Conan 321

[Ichabod]

A scholar is certainly not going to dump on Cha if making magic attack roles.

But, it doesn't bother you that most of the Soldiers out there would have low CHA?

Not really, no. I do care that every attribute, skill, ... every feature of a character be useful.

But, I can only fight so many battles in terms of game fairness - I'm far more concerned about how crappy the soldier class is than how crappy charisma is. At least some characters have a reason to have a good charisma. Nobody has a reason to play a soldier in our campaign since being able to do something besides fight is necessary to the PCs.

I'd be more inclined to bitch and moan about how overpowered Str is than how unnecessary Cha is for most characters, but again, that's further down on my list.

 

[Supplement Four]

[But, it doesn't bother you that most of the Soldiers out there would have low CHA?

Not really, no.

Well, it should.

Soldiers are people. They have personalities all over the map just like all other individuals. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn't be able to count on CHA being the lowest stat for a Soldier character.

From a purely "game" perspective, Soldiers need high CHA when in leadership positions.



So, you start a game, and your player rolls 18, 15, 14, 12, 11, 6.

Then, he arranges those scores: STR 18, DEX 11, CON 15, INT 14, WIS 12, CHA 6.

Why?

Because he gets the most attack and damage bonus from the high STR.

DEX, he goes lower on because he will wear heavy armor and use Parry more than he uses Dodge. Plus, he won't use a lot of ranged weapons.

CON is his next highest to get him some Hit Points.

INT is next highest to get him some skills.

WIS, he's not as worried about because it's only the "save stat" for him.

And, if he's going to take a negative, because of a low score, it's going to be in CHA. Because, the Solider is least effected by CHA. So, the 6 goes in CHA.



Over and over, I've seen this type of thing in the past with arrange-to-taste systems.

Unless you have a game system where all stats are equally important to all character classes, a dump stat will be created the majority of the time.

Soldiers with consistently low CHA scores bother me.

I want more "reality".

I want suspension of disbelief restored.

That's why limited arrange-to-taste, with Conan 321, is a better way of allow players to assign stats.

 

[DigitalMage]

Okay, first bear in mind I haven't read Conan, but I am familar with d20.

So, you start a game, and your player rolls 18, 15, 14, 12, 11, 6.

Then, he arranges those scores: STR 18, DEX 11, CON 15, INT 14, WIS 12, CHA 6.

Okay, suppose who are creating a Scholar character instead - what is likely the dump stat there? Strength perhaps?

But Scholars are people too! Not everyone with a high IQ are weak, some brawny people have brains too!

Some scholars still want to remain healthy and may exercise - or they may be part of a culture where day to day life simply requires a decent strength. That hermit scholar needs to be able to go out and chop down trees and carry bundles of fire wood.

The point is - each class is likely to encourage a certain "dump stat", and as long as every player wants to go with what is encouraged then those dump stats will occur -be it charisma or strength.

However, some players will buck the trend and go against teh grain - their characters may not be optimal, but they will not go with the established dump stats (in D&D I have played high Charisma half orcs rogues, tough as hell sorcerers etc).

Of course I never liked the idea of teh 4d6 drop teh lowest as if I ever did roll a 5 or something the GM would say re-roll. If you aren't going to accept your PCs having stats below 8 then why not just use 6+2d6 giving a range of 8 to 18 and an average of 13, then even the dump stat will likely be at least average or at worst just below average.

 

[Sutek]

I say...

That this entire effort is based on the (a) false assumption that players always make a dump stat and (b) that even if they do, that it ruins the game or is somehow "cheating the system".

There's skills. If your group regularly goes the route of a CHA dump stat, then there's a simple way to make them realize thier mistake: Conduct CHA based encounters on a regular basis. When "meat head" can't pass a simple Diplomacy check to avoid being thrown in jail, he'll reconsider next time making CHA so low. The flip side is that it really matters that he can't pass a CHA DC. Even if he can't, most of the time, lack of stat can be recovered by gaining skill ranks, and Conan is verrryy generous in this regard. Well, more generous compared to D&D 3.X, anyways. Only Skill Points gained from a PC'c class count as half-rank points. Skill Points gained from high INT don't, so, basically, you don't have to worry about the "dump stat" so much as you players putting INT higer than you'd like it to be.

