2 for 1 attribute adjusting, powergaming or survival

[max_vale]

I'm not trying to sound like a power-gamer or min/maxer; but did you guys know that you can do 2 for 1 trading with your attribute scores? I.e. if you have a 14 WIS and a 14 DEX; you could drop the WIS to 12 and raise the DEX to 15.

I just wanted to make sure people knew they could do that!

[Vargr1105]

You know what? I think I will indulge in some powergaming after all.

[Alethan]

I'm not trying to sound like a power-gamer or min/maxer; but did you guys know that you can do 2 for 1 trading with your attribute scores? I.e. if you have a 14 WIS and a 14 DEX; you could drop the WIS to 12 and raise the DEX to 15.

I just wanted to make sure people knew they could do that!

I'm fully familiar with a limited form (must raise primary attributes per class selection, can only lower certain ones and they can only be lowered to 9) of this method of chargen in the B/E rules. I don't recall ever doing anything like this in 1e AD&D rules, though, especially where you can willy nilly raise stats at a 2-for-1 exchange rate. Did I miss that somewhere in the DMG? Or is this a ruling by rredmond and bhart and I just missed that?

[Alethan]

I'm not trying to sound like a power-gamer or min/maxer; but did you guys know that you can do 2 for 1 trading with your attribute scores? I.e. if you have a 14 WIS and a 14 DEX; you could drop the WIS to 12 and raise the DEX to 15.

I just wanted to make sure people knew they could do that!

I'm fully familiar with a limited form (must raise primary attributes per class selection, can only lower certain ones and they can only be lowered to 9) of this method of chargen in the B/E rules. I don't recall ever doing anything like this in 1e AD&D rules, though, especially where you can willy nilly raise stats at a 2-for-1 exchange rate. Did I miss that somewhere in the DMG? Or is this a ruling by rredmond and bhart and I just missed that?

Ahhh... found it.

viewtopic.php?p=23970#p23970

Unlimited 2-for-1 trading of attributes seems... I don't know... not right. If I do any trading in chargen, I'll stick to the B/E guidelines for doing so.

[rredmond]

Yup, the thought is to give the PCs every percieved advantage. Normally I'm not a fan of 2 for 1's, except as limited (pretty similar to how you say, though I've never really played any BX/BECMI games) or as approved by the DM. There should be no going below 9 though, that's way out!

This is a different sort of game though, so we're trying different things. , er I mean,

[max_vale]

I have no idea where the idea started; but most people I've ever gamed with have allowed 2 for 1 trading and putting starting scores wherever you want them.

Personally, I think it all comes down to the type of game people want to run/ play. Do you want characters that are 'advantaged' or just regular sorts who happen to find themselves in fantastic situations. I'm cool with either; but if it's the first....and using 1E; I think 4d6; arrange to taste and allowing 2 for 1 is the only way to ensure on average that most characters have 1-3 attributes with bonuses. 4d6 alone usually only nets a few 13-15s; which if using Basic or C&C rules; this works for this type of game...if using 1E; where attribute bonuses don't usually kick in until around 15 or so; I think 2 for 1 is fine.

I will say as a DM though; I tend to go after characters with obvious dump stats....if somebody lowers thier CHA to 6; I'll make sure that poor character is in any number of situations where he has to charm/lead people!

[Alethan]

I have no idea where the idea started; but most people I've ever gamed with have allowed 2 for 1 trading and putting starting scores wherever you want them.

Personally, I think it all comes down to the type of game people want to run/ play. Do you want characters that are 'advantaged' or just regular sorts who happen to find themselves in fantastic situations. I'm cool with either; but if it's the first....and using 1E; I think 4d6; arrange to taste and allowing 2 for 1 is the only way to ensure on average that most characters have 1-3 attributes with bonuses. 4d6 alone usually only nets a few 13-15s; which if using Basic or C&C rules; this works for this type of game...if using 1E; where attribute bonuses don't usually kick in until around 15 or so; I think 2 for 1 is fine.

I will say as a DM though; I tend to go after characters with obvious dump stats....if somebody lowers thier CHA to 6; I'll make sure that poor character is in any number of situations where he has to charm/lead people!

Well, I think it started in the b/e rules. Maybe people just casually migrated it into the advanced rule games they played. I think it was appropriate in the b/e rules because you rolled your 3d6 stats in order under that system. I don't know if I agree with seeing it in an AD&D rules game...

