Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

Message
Author
Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#21 Post by Xaxyx »

MonkeyWrench wrote:Yeah, but using a point-buy system is really your own preference. It's a nice system that does allow a player to create a character that they believe fits their internal image of them but again, that's really up to the GM to decide, some people love rolling the dice for their character and then using those stats to truly get into their character.
Certainly. What I can't help but wonder, however, is how many GMs have really sat back and thought about the impact that their character generation method really has, and whether or not it's merited to reconsider. As opposed to those who shrug and go, well, everybody else seems to do 4d6c3, so it must be fine.
Monkeywrench wrote:Some of my most memorable characters were the ones with low stats that made me think outside the box to get things done; that made me play smart instead of "I roll to attack" on every. single. encounter. It's honestly more fun to be creative in my opinion.
An option that exists in a point-based character generation system as well, if you've truly got your heart set on it. ;)
Monkeywrench wrote:I think you're getting to involved in the differences of each character, as you said, this is a roleplaying game. Sometimes characters are going to meet people that are just better than them in things. That player should instead focus on their own character and playing them as best they can, rather than trying to emulate the other players character. As long as someone is actually taking the effort to roleplay their character it shouldn't matter anothers stats and if it does then that player is probably not playing with the right group of people.
I was merely demonstrating the fact that how "heroic" a character might be defined to be can oftentimes be influenced far less by how that character is depicted or role played and far more by what astounding (or atrocious) ability scores they're assigned.

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#22 Post by Xaxyx »

Zhym wrote:BTW, I'd let a player who rolled no higher than a 9 on 4d6c1 re-roll. That's also an amazingly improbable result, with a 1 in 34,631 chance of happening.
What about no higher than 12? That's the equivalent character, more or less, in most of these game systems. It's also far more probable.
Zhym wrote:As long as everyone uses the same character generation method, the differences between stats aren't going to be so drastic as to be unfair. And it's easy enough to add a house re-rolling rule to let people out of really bad rolls.
What would you define as a "really bad roll", as a DM? (Or "drastic" or "unfair", for that matter?)

User avatar
Zhym
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 20556
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:14 am

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#23 Post by Zhym »

Xaxyx wrote:What about no higher than 12?
There's about a 1.8% probability of rolling up a PC with no attribute higher than 12. And there's only a 7.2% probability of rolling up a character with attributes that are all 13 or lower—which is only slightly more probable than the chance of rolling a fumble on an attack. I'd say both of those, while obviously more common than all 9 or less on a relative scale, are pretty uncommon.

Here's a chart of the probability that the 4d6 method will generate at least one attribute of a given value or better:
4d6.png
4d6.png (71.44 KiB) Viewed 3965 times
For example, there is almost an 80% chance that any character rolled up with the 4d6c1 method will have at least one score of 15 or higher.
Xaxyx wrote:What would you define as a "really bad roll", as a DM?
It would depend on the game, for me. I don't think I've ever had to adopt an official mulligan rule. Because of variance, it seems like you don't often see characters where all the attributes are in the 9-12 range—instead, there's likely to be one really bad attribute in the bunch. A bunch of mediocre attributes and at least one crummy one is an easy mulligan, in my opinion.

I've played in games where you could re-roll if your total of all bonuses was negative, or where you could re-roll if all six attributes added up to less than some number (around 70-75, IIRC). And 2-for-1 adjustment rules let players turn blah stats into interesting stats. But generally, I can't recall having had a DM who was inflexible about playing a truly awful set of stats. Everyone's in it to have fun, after all.

ETA: One mulligan rule I kind of like is to allow any player to re-roll stats once with no backsies. Don't like the stats you rolled up? Go ahead and roll a second set—but you're stuck with that second set and can't go back to the first set or roll again. With this system, players who rolled really bad stats won't have much to lose by re-rolling, while players who roll a decent set of stats would be wise not to push their luck. Side benefit: it puts it on the players instead of the DM to decide how bad stats have to be before it's worth re-rolling.