Then there's Reputation. Starting off it's LVL+CHA mod, and Rep can be a powerful tool to a crafty player. Heck, starting off, a PC could have a 5 REP (CHA+4 plus LVL), and thereby gain a +1 REP bonus on all Intimidate, Bluff Perform and Gather Info checks. Why would I want to "dump stat" CHA if I could get +1 on skill checks, essentially for free? Not only that, but because it goes up +1 each level and an additional +1 every sixth level (when all stats get a +1 bump) the concept of CHA as a "dump stat" is more or less erased.

The last reason not to worry about a "dump stat" is shere randomness. Using the 4d6 system where players roll all four and toss out the lowest die once for each stat and arrange them where they want them only gets "dumpy" if the player generates one low number. If he generates five 8s, then basically he ends up with five "dump stats"? No, it's totally fair to allow player palcement, but if you still think that the basic bell curve is too "dump friendly", then go to allowing only 3d6 and placement. Or maybe 4d6, discard lowest die, swap two.

But the bottom line for me is work the "dump stat" twinks and make them worried about doing that. Soldiers in this world with CHA 6 makes total sense to me, though. They're not the multi-sylabic sorts we have in our modern militaries, and if players are consistantly doing it, change your behaviour; not theirs. What I've found, when I change system stuff to try to work around players trying to twink the system...you guessed it: They twink it somewhere else. Put that CHA 6 Soldier into social interactive situations and the player will learn the importance of not "dumping" the hard way without you having to come up with any new mechanics.

 

[Supplement Four]

INo, it's totally fair to allow player palcement, but if you still think that the basic bell curve is too "dump friendly", then go to allowing only 3d6 and placement. Or maybe 4d6, discard lowest die, swap two.

Or, just go with Conan 321...and you're done.

Player picks his limited swaps. Player still arranges to taste. Player still has most of the control.

It's a good compromise between the two normal systems detailed in the book (4D6, drop lowest, with no arrange vs. 4D6, drop lowest, with arrange).

 

[Sutek]

(hehe) I guess so, man. I just see it as a good compromise that player A that has a crap CHA doesnt' get XP for the social encounters, and player B who has a decent CHA does.

I think it's adding to a pot pf perfectly good soup...

 

[kintire]

Or, just go with Conan 321...and you're done.

Player picks his limited swaps. Player still arranges to taste. Player still has most of the control.

It's a good compromise between the two normal systems detailed in the book (4D6, drop lowest, with no arrange vs. 4D6, drop lowest, with arrange).

Or, still better, go with point buy.

No system produces more certainty that there will be a dump stat than random roll. If one of your stat rolls is 6, then there WILL be a dump stat... you have no choice!

Point buy removes that potential, maintains party balance (yes, I bet that traveller PC was happy... but not many other players would be so delighted at having to spend an entire campaign playing second fiddle) and allows people to create the character they want to play.

And if they keep dumping Charisma, the problem is not with the generation system, its that your game isn't using Charisma. That may ior may not be a problem. not all campaigns are of the Charisma using type. But if it is, the answer is to make it more imprtant, not to penalise players further by forcing them to put one of their high stats in a useless place!

Edit: fore spellin

 

[Supplement Four]

Or, still better, go with point buy.

Point buy is definitely not the answer. They will put enough points into all stats to avoid penalties. Random roll provides more varied, and therefore more realistic, results.

And if they keep dumping Charisma, the problem is not with the generation system, its that your game isn't using Charisma.

I use CHR because its easy to highlight the point with a Soldier character. With another type of character, a different stat may be the dump stat.

I'll use CHR based rolls in my game as needed. But, let's face it. You can roll CHR based throws in a game all day long, and a Soldier character is never going to put his highest stat into CHR.

With Conan 321, there is a chance that the highest throw will be assigned to CHR.

 

[DigitalMage]

Point buy is definitely not the answer. They will put enough points into all stats to avoid penalties.

But doesn't that mean there isn't a dump stat in the sense you are meaning, i.e. soldiers all having below average Charisma? If point buy in Conan is like D&D stats start at a minimum of 8 which really is only just below average.

Random roll provides more varied, and therefore more realistic, results.

I don't believe "realistic" is a term to use, more "varied" maybe.

 

[Spade]

These challenges to the d20 System as I play it have goaded me into finally registering after years of lurking.

