dice to stats of their choice (before rolling), and take the three highest. Now that sounds like fun. ^_^

[nenjin]

Or just roll 3d6 down the line, and be done with it. Anything else is just one step closer toward power gaming.

The best games we've had were with unforgiving stat rolls. The most boring were the ones were everyone walked out with an 18 in something.

[Neonivek]

I was going to say that sounds like it would greatly encourage minmaxing and boring characters, but then I realized we're talking about D&D here, and that's what the whole game is about, so it makes sense

You should try something new and different different. Give each player a base of two dice per stat, and then allow them to assign 14 other dice to stats of their choice (before rolling), and take the three highest. Now that sounds like fun. ^_^

Min Maxing makes a lot more sense the more I think about it when I think about Movies, shows, and books.

The Hero is either incompetent and lucky or better then everyone else. Dungeons and dragons games work the same way, the most effective members of the party are the ones that... well... get to roleplay.

In otherwords Rollplayers get to roleplay in most situations.

This is why I shouldn't draw on experience. I am a suck magnet.

One game was good but the DM was too sensative. For example the plotdevice he used was using News feeds from the TV to predict supernatural events by pure coincidence. So we joked about that a lot! One time he even added in something about the stock market at the end as a way to fade out (thus it was unimportant) and we immediately went on to find the cause of the drop in stock prices. The DM felt very insulted.

Mind you the news feeds were soo loose. A park opening? Werewolves. Better yet the TV wasn't magic.

[GlyphGryph]

...what?

I've always found the most fun and interesting characters to have the poorest stats, because then they NEED to roleplay to get what they want, they can't just rely on the numbers to carry them through.

Even in popular fiction, most of my favorite heroes are essentially ordinary people who through supreme effort do something extraordinary.

In D&D, its not stats that makes someone a hero, its the heroic spirit that gives them "class" levels.

[Neonivek]

Yes but remember I am a suck magnet.

[nenjin]

So overcome your suck. Or play to your suck.

One of our most memorable characters was named "Bullet Head", after the picture my friend's brother drew for the character. He was a 17 Str, a 6 Int, and a 5 Wis Fighter. When he smashed doors, he rammed them head first with his bullet shaped helmet. Some of the best lines came out of that character, like "Dis door is too hard!" (Steel door) "Can I eat that?" (random item), not to mention a complete lack of meta-gaming justified by the character's rampant stupidity.

D&D is not about your stats. D&D is about what your stats let you imagine you could, would, or should do. After 50 games of D&D, you quickly realize that min/maxing produces the exact same kind of characters you played last time. Sometimes it's that low score, that 3 Charisma or 5 Dexterity, that ends up a defining a character MORE than their 18 in some other stat.

[GlyphGryph]

Also, the key to min maxing is that players will always min max in a way that they will never have to actually deal with the consequences of their choices (something D&D encourages). Its taking flaws that don't effect the game to gain powers that do.

Real honest to goodness low stats should always effect the game. A score of "9" can be used as a "dump stat" without worrying. A score of 4? Not so much!

Of course, as a GM its still your job to insure your players actually roleplay those stats...

[Neonivek]

I prefer to show my character through... character rather then through raw stats in dungeons and dragons.

The most powerful character I ever had was probably the most fun character to roleplay (I wasn't trying to overpower him... I just usually make REALLY terrible characters. So this really decent character was my best) because of his connection to nature and oddly scewed morality system. He ended up calling the most intelligent character in the party stupid because he had absolutely no survival skill... and it would be true in his case that he would be stupid in his eyes.

That player SERIOUSLY ended up hating me though because I ended up killing him... Though honestly I tried everything not to. (It is complicated. Lets just say we witnessed him commiting a lot of crimes, we know he is somewhat immoral, and he just attempted to murder someone infront of our eyes. We end up capturing him and if we turned him in he would be killed. I instead dragged him around in a sack and had him attempt to prove himself innocent. Unfortunately he failed tons and tons of rolls and attempted to escape)

As for "No concequences" frankly in dungeons and dragons I don't mind it since that game is sort of... EVIL! Id love to get hit by curses if half of them weren't too cursed.

[Max White]

Well I haven't played countless hours of D&D like I'm sure some here have, and I have never been DM, but I have played a bit, and the contrast between the two DMs I have played with made a huge difference in game play. One DM let us see he's rolls, and when he was describing what was happening, he used a lot of numbers and common terms. The other hid behind a piece of cardboard, and if we did well at a task he would describe the character succeeding at what they were trying, and we never knew exactly how well we did numbers wise. Combat was fun because we only have a vague idea of what we hit, and we had to guess if the monster was getting low on health based off given description.

All in all, the second DM made things full of win and awesome, while the first was sort of bland. As DM, part of your job should be to translate numbers into images, and never show us the numbers.

[nenjin]

I don't know about "never" letting players see rolls.

Default mode is to hide rolls. Occasionally I roll out front of the DM screen for "Big" moments like character saving throws versus instant death, stuff like that. Because there's a lot of drama in having 6 people staring a die as it tumbles across the table, and the screams of agony or relief the result brings.

Usually you hide your rolls though, both for the mystique and the ability to flub the result as needed.

What is unfun is when you have a lot of veteran players, and they can run Thac0 calculations in their head quickly. So they'll make an attack roll, miss, and be like "Well I have a +6 to hit so that guy must have a -3 Armor Class or better."

That always kind of pisses me off as a DM. It's basically a player calling you out as a cheater ect.... because they read the Monstrous Manual cover to cover and have it memorized by heart.

[Neonivek]

Hiding rolls is also interestingly more metagamey then showing them.

Your warriors of GRAND experience many times greater then any real life warrior.

You should be able to tell how well an enemy's strike connected.

Hiding rolls in many ways is plot induced stupidity.

MIND YOU... I really don't mind hiding rolls unless it is active search rolls. Id think I would know how well I am searching thank you... Though some search rolls are silly "You find some gems inside a chest".

[Darvi]

Hey, I'm both a min-maxer and a roleplayer! D:

[Neonivek]

Hey, I'm both a min-maxer and a roleplayer! D:

I don't know why people think they are contradictory.

Heck personally I like systems that mix both gameplay elements and roleplay elements really well. I hate when systems easily bypass gameplay. (Dang it Exalted and Scion!)

[GlyphGryph]

Your warriors of GRAND experience many times greater then any real life warrior.

You should be able to tell how well an enemy's strike connected.

Hiding rolls in many ways is plot induced stupidity.

MIND YOU... I really don't mind hiding rolls unless it is active search rolls. Id think I would know how well I am searching thank you... Though some search rolls are silly "You find some gems inside a chest".

Now thats just silly. ADJECTIVES, man! Adjectives. Give them an idea of how much damage they did, but no matter how skilled, they can't see inside the enemies body. They can't tell if that broken rib pierced a lung. They shouldn't be fighting blind, but thats no reason to give them all the details. If you really want to give them the opportunity, have them make a skill check to determine how much damage has actually been done to the monster (there are some skills that might apply).

And active search rolls are the only rolls that always NEED to be hidden, in all honesty. Otherwise they give away way too much meta-game information. "I rolled a 20, so I KNOW there's nothing here" How do you know? Isn't this what your character would ALWAYS think when they failed to find something? How would they know they didn't just overlook it? If you roll a 1, what excuse would your character have to search again, when said result is supposed to indicate they believe nothing to be there?

If you want to know exactly how well you did, take 10.