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#24 Post by Xaxyx »

Zhym wrote:For example, there is almost an 80% chance that any character rolled up with the 4d6c1 method will have at least one score of 15 or higher.
Which in turns means there's an over 20% chance that any given character rolled up this way *won't* have a score higher than 14. Which, in 1st and 2nd Edition AD&D.. and Osric.. is the equivalent to a 9 for pretty much any practical purpose. This means that, at any given table with 5 players, on average, one's going to roll up a character with *no useful bonuses whatsoever* from ability scores. Why? What's the driving notion to defend such arbitrary chaos? It's not necessary. It's not horribly imbalanced if everyone's got at least *something* out of their scores.

Meanwhile, the guy at his elbow gets blessed with 18, 17, 16, x y z and creates God On Wheels the Ranger with 20+ hit points, +2/+3 to-hit/damage, -3 to AC, etc, etc, etc. So one guy get HUGE bonuses; the other guy gets NO bonuses. Why? Why defend such a system of potential extremes? It will forever escape me.
Zhym wrote:I've played in games where you could re-roll if your total of all bonuses was negative, or where you could re-roll if all six attributes added up to less than some number (around 70-75, IIRC). And 2-for-1 adjustment rules let players turn blah stats into interesting stats. But generally, I can't recall having had a DM who was inflexible about playing a truly awful set of stats. Everyone's in it to have fun, after all.
Sounds like a lot of work to "fix" what's to me very clearly a broken system. Truthfully, I can't think of any other aspect of AD&D or its ilk subjected to a wider and more colorful collection of varying house rules than the ability score generation process -- a process that lies at the heart of character creation; a process that should, by its very nature, be the most tried and true, reliable function in the entire game system. In my opinion, of course.
Zhym wrote:ETA: One mulligan rule I kind of like is to allow any player to re-roll stats once with no backsies. Don't like the stats you rolled up? Go ahead and roll a second set—but you're stuck with that second set and can't go back to the first set or roll again. With this system, players who rolled really bad stats won't have much to lose by re-rolling, while players who roll a decent set of stats would be wise not to push their luck. Side benefit: it puts it on the players instead of the DM to decide how bad stats have to be before it's worth re-rolling.
Side deficit: if the stats you roll are even worse than the first set, you're screwed. Would you try to force a player who had this happen to him to create and play a character with these stats?

Would you then be surprised if his character suddenly turns out to be suicidal?

User avatar
Zhym
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 20556
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:14 am

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#25 Post by Zhym »

If you don't like random generation of attributes, don't use it. Problem solved.

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#26 Post by Xaxyx »

Zhym wrote:If you don't like random generation of attributes, don't use it. Problem solved.
I don't have a problem, because I don't use it. The purpose of this thread is to try to understand why everyone else is using such a system, and to see if I can convince others to reconsider using such a system. Is it truly a "just a preference" for DMs to be using random systems rather than any sort of fixed one? Or is that merely such an ingrained, pre-supposed stance that it's never really been given any consideration or scrutiny? So far in these discussions, it seems to be more the latter.
Last edited by Xaxyx on Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AleBelly
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 8960
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 4:46 am
Location: Research Triangle Park, NC

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#27 Post by AleBelly »

Xaxyx wrote:
AleBelly wrote:No, I think the chargen method is a key indicator of the style of game a DM runs. I rarely, if ever, allow re-rolling of stats. In my games, the PCs don't have a right to be heroic. They earn that through game play. I'm not saying that's the only valid philosophy, but it is the philosophy of games I run and like to play in. I've run a game on here for over a year. I have been lucky that many of them are excellent role players, and I've also found this type of player is much less likely to whine about ability scores. In my experience, the players who prefer inflated scores tend to be flakier and more likely to drop out of games here.
Unfortunately, you're omitting a crucial scenario: the player who sits down and rolls 16+ on most or all of his ability scores. Suddenly, he's a hero! Not for the time and effort of creating a fascinating character concept and a detailed background; not for crawling through the muck of his first dungeon adventure and emerging unscathed; not for brilliant, gripping role play and personality development; but because he -- the player, not the character! -- got extraordinarily lucky on his dice rolls.