Dumping a low-rolled number is a perfectly fine thing. Most geniuses are absolute fools outside a limited area of specialization, and genius covers the physical too. An absolute juggernaut of a Soldier should probably have a mental weakness. And once he's an awesome, hard-bitten veteran, his personality will have grown. Having a single lower stat that is somewhat optimal for your character build is not a bad thing- it's the usual thing. Likely, most heroic NPCs with the same levels have the same one or two dump stats. But no dump stat should be unfelt.

I see absolutely no interest in being compelled to fit a character concept to a random array of numbers. In my view, it's always better to encourage your players to come up with ideas for characters that are not hyper-specialized. And punnish those that do. This game and the Swords & Sorcery genre as a whole rewards versatility far more than any other game I've ever played. Yes, high stats are excellent, but if you don't have the versatility to deal with any kind of challenge while wearing a loincloth and looking for a large stick, you will probably die in Hyb

I have played a Soldier whose highest stat was Charisma. A Zingaran with Steely Gaze and Intricate Swordplay. His damage output was fairly low, but with Strength as his next highest stat, his Parry Defense was massive in melee. He could occupy anyone he could reach with Broad or Arming Sword. Some levels in Noble later on gave him the skill points to operate more readily on his own, and voila! I had a Sword & Sorcery Urban Adventurer that could operate on his own and evade danger when it reared it's head, or operate with a party to destroy all comers.

Remember, Swords & Sorcery as a genre is not about ordinary people thrust into heroic, extraordinary events. It's about extraordinary people wandering off from their pissant village and creating extraordinary events. A walking cliche with a twist is a very strong character in this system.

- Spade
Of the 10 page character background.

 

[Supplement Four]

But doesn't that mean there isn't a dump stat in the sense you are meaning, i.e. soldiers all having below average Charisma?

You've read my meaning wrong. It's not that Soldiers will have below average CHR, it's that, most of the time (the majority of the time--I know there will be a few exceptions--but not enough to balance out the population) players will make their lowest stat CHR. It doesn't matter if this stat is 18 or 6, most of the time, a player playing a Soldier will put the lowest one in CHR. And, that happens in point-buy as well as arrange to taste.

I don't believe "realistic" is a term to use, more "varied" maybe.

Absolutely Conan 321 is more "realistic" as well as "varied". Why? Because in reality, soldiers have CHR ranging from low numbers to middle-ground numbers to high numbers.

Because Conan 321 is more varied, it is also more "realistic" (meaning, it models the varied nature of human beings better than either the blanket arrange-to-taste or point buy).

 

[Supplement Four]

I see absolutely no interest in being compelled to fit a character concept to a random array of numbers. In my view, it's always better to encourage your players to come up with ideas for characters that are not hyper-specialized. [/size]

A lot of point-buyers say this type of thing. And, there is some merit to it. Point-buy is a viable way to design characters in games.

It's just not a method I've ever embraced, and done so only when forced to (the James Bond rpg, for example).

See...point-buy leads to "ideal" character types. You have the stronger than strong fighter. You have the incredibly intelligent mage. You have the awesomely deft thief. You have the holier-than-holy cleric.

Now, I understand that there is some variance that happens. Players are individuals, so we're not talking about specifics. We're talking about what usually happens.

And, what usually happens is that a player will build his character, mechanically, to make that character the best he can be at the chosen class. I mean, why not? Why hamper yourself? I sure as heck wouldn't blame a player for trying to make the most with the tools that he is given.

So, you give a number of points to a player and allow him to buy his character stats for the soldier he's trying to make (or, you allow him to arrange to taste a number of random rolls), and what you get is a character that looks like this:

Rolls - 6, 13, 12, 15, 11, 18

STR 18
DEX 11
CON 15
WIS 12
INT 13
CHR 6

Let's see. He's strong for melee combat. Check. He can allow his DEX to be lower since he will rely more on heavy armor and parry. Check. He's got a high CON for more hit points. Check. His INT is fairly high for skill points. Check. Magic is not enountered as much in this game, so the WIS based save is not as important, and WIS gets the second to lowest number. Check. And, finally, CHR. Something's gotta give, and CHR is the lease important of the six stats, so it gets the 6. Check.

Now, using Conan 321 let's see how interesting the character could be.

Group 1: STR, DEX, CON (the thinking here is that DEX can be the lowest number thrown).

