Forums of the Megaverse®

The sad problem with your concept is many character races do not use the same number and type of dice in various attributes. While I see no reason why attributes which are rolled the same way can not be traded, the concept simply does not always apply.

The Random Roll system is also a requirement for using the exceptional ability system. Basicly having exceptional attributes is a reward you get for risking being unable to get the character you want. If you switch attributes around, you should not be able to do exceptional attributes.

For most physical attributes, there are ways to increase the attributes through physical skills. I have often thought there should be similar ways to increase mental attributes...

blah blah blah

pick your OCC and then roll, if the rolls don't meet the minimum then bump the ones that are low to the min.

Yes, that is an option...and is sometimes the only one that works when no member of a race can meet the minimum requirements of an allowed class. I remember a discussion of that in the Rifts section.

I allow my players to distribute their PC stats among attributes based on the chosen OCC.

There are only two basic ways to handle character creation: the random roll method and the point distribution method. If you are dissatisfied with the one, then you could consider the others. In most systems where the average 3d6 roll is 11.5, you are given enough points to set all primary attributes at 12.5, and increasing any one attribute over 14 costs extra. There is also the dice distribution variation, you give the player a number of extra dice and they can add the extra dice to the totals to fix unfortunately low scores or to give exceptional attributes (but there are no free rolls for exceptional attributes with any distribution system).

The key here is explaining how you can change OCCs in a more clear, simple form. The rules as written are not very clear, and basically a colossal mess.

actually I come up with a char concept before doing any rolling, because if you don't know where you want to go with the char then you can't do a good job on creating the char.

Rolling the stats is the second thing I do after picking out the race and which CC, but even then one of the least important part of making a char. Even though it is one of the most important part of the char. (no it not a oxymoron... just the way it is)

Usually I roll out the stat numbers before placing them with each attribute, that way I can make sure that I cover the attribute requirements of the CC.

But then again I sometime throw out a whole set of die rolls because they are wrong for the char concept.

The thing you have to watch out for is the tendicy to min-max chars with skills, traits, and talents.

It's weird to see the same issues pop up after 30 years. There are three Schools of Thought in chargen. This ain't rocket science.

1) The Player makes the best of his random rolls.

AKA, you may want a Cyber-Knight, but your rolls don't qualify so you play a City Rat who completely follows the Cyber-Knight code.

2) The Player modifies or moves about the random rolls to customize the character.

AKA, you want to play a Cyber-Knight and you move the stats about to qualify OR the GM says change your highest rolls to the Cyber-Knight's minimums.

3) The Player spends points to build the exact character he wants.

AKA, the GM gives you X number of points (say 11.5 x 8 = 92 pts) to spread among the 8 stats as you like within the confines of your race and class. Thus you min-max to get your character.

There are pros and cons to each School of Thought and everyone has their favorite. The best answer for which School of Thought is superior is whatever works best to maximize the fun for your players.

Although personally, if you have a group which cycles through campaigns and characters on a regular basis, I highly recommend that you try out different Chargen methods and rotate between them for variety and challenge.

BTW, are you familiar with the Troupe Method? The Troupe Method is interesting because each player rolls up several characters at the start of the campaign and the player can play only one of them per game session, but if it makes sense, he can switch out to someone else.

I have run Troupe campaigns with the understanding that the campaign ends (BBEG auto wins) if a player has all their characters die. In general, the random roll (Method 1) means you will have some characters better than others, so as a player you are always thinking about who to play and what order and how to level them up and keep them alive through the campaign. Also as a player, you are very motivated to help the other PCs stay alive because losing characters acts a timer on the game. And since I am a evil meanie GM, there will be blood...

Traek wrote:Personally, I have never really understood the fundamental character creation process for the various Palladium systems. They revolve around a player without form or purpose -- other than a race. It's only after rolling the initial attributes that you have an idea of what kind of OCCs are available to your character. Who plays like this?