This makes no sense at all to me. It's further exacerbated by this scenario: two players sit down. They create fighters. Player One has an awesome character concept about how his half-brother murdered his fiance and now he's devoted himself to hunting him down and also he's allergic to broccoli. Player Two shrugs and goes "Uh, he's a fighter."

Player One rolls all 8's and 9's for his ability scores (and a 6 just for flavor). Player Two rolls 14-18 all around. Con bonus. AC bonus. Percentile strength. The works.

Who's the real "hero", I find myself forced to ask? Who's most likely going to survive the first dungeon crawl? Yes, I know the spiel, as I've even given it myself: it's a game; it's in the nature of AD&D; stuff* happens; it's about role playing, not roll playing. But here we have a player who demonstrates no interest in "earning the right to be heroic through game play", to more or less quote you. Yet his staggeringly magnificent 1st level character has a clear and huge advantage over his companion. Was this "earned"? No? Then why allow it? Just because that's what's the dice dictated?
I just think it comes down to how you approach the game. I love randomness. I understand the arguments behind a point buy system. You start with a character concept and build stats accordingly. I have played that way, but much prefer rolling stats. I just find it far more enjoyable to build a character off of the stats given to me than starting with a concept.

Players may end up with uneven scores, yes, but your example of all 16s is so unusual that it would actually be thrilling to have that as a player. A once in a lifetime opportunity! I would also argue that this player isn't automatically heroic. But he/she does have greater potential to be. But PCs of average ability can survive...they just might have to take a different approach - more running, form alliances, etc.

It comes down to this - I enjoy the randomness of 4d6drop1 stat generation. I find point buy systems too restrictive. I understand why it's done, but I just don't like it. If I roll crappy stats and other PCs have really good stats, I'm completely fine with that as long as everyone plays by the same rules.

User avatar
Zhym
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 20556
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:14 am

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#28 Post by Zhym »

Xaxyx wrote:The purpose of this thread is to . . . to see if I can convince others to reconsider using such a system.
Seems like you're nudging up to Rule 3 there. ;)

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#29 Post by Xaxyx »

Zhym wrote:Seems like you're nudging up to Rule 3 there. ;)
No moreso than you, I'd imagine.

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#30 Post by Xaxyx »

AleBelly wrote:It comes down to this - I enjoy the randomness of 4d6drop1 stat generation. I find point buy systems too restrictive.
See, this is what fascinates me about the divergent views. Point buy systems restrictive? How can this be? Point buy systems, by their very nature, are *as versatile as possible*! You can put together ANY set of ability scores you want from a point buy system. Any! The only "restriction" is the amount of points available for you to spend -- which is set by the DM, the same fellow who, in a parallel universe, is telling you how many dice to roll to generate your ability scores in a randomly-based system.

Whereas: it's the random rolls that are restrictive, insofar as that you're restricted to whatever template your results will allow. Want to play a paladin? Oh, poopy-pants; you didn't roll a 17. Want to play a ranger? Oh, but you don't have enough 13's and 14's, tsk. Druid? Illusionist? No soup for you. And so forth. With a properly built point-buy system, on the other hand, such restrictions melt away. (Emphasis on properly built, mind you.)

Here's what I haven't really seen, though, AleBelly, and its conspicuous absence gnaws at my soul. Never once, in all the years I've been foaming at the mouth about this very concern, have I come upon a person who says, yup, I run campaigns where the players roll random dice for their ability scores; and yup, it's possible that one guy will roll up a character with three huge stats and make a god-awful amazing character, and the guy next to him will roll all 9-14's and get soup; and yup, I LIKE THAT VERY MUCH; yup, I WANT this randomly-determined, extreme diversity in my group of players; yup, I'd actually be displeased or disappointed if all the players started with the same amount, or even a *comparable amount*, of potential at level 1.