Group 2: INT, WIS (again, we can swap to make INT higher)

Group 3: CHR (We'll get what we get.)



Rolls - STR 6, DEX 13, CON 12, INT 15, WIS 11, CHR 18

Arrange within the groups to get the final character:

STR 13
DEX 6
CON 12
INT 15
WIS 11
CHR 18

Hey! Look at that! You don't see too many Soldiers built that way, do you?

Of course you don't. That's why Conan 321 works. The player can still change this character's class (and he can multiclass later).

But, this is much more interesting than what the point-buy/arrange-to-taste method delievers.

And, who knows what the player will do with this character based on those rolls. His CHR is fantastic, so, the player will probably focus on that (a stat he would have never focused on given the choice), and run down game avenues he never would have done.



Why does this work? It's because it's easier to edit than it is to create.

If I give you a framework, it's easier to come up with a story than it is when you are forced to work with a blank slate.

For example, I could say, "Write me a background about a soldier character and tell me why he's in the city watch."

Chances are, generic stuff will appear most of the tie.

But, if I tell you, "Write me a background story about an albino soldier character and tell me why he's in the city watch." Then, that one little change--that pillar I gave you to wrap your story around and make an interesting background about this character...that one thing, makes the character come alive.

That's why random rolls are better suited to more interesting characters than point-buy or blanket arrange to taste. Random roll forces the player to work with some "givens", where as point-buy or arrange-to-tastes opens the door for generic, seen-it-before types.

 

[flatscan]

Arrange within the groups to get the final character:

STR 13
DEX 6
CON 12
INT 15
WIS 11
CHR 18

Hey! Look at that! You don't see too many Soldiers built that way, do you?

If I had to play with the system you describe, I would not choose to play a Soldier if those were my character's attributes. I would play a Scholar. So unless you make your players choose their roles first and say "no matter the attributes, you must live with your Character role choice," then you won't see a Soldier like that either.

 

[DigitalMage]

Maybe I am used to making characters who wouldn't fit your idea of what is optimal.

To me if a player has a concept then I don't feel obliged to impose a restriction on how they assign their stats (just like I don't feel I should restrict their skill or feat choice). And that obligation is not there whether the player's concept is optimal or not.

I agree that it can sometimes be fun to play a character with attributes that aren't quite what you expect. But if I want that fun I usually want more randomness in the whole of character gen, much like Warhammer Fantasy RP where you roll your professions and skills randomly as well.

So basically I like either total control or almost completely random, bits of randomness just annoys me.

BTW my comment re Realistic vs Varied, when random rolling could lead to characters with horrendously varied stats, e.g. 18 Strength with 6 Constitution as the extreme, then it isn't necessarily any more true to life than point buy.

 

[Supplement Four]

If I had to play with the system you describe, I would not choose to play a Soldier if those were my character's attributes. I would play a Scholar. So unless you make your players choose their roles first and say "no matter the attributes, you must live with your Character role choice," then you won't see a Soldier like that either.

Actually, I am limiting choice to character class to either Borderer, Soldier, or Thief. All will be Zamoran. All will be first level.

And, I'll give my players a choice on character stat generation. They can either use the first suggested method straight out of the book (Roll stats straight with no arrange to taste), or they can use the limited arrange method with Conan 321.

Their choice.

I'm sure 321 will be more popular because had the method straight out of the book been used, then this character would look like this at level 1.

STR 6
DEX 13
CON 12
INT 15
WIS 11
CHR 18

The 321 method allows them to tweak a bit, where as the first "official" method doesn't.

 

[Supplement Four]

Maybe I am used to making characters who wouldn't fit your idea of what is optimal.

Maybe. As I said, some people are "into" point-buy. That's not our thing. It never has been.

We think it "fits" some games, like James Bond, where the characters aren't true characters but more two-dimensional archetypes (not speaking of the books or the two new movies).

But, for many games, we play in a "more real" universe. Even when we play D6 Star Wars, it's got a grittier bent than the movies.

BTW my comment re Realistic vs Varied, when random rolling could lead to characters with horrendously varied stats, e.g. 18 Strength with 6 Constitution as the extreme, then it isn't necessarily any more true to life than point buy.

Disagree. There are people out there with a lot of strength and not a lot of constitution. This is even explained in official Conan books.