*snip*

1. First and foremost, I completely ignore OCC requirements. While I understand they are important, I still ignore them for the following reason:
2. OCC is selected first (or RCC/PCC/whatever) along with the race
3. Players are guided in their rolling to fit the mold of the OCC (you can't have a Knight roll a PS of 3... it happens all the time!)

*snip*

Thoughts?

There are a couple of suscribed methods of character creation - D&D before 3.x though is the method this system was designed for. This is important to note because it gives us a reference frame on the mentality of these aging dinosaurs. These RPers have leathery skin and have refused to adapt. They are easily identifiable by their excessive facial and body hair (both men and women), and their complete elitist out-look towards the newer generations of gamer (this, btw is not a joke - how ever funny it might seem).

I bring this up because this is why everything is random - these people have a different view of how an RPG should be played. This is why there are dozens of different OCCs, when a single OCC archetype would've been both preferable and more efficient in use. Really, why must we suscribe to what people are telling us the "Merc-Pigman" is in Rifts? They are all the same - and are enforced to be as such. BUT did you know that pretty much every other military OCC capable of taking both demolitions and WP heavy/ e-heavy make better pigmen, and are more numerous?

Basically this system was designed with a particular gaming method in-mind; that random equals fun, and that people who role-play take roles that fate makes available to them, not choose and build. There is a certain charm to this; and that it shows people that you can't always have what you want.

But what you're telling me is that you must always get what you want, or else you won't play. Maybe you can abide by rolling randomly, but not as of this thread-topic.

I don't particularily like how the Palladium system is set-up; I believe it to be inferior in many, many respects. But this set-up I can both understand and respect. I mean, it's not like the game has a ton of requirements, and even then they are all low. That said, I've offered that my players are allowed to switch stats around (assuming no racial stat conflicts with another) to get what they want, but otherwise the first roll is the roll they get; otherwise what was the point?

Spinachcat wrote:AKA, the GM gives you X number of points (say 11.5 x 8 = 92 pts) to spread among the 8 stats as you like within the confines of your race and class. Thus you min-max to get your character.

Where are you guys getting this 11.5 number from? The average on 3d6 is 10.5. That's 3.5 (the exact middle on a d6) times 3. other methods include the low-average of 3+4+3=10 and the high-average of 4+3+4=11, but no matter how you look at it, the average is 10.5.

Yea but 11.5 gives you better mix-maxing potential - a full extra 8 points to smear around.

Natasha wrote:Yea but 11.5 gives you better mix-maxing potential - a full extra 8 points to smear around.

Then why not make it 12.5 or straight-up 18's?

Basically, you're assigning a higher number to produce a better character; the only reason people see this as justified is because it is close to the actual number. Beyond this, you'd be better-off to roll than use 12.5; you're likely to get a low stat and a high stat, which gives you additional points above and beyond the total average of 12.5. That and with the low-stat clause, you can basically make up for any low stats rolled in character creation.

Dog_O_War wrote:

Natasha wrote:Yea but 11.5 gives you better mix-maxing potential - a full extra 8 points to smear around.

Then why not make it 12.5 or straight-up 18's?

Because firstly I wasn't being serious.

Secondly, playstyle determines the multiplier and how you distribute your points.

So my point was that they decided up on 11.5 because that's a number they like, even if it's not statistical average (which they never mentioned in any case).

With points allocations schemes you're practically guaranteed not to get a low stat, unless that's what you're going for, and unless you're willing to not spend points you have to pump one or more attributes.

With dice you can get a series of low attributes or a series of high attributes. Neither of which are likely with points allocation (nevermind if they're even possible).

Has anyone considered useing a system like the new Robotech character creation for PFRPG or Rifts. It would take a lot of time to make it a workable system because of all the different races and classes. But I think it would at least be worth a try.

How I roll up my chars and have my players do it.

Roll 3d6 3 times each for each stat. You get to pick out of the three. You dont get to change the numbers to a different stat.

If you are wanting to play a [blank] but dont meet the requirements, then you either play something similar who tries to pass himself off as such, or you bump up if the requirement is 1-2 points above what you rolled.

But beyond that, i am more into Tri-Stat anyways anymore.