Does such a person exist? Or am I chasing phantoms?

Here's another fun thought for us to chew on: what about a randomly-determined point-buy system? How about everybody rolls 20+2d10 for the number of points they have to spend on ability scores? What aspects of such a system would appeal to you, and which ones would not?

User avatar
dmw71
POWAH!
POWAH!
Posts: 19482
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 7:18 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#31 Post by dmw71 »

Xaxyx wrote: Point buy systems restrictive? How can this be? Point buy systems, by their very nature, are *as versatile as possible*! You can put together ANY set of ability scores you want from a point buy system. Any! The only "restriction" is the amount of points available for you to spend
This has been an interesting discussion.

Regarding point-buy systems, though, I have yet to see one that is truly unlimited. Take the Pathfinder point-buy system for instance, the lowest ability score you can take is a 7, and a seven isn't really all that low. Yes, a system could be customized however the DM likes, but that leads me to my actual point:

What has always bothered me about point buy systems has to do with "dump stats." When low ability scores in the non-physical attributes (e.g. int, wis, cha) can easily be overcome by good role-playing, there is nothing to prevent a player (unless playing a class that requires them) from putting 7's (or lower) in all their non-physical stats and maximizing their physical (str, dex, con) abilities. When the "penalties" you took by accepting a low charisma, or low intelligence, can be essentially be hand waived, or attempted with minor penalty (e.g. nominal penalty on a reaction check) because the player controlling that character outperforms those scores, I don't like it.

That, at least for me, as always been the biggest limitation to the point-buy system.


-- DM --
Game Status Groups Players
Greyhawk Campaign: Sandbox (1e) On Hiatus (Archived)
--
--

User avatar
AleBelly
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 8960
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 4:46 am
Location: Research Triangle Park, NC

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#32 Post by AleBelly »

Xaxyx wrote: Whereas: it's the random rolls that are restrictive, insofar as that you're restricted to whatever template your results will allow. Want to play a paladin? Oh, poopy-pants; you didn't roll a 17. Want to play a ranger? Oh, but you don't have enough 13's and 14's, tsk. Druid? Illusionist? No soup for you. And so forth. With a properly built point-buy system, on the other hand, such restrictions melt away. (Emphasis on properly built, mind you.)

Here's what I haven't really seen, though, AleBelly, and its conspicuous absence gnaws at my soul. Never once, in all the years I've been foaming at the mouth about this very concern, have I come upon a person who says, yup, I run campaigns where the players roll random dice for their ability scores; and yup, it's possible that one guy will roll up a character with three huge stats and make a god-awful amazing character, and the guy next to him will roll all 9-14's and get soup; and yup, I LIKE THAT VERY MUCH; yup, I WANT this randomly-determined, extreme diversity in my group of players; yup, I'd actually be displeased or disappointed if all the players started with the same amount, or even a *comparable amount*, of potential at level 1.

Does such a person exist? Or am I chasing phantoms?
Nope, I exist. The things you cite as negatives are things that I like about the game, and what I don't like about point buying, much for the reasons dmw points out.

A year or two ago, there was a great thread over at rpg.net that followed the B/X adventures of a group called The Fellowship of the Bling. Part of what made that so excellent was a low-ability, 1 hp character that survived against all odds. Everyone rooted for this underdog, and he actually was the deciding factor in a couple of battles...against steep odds. You don't get really weak characters in point buy systems, and this game would have been the worse for it without the character I'm mentioning.

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#33 Post by Xaxyx »

dmw71 wrote:That, at least for me, as always been the biggest limitation to the point-buy system.
"Dump stats" is a concept equally existent in randomly-generated ability score systems. Indeed, if you generate a bad roll -- or two, even -- you are forced to put them somewhere, after all.

In any event, as you pointed out, the system can be built to prevent "dump stats". 5e has no concept of a dump stat, arguably; all stats start as 8 (which gives a -1 modifier), and you increase them from there using points. (5e players seem to have taken to calling any stat left at 8 as a "dump stat", so there's that I suppose, but you get the idea.)

