Idea for a custom party.

[Indemaijinj]

Unless the barbarian's primary stat really IS constitution we would have a major problem finding any kind of class for the CON character.

I also have doubts about the CHA character.

(Trying it out now).

[Indemaijinj]

Nope, a character with 3's in all ability scores besides CON or CHA is not legible to any class.

The primary ability score for barbarians is strength (though I think it should have been CON).

The sorcerer must have at least 9 in INT.

But think about it:

Having a STR of 3 is being severely crippled. Though you could still walk around, you'll have trouble carrying a half-filled schoolbag.

Having a DEX of 3 would also earn you the status of a cripple. While you might be able to waddle around unaided, most people would probably rather stick you in a wheelchair. For roleplaying reasons a character with a dex of 5 or below should be carrying a staff. Not as a weapon, but as a walking aid.

Having a CON of 3 would mean having Raistlin Majere'ish bad health. The slightest action would make you cough and wheeze and a common cold would pose a threat to your life.

Having an INT of 3 would mean that you could find many dogs who are more intelligent than you (a normal dog's intelligence varies between 2 and 4). You might still have the power of speech (it's part of human nature), but besides that animals would be able to best you in intellectual excersises.

Having a WIS of 3 would mean that you are suffering from full-blown dementia and hallucinations. You would have almost no clue what is going on around you.

Having a CHA of 3 would mean that you are completely catatonic, probably lacking the power of any intelligible speech. You would be so deeply absorbed in schizophrenia that few people could have any chance to understand you. Let alone you understanding them. You'll live your life in your own lonely microcosmos.

There is a reason why 3 is always the lowest possible ability score. Having a STR, DEX or CON of below 3 would mean that you were so completely crippled (and probably dying too) that the game would be no fun at all.
Having a INT, WIS or CHA of below 3 would be so completely alien that it is unfathomable for any human (including those who actually HAS such lacking abilities).

Realistically I will mark 5 as being the lowest playable score. A character with an INT of 5 would be retarded and a guy with 5 WIS would be mildly demented, but it's not something you can't imagine being.

[ 01-24-2003, 06:27 PM: Message edited by: Indemaijinj ]

[Butterfingers]

Sorry Six, but, I have to correct you.

Dwarves are NEVER called thieves. No self respecting Dwarf would let this insult pass with out cutting your head off.

The proper term is Dwarven Locksmith, a very honourable career.

[Luvian]

Originally posted by Indemaijinj: Nope, a character with 3's in all ability scores besides CON or CHA is not legible to any class. The primary ability score for barbarians is strength (though I think it should have been CON). The sorcerer must have at least 9 in INT. But think about it: Having a STR of 3 is being severely crippled. Though you could still walk around, you'll have trouble carrying a half-filled schoolbag. Having a DEX of 3 would also earn you the status of a cripple. While you might be able to waddle around unaided, most people would probably rather stick you in a wheelchair. For roleplaying reasons a character with a dex of 5 or below should be carrying a staff. Not as a weapon, but as a walking aid. Having a CON of 3 would mean having Raistlin Majere'ish bad health. The slightest action would make you cough and wheeze and a common cold would pose a threat to your life. Having an INT of 3 would mean that you could find many dogs who are more intelligent than you (a normal dog's intelligence varies between 2 and 4). You might still have the power of speech (it's part of human nature), but besides that animals would be able to best you in intellectual excersises. Having a WIS of 3 would mean that you are suffering from full-blown dementia and hallucinations. You would have almost no clue what is going on around you. Having a CHA of 3 would mean that you are completely catatonic, probably lacking the power of any intelligible speech. You would be so deeply absorbed in schizophrenia that few people could have any chance to understand you. Let alone you understanding them. You'll live your life in your own lonely microcosmos. There is a reason why 3 is always the lowest possible ability score. Having a STR, DEX or CON of below 3 would mean that you were so completely crippled (and probably dying too) that the game would be no fun at all. Having a INT, WIS or CHA of below 3 would be so completely alien that it is unfathomable for any human (including those who actually HAS such lacking abilities). Realistically I will mark 5 as being the lowest playable score. A character with an INT of 5 would be retarded and a guy with 5 WIS would be mildly demented, but it's not something you can't imagine being.