Check out the 2E Players Guide. A character with high STR, low CON, and low DEX is probably overweight but his muscles have grown to carry around his weight. Picture big, barrel-chested men with a lot of power, but maybe not a lot of lasting power. The PG suggests allowing these types of characters a +2 bonus on STR checks to avoid being Bull Rushedor Overrun. Also, give them a -1 penalty to Escape Artist check, and consider reducing his base speed by 5 feet.

So...a character with STR 18 and CON 6 is a very playable character. And, it represents a not-so-uncommon type of person in the real world.

On top of this, point-buy probably wouldn't turn out a character like this...which is why I continue to say that random roll, or random roll with limited arrange-to-taste delivers much more interesting, less generic, more true-to-life characters.

 

[Ichabod]

I hope everyone at this point gets that you want randomly determined normals and others want something else. Different strokes for different folks and all.

I would point out, again, that the reason I don't care much about this attribute stuff is that there are far greater balance problems in the game. If you want to min/max characters (for what I would consider a normal campaign or any campaign that wasn't just a battlemapfest), there are reasons to care about any of the attributes, there's no reason not to start out as a thief. So, while you can go on about how much you prefer realism in attributes, I'd worry a lot more about that fact that borderer and soldier should never be played by PCs at any level and that no character should start out as anything besides a thief.

But, whatever. Nobody really seems to care about how broken initial skill ranks are and lots of folks seem perfectly happy playing soldiers and other garbage classes, so it's about as useless beating this dead horse as it is worrying about what house rules someone prefers.

 

[Supplement Four]

So, while you can go on about how much you prefer realism in attributes, I'd worry a lot more about that fact that borderer and soldier should never be played by PCs at any level and that no character should start out as anything besides a thief.

Obviously not a Conan d20 fan, but I'll bite. What is it you think is "broken"? I probably won't agree, but I'm always open to what the other side of the table has to say, so to speak.

So, speak on...what's wrong with the Borderer and Soldier classes?

 

[Style]

If I were to play in a system with Conan 321 rules, I'd first think about what stats were most important, and arrange them in order. Then I'd roll them as follows:

1st (most important), 6th (least important), 3rd
2nd, 5th
4th

If I were a min/maxer that wanted to play a soldier, I'd probably arrange the stats in order of importance like so:

1. STR
2. CON
3. DEX
4. INT
5. WIS
6. CHA

That would mean I'd roll stats as follows:

STR, CHA, DEX
CON, WIS
INT

Given your rolls, would lead to the following stats:

STR 13
CHA 6
DEX 12
CON 15
WIS 11
INT 18

At which point I'd say to the DM "You heard me say I was playing a sorcerer, right?" and switch them to the following:

STR 6
CHA 12
DEX 13
CON 15
WIS 11
INT 18

 

[Ichabod]

So, while you can go on about how much you prefer realism in attributes, I'd worry a lot more about that fact that borderer and soldier should never be played by PCs at any level and that no character should start out as anything besides a thief.

Obviously not a Conan d20 fan, but I'll bite. What is it you think is "broken"? I probably won't agree, but I'm always open to what the other side of the table has to say, so to speak.

1st level soldier with 10 Int - 8 skill ranks
1st level barbarian with 10 Int - 16 skill ranks
1st level thief with 10 Int - 32 skill ranks

1st level soldier with 18 Int - 24 skill ranks
1st level barbarian with 18 Int - 32 skill ranks
1st level thief with 18 Int - 48 skill ranks

This seems balanced how?

3.5 had exactly the same problem, which is why our campaign saw a fixed amount of starting skill ranks supplemented with 1 level of your class's number of ranks and some Int modifier. In 3.5, you may be able to ignore skills as you use magic to solve any problems and if you just run dungeon crawls you never have to talk to anybody and may never have to learn how to swim. In Conan, that this system is used is utterly mindboggling. That soldiers get only 2 ranks per level is similarly mindboggling.

Note also what a complete moron you have to be to take a class at first level that gives less than 8 ranks if you ever take one of those classes later.

So, speak on...what's wrong with the Borderer and Soldier classes?

Borderer - see barbarian ... the strictly better borderer

Soldier - hope to God you never have to do anything besides fight, hope you never have to make a fear check or have deleterious spells cast on you, hope the campaign is heavy armor friendly