Another consideration is that point-buy isn't necessarily the only game in town when it comes to balanced character generation. A DM can readily hand out an array of ability scores (which is what I do); or, the DM can offer an array of sets of scores, each of which is sufficiently balanced in the DM's opinion, from which each player can choose (or for real fun, each player must pick a distinct one; there's your forced variety, while maintaining my desire for balance).

Xaxyx
Pathfinder
Pathfinder
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 9:27 pm

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#34 Post by Xaxyx »

AleBelly wrote:You don't get really weak characters in point buy systems, and this game would have been the worse for it without the character I'm mentioning.
You can, arguably, get really weak characters in point buy systems, insofar as that you aren't required to spend all of your points. Thus, you are free to create a physically and/or mentally imperfect -- or even impaired -- character to your heart's content. If your penchant truly is for suffering weaklings (mind you, I've played -- and tremendously enjoyed playing -- a suffering weakling) then not only does a point buy system allow it, it *explicitly empowers you* to create one, without having to worry about the dice instead giving you just an average, mediocre character with a bunch of boring 11's and 12's (truly the worst fate, imo).

User avatar
dmw71
POWAH!
POWAH!
Posts: 19482
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 7:18 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Being a Jerk When Creating a Character

#35 Post by dmw71 »

Xaxyx wrote:
dmw71 wrote:That, at least for me, as always been the biggest limitation to the point-buy system.
"Dump stats" is a concept equally existent in randomly-generated ability score systems. Indeed, if you generate a bad roll -- or two, even -- you are forced to put them somewhere, after all.
The difference here, though, is intent. In the randomly-generated system, poor rolls are not intentional. When a player has free reign to basically build a character to taste, the players can (and likely will) make a conscious decision to lower specific stats (and those stats, more times than not, are those that can be overcome by roleplaying).

The "array of ability scores" idea seems like a decent option, and is superior, at least in my mind, to a true point-buy system.


-- DM --
Game Status Groups Players
Greyhawk Campaign: Sandbox (1e) On Hiatus (Archived)
--
--

User avatar
dmw71
POWAH!
POWAH!
Posts: 19482
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 7:18 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#36 Post by dmw71 »

I saw the following video this morning, which made me think of this conversation. It's kind of an interesting take in that it doesn't actually generate the actual ability scores, but the modifiers (which, it's argued, is all that anyone cares about). The method results in a net +2, so it creates kind of bland characters, but, like they said, it is really useful for pre-gens or NPCs.

Anyway, thought I'd share: A quick yet random alternate character generation method.


-- DM --
Game Status Groups Players
Greyhawk Campaign: Sandbox (1e) On Hiatus (Archived)
--
--

User avatar
onlyme
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 6838
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 12:42 pm
Location: Middle of Carolinas

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#37 Post by onlyme »

I find this discussion fascinating...

I tend to agree with xaxyx on one of the points.

It seems to me (with no real evidence either way) that PCs in a group who are somewhat equally endowed play better. The DM is more likely (at least I probably would if I was creative enough to do it) going to cater the challenges to the level of the PCs.

One bad stat PC could probably hide within a larger group and enjoy the role playing.

One stud PC would probably get bored with the party constantly running away at anything stronger than a kobold, but would probably enjoy the glory.

But, as a DM, how do you handle half your PCs being solid enough to survive a couple scrapes in dungeon and therefore keep pushing deeper, when the other half need a vacation in town after each battle with a kobold to recover HP, spells, etc. It seems like it would create unnecessary tension???
Dandelion - female half-orc beautyqueen in training (The Lone City in the Wildlands) OSRIC
Halfpint - female halfling badgirl wannabe (Lab Lord- The North Marches) LL
Mark'd - charismatic human fighter (Lab Lord- The North Marches) LL


User avatar
Alethan
POWAH!
POWAH!
Posts: 14355
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:50 pm
Location: Midwest
Contact:

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#38 Post by Alethan »

In the really real world, how do you handle it when you have a team of people who have to work together on a project and two or three of the team members cannot perform at the same level as the other team members (due to circumstances they can or cannot control - doesn't matter)?