I didn't say this would make a realistic party. Just that it would be challenging to play.

[Olorin]

I think the idea of choosing a party, and then taking the first roll for each of them is a good way to go.

Artificially lowering all your non-essential stats would ruin any chance at role-play. Putting str at 3 for 5 out of 6 party members is a really bad idea. Str 3 has a weight allowance of 5 pounds. Your character has to make a tough decision; do they go with a ranged weapon or a melee weapon...they probably can't carry both. And forget about armor, even leather armor would be too heavy to wear. That kind of a handicap could potentially be dealt with, but it's very unrealistic.

I'd say, just put an out of order sign on the reroll button and try to have some fun. You might end up with some odd combinations; a mage that is the strongest in your party, or a really smart thief. With stats more in the range of normal humans, not demigods or cripples, you can have fun trying to role play all of them together. Plus, when you do come across those stat-boosting items, they will be the awesome treasures they were meant to be. When I'm being a munchkin, I find girdles of strength and think...well, it be kind of a waste on my fighter, he's already got 18/92...maybe I'm better off giving it to my mage, so he can carry more loot...

Also, I think it's more fun to limit yourself to only the amount of items that a character can actually wear/wield. By that I mean that playing a thief that has a whole bag full of invis rings that he keeps swapping as they're used up is kinda cheesy. Or using the girdle of fortitude to raise CON to 18, and then swapping it out for a STR girdle; but keeping the CON bonus for 8 hours. Instead, limit each character to only using the items they have on them 24/7. The only swapping allowed would have to be for role-playing reasons:

"We are invading a vampire lair today; I think I'll take the Daystar for backup instead of Ilbratha"

You can imagine an adventurer owning some extra weapons that they don't use on an everyday basis, but are very good for special occasions; like anti-undead or anti-troll weaponry.

Back to the original idea; I would personally rather play with luck of the draw characters than ones that were modified to have all 9, one 18 or something, because that gives you six one-dimensional characters. You can have a lot of fun trying to come up with a suitable way to roleplay someone with an odd combination of stats.

I played a PnP fighter once that had decent fighting stats, but an INT of 8 or 9, and a WIS of 5. I had lots of fun with him though. I played him as a fearless (i.e. totally reckless; borderline suicidal) fighter whose entire repetoire of tactics consisted of charging in head on. He just couldn't grasp the idea that a) some monsters were better than him or b) that he could ever lose when he was fighting for a just cause. One time he charged a white dragon, got a crit failure (fell flat on his face), managed to get a 19 to save vs. the ice breath (a kind DM let me take 1/4 damage due to the falling flat on face being a rather unexpected dodging technique). That left him with 4 hps, but he just got back up and started swinging.

[Indemaijinj]

Oh yeah, my cousin mentioned this (that doesn't seem to be common BG lore).

Wisdom actually determines the character's sight range. For most values the difference is neglectible, but when it drops below five it becomes significant. A character with a WIS of 3 is almost as affected by constant blindness.

I haven't tried this yet, but he ain't the lying sort (but he could have messed up two rpg's).

[ezekill]

hows about for making it harder, instead of making stupid characters, make awesome characters and put the difficulty on full, that way your good, but the baddies are even "gooder"

unless you guys are all awesome at this game and have the difficulty on full anyway (you smartass bastards)

[karlosovic]

Originally posted by Raistlin Majere: Its over midnight here in Finland, so dont mind me, if i post something stupid(this damn forum hasnt given me the chance to sleep well lately)

Is it just me, or is it *always* past midnight when someone makes a post in Finland ? lol

ezekill, I think a *lot* of them play on hardest anyway (and download mods to make it harder), although I myself play on Core Rules.

I think Olorin had the idea though, make a charater and roll the stats once only. What you get is what you got. Alternatively, take the IWD2 approach (ie. 3rd Ed rules) and give yourself 10 in everything and 16 bonus points to boost what you want (or something similar). I like the appeal of the random approach though, take what life gives you and then make the most of magic item bonuses. I only ever normally give gauntlets of Dex or girdles or strength etc to in-game NPCs. Characters I make myself have all the stats they need, but maybe I should try the more realistic way (I was gonna say 'approach' again but I'm starting to feel repetative)