If you start giving too much leeway to stat modification in chargen, might as well just tell them to pick what they feel are appropriate stats for their character and skip rolling dice. Or let them keep rolling stat dice until they're happy with the six stat numbers they've generated...

I'm not really going to worry about it too much here, though, because this is the Tomb of Horrors. I'm not investing any personal interest in my character. Ultimately, I don't really think stats are going to have too much of an effect on the game, anyway.

If we were starting up a game at first level, I'd throw up a bigger argument against this chargen method. Or, more likely, I'd probably just find a different game.

Like I said, I'm not worrying too much about it here.

[rredmond]

Moving some posts!

[AQuebman]

I've realized most of the people I game with can't handle hardcore roll and deal with what you get. It's why I have to get my DCC fix here on the forums. I think that 2 for 1 rule comes from that as a lot of folks do not appreciate feeling underpowered or average. I think overcoming your struggles is much more fascinating but I know i'm a strange sort.

I enjoy both methods of hard and firm you roll what you get and full stat adjusting it just depends on the type of game you would enjoy.

[ToniXX]

I've never played in a game with any 'buy' system or x for y points adjustment. I agree with AQuebman in that if you get a low score, it just makes your PC more interesting. Maybe he's a fighter with an 18 strength but a 6 intelligence. So, play him accordingly: strike first, ask questions later. No dilly-dallying, no parley, just bashie-bashie!

Or maybe you've got a really ugly cleric. He may get a penalty if he tried a charm spell or if he tried to get some info from a barkeep in town. Leave that to the 'pretty' elf. Such modifications, of course, are up to the DM, but would add interest and a little comedy to the game.

[rredmond]

bashie-bashie!

[Vargr1105]

I have no issues playing PCs with funky scores, its part and parcel of the game. Heck, when I was testing Unearthed Arcana's Method V I got a Fighter with Str 13 and Int 18, now that's a different flavor.

What I don't like is playing PCs with crippling scores, whether related or unrelated to their classes, and some Ability Generation methods produce members of the bottom of the gene pool as often as superior material. We are, after all, playing heroes who delve into the maws of danger for a living. If they all are median or mediocre stat-wise the party will have a hard time surviving. Show me a fantasy literature main character which can be deemed "average" and I'll change my mind.

I never liked the "cannibalizing" 2:1 method from BD&D, it tends to produce weird folks with one high score and a string of "9's" (heck look at poor Halbrad).

My variant of that which can be used ONLY to modify scores so you can qualify for a chosen race or class is "shaving off the top". You trade 1:1 for the ability you need but can do so ONLY from your highest score. If two abilities are equally highest, take turns in shaving from each. And if you are playing a single-classed human I use Method V; you're guaranteed to get playable scores and it saves a lot of headache.

[AQuebman]

I think the older systems do a better job depending on your DM of handling average rolls because magical items had such a major effect, and death was much more common no matter what your numbers were. More modern roleplaying games that's not the case which is unfortunate.

I haven't DM'd it enough but it's one of the things so far i like about DCC is that it seems that it's not real stats heavy where you can have interesting characters instead of being worried about the min/max advantages.

[Hrafn]

Ahhh... found it.

viewtopic.php?p=23970#p23970

Unlimited 2-for-1 trading of attributes seems... I don't know... not right. If I do any trading in chargen, I'll stick to the B/E guidelines for doing so.

I remember something like this, in either 1 or 2e, but not sure which; we mixed and matched. I do recall it was limited mostly along the lines of each transfer being it's own "transaction", and any single attribute being allowed only one "transaction", so you could only increase three attributes, and only decrease the other three.

I do feel that your impression of it being "not right" is an inherent limiter though, because that feeling of cheating reducing your enjoyment of the game is pretty potent.

I have once, though - just once - been able to swap around attributes however I wanted on a 1:1 basis. I also rolled EXCEEDINGLY well. Bregorak (pronounced "Theo") The barbararian was born; Constitution high enough for regeneration, Strength and dexterity to rival dragons, and the mind of a child. Never actually fought something where his attributes mattered though; Kobolds would be wiped by regular warriors, let alone this guy. Plus if he stepped in a puddle, he would panic! He doesn't know how to swim.

That was a fun game~