You adjust. You give the tasks they can handle to those players and you adapt the team to compensate. Sometimes it's a natural progression; sometimes it's very up-front and obvious.

However, I would propose that there are very few limitations resulting from initial Chargen rolls that would cause such a situation. The Basic D&D Chargen concept was to roll the dice, then see what you can build from those dice rolls. It wasn't all about what is the best party make-up; it was about what can YOU do with the rolls you're given. Of course, you don't have to build a character based on the rolls. If you rolled an 8 INT, but you still wanted to make a MU, then... I mean, you're sort of gimping yourself, but it's your character so build it however you want. Same if you make a fighter with a CON of 5.

But you aren't exactly gimped if your character has a STR of 10 and Bob the Fighter has a STR of 16 and he gets a small To Hit bonus and you don't.

Really, the only dice roll that might cause a character to be somewhat gimped is the HP roll. But even then, I know of several forum users who have had a blast playing a character with just 1 HP. And you can mitigate that, even, to some degree with DM rules. Or... I'm in an OD&D retclone game (Delving Deeper) where all players re-roll Hit Points at the start of every venture. This is to simulate that you might not feel as good as you did two weeks ago. Or maybe you feel better than you did last week - more robust, stronger, faster, whatever. So every time you overnight in town, before you head out again you reroll HP for everyone. That at least gives characters the chance to NOT constantly play with 1 HP for all of Level 1.

Some of it stems from the DM's approach to the game, I think. If the DM runs a game of heroic characters, then maybe his Chargen should reflect that the characters have a much better chance of being exceptional in the form of higher stats. If the DM runs a game of common people trying to make their way, then Chargen should reflect that these characters may very well be normal, average, ordinary men and women. Or even below-average...

I can see the fun aspects of both lines of thought.

But, for me, the idea of taking an average (or sub-average) character and making them do exceptional things is very appealing. It's the bigger challenge. And I like that.
Dragon foot. Bamboo pole. Little mouse. Tiny boy.

User avatar
Zhym
Rider of Rohan
Rider of Rohan
Posts: 20556
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:14 am

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#39 Post by Zhym »

This is a bit of a tangent, but on this point:
Alethan wrote:However, I would propose that there are very few limitations resulting from initial Chargen rolls that would cause such a situation. The Basic D&D Chargen concept was to roll the dice, then see what you can build from those dice rolls. It wasn't all about what is the best party make-up; it was about what can YOU do with the rolls you're given. Of course, you don't have to build a character based on the rolls. If you rolled an 8 INT, but you still wanted to make a MU, then... I mean, you're sort of gimping yourself, but it's your character so build it however you want. Same if you make a fighter with a CON of 5.
One of the crazy things about Moldvay Basic D&D is that Intelligence has almost no effect on an MU's ability. An MU with intelligence of 13 or more gets a 10% experience bonus, but that's it as far as I can tell. There are no rules for maximum or minimum spells per level or chance to learn a spell. As far as I can tell, a Moldvay D&D MU with an intelligence score of 5 is every bit as capable as one with a score of 18.

User avatar
dmw71
POWAH!
POWAH!
Posts: 19482
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 7:18 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Character Generation and Ability Scores (Merged Topic)

#40 Post by dmw71 »

Zhym wrote:One of the crazy things about Moldvay Basic D&D is that Intelligence has almost no effect on an MU's ability.
Actually, none of the classes have an exclusive benefit from having a high ability score in their prime requisite. A magic-user with a high strength enjoys the same to-hit/damage benefits as a fighter. Just as a cleric with a high dexterity has the same benefit to their armor class as a thief would.


-- DM --
Game Status Groups Players
Greyhawk Campaign: Sandbox (1e) On Hiatus (Archived)
--
--

Post Reply

Return to “RPG theory”