Using what you've got. That's what the Cimmerians do.

[Supplement Four]

One thing I have never in my entire life understood is why people like random stat generation. Its just one of those areas where I have no point of contact with the other person. Wierd feeling.

I use point buy in some games, as in the James Bond RPG. But, I do prefer random gen for most games.

Why? For a couple of reasons.

First, we don't get to chose who we are in life. I like how that is reflected in random gen. I don't want all my players having strong fighters, dexterous thieves, smart and wise and charismatic scholars. It's not that I don't like stereotypes--I just don't want every character to be one.

I want to see "people". Not characters.

Second, I find that characters are much more interesting if you generate them randomly and then try to puzzle together the results. Throw in some "givens" with a little creativity, and some superb--not always mechanically strong--characters appear.

Some of the most memorable characters I've had in my games were randomly generated with "weak" stats. That fact actually added to the "character" of the character. It gave the player something to develop rather than a stereotype with stereotypical problems.

And, third, I love the way random gen makes some stats harder to obtain. A player gets hot on the dice, and the character he develops, mechanically, is something else. Roll an 18 stat, and it's something to really say, "Wow," about, unlike point-buy, where, if a player wants it, he just adjusts his resources to accomdate.

I've got a character in this current campaign with these stats:

STR 13
DEX 10
CON 14
INT 11
WIS 9
CHR 17

Under point-buy, the player would have never arranged his stats like that. He rolled these, as-is, and then used the second Fate option above to re-roll STR (orignal was STR 9) and CON (original was CON 7).

Now, these stats are really having a bearing on how the character is played. Instead of making up a usual stereotypical Cimmerian Barbarian, we're looking to see what these stats "mean" about this character.

The player has decided to make him a persuasive bully. He's putting points into Intimidate. And now, the character did not finish the Ras Croi during our first game session, so that's having an impact on the development of this character, too.

It's all very interesting. I think this character benefitted immensley, role-playing wise, from random generation. I really don't think the point-buy character would be quite as interesting.

It's not that I don't see a place for point-buy. I do. I just think that random gen is a superior choice in a lot of cases.

 

[Supplement Four]

-- STORM PEACE --



The custom of storm peace evolved long ago in this Cimmerian region in response to the sudden and severe storms that plague this area. All characters native to the region should be aware of this.

The basic concept is that an automatic truce exists between all individuals and groups who seek shelter in neutral territory during extreme bad weather. Such weather is simply too dangerous for fighting, regardless of people's feelings toward one another. Storm peace is assumed to be in effect unless someone specifically rejects it. Even so, whenever two strangers meet during a storm, they often greet one another by asking, "Storm peace?" simply to ensure that the other knows and respects the tradition.

Storm peace applies to anyone who can comprehend the meaning (it has been debated whether Picts are capable of understanding the concept).

 

[tarkhan bey]

I like the idea of the Storm Peace. I used something similar in a Westermark campaign I ran about 5 years ago. The characters were scouts for the garrison at Fort Tuscelan and were escorting the daughter of Valannus back to Velitrium when a massive storm blew up.
They took shelter in a cave , only to find it occupied by a raiding band of North Hawk Picts. Nothing was said, but neither side attacked and the night passed peacefully until the storm abated.
So, In my Hyborian age at least, the Picts do understand your Storm Peace concept.
Of course, the very next day the Picts ambushed the characters on the trail and attempted to abduct the girl. :twisted:

 

[Supplement Four]

I like the idea of the Storm Peace.

I like it too. I found it in a freebie D&D adventure and thought it would work well in this campaign.

I used something similar in a Westermark campaign I ran about 5 years ago.

That campaign sounds cool!

 

[kintire]

I don't want to derail your thread into a systems discussion, so i will keep this very brief;

First, we don't get to chose who we are in life. I like how that is reflected in random gen. I don't want all my players having strong fighters, dexterous thieves, smart and wise and charismatic scholars

We don't choose our native characteristics, but we choose our professions... or our professions choose us. Why would the local recruiter pick weak warriors, the local thief choose a clumsy novice, the local scholar train a half wit? this seems less realistic to me, not more.

A player gets hot on the dice, and the character he develops, mechanically, is something else. Roll an 18 stat, and it's something to really say, "Wow

And roll a string of 10s, and say "meh".

Now, these stats are really having a bearing on how the character is played. Instead of making up a usual stereotypical Cimmerian Barbarian, we're looking to see what these stats "mean" about this character.

Why can't he invent this character himself?

 

[VincentDarlage]

One thing I have never in my entire life understood is why people like random stat generation. Its just one of those areas where I have no point of contact with the other person. Wierd feeling.

I LOVE random generation methods and despise point-buy systems. I hate the concept of a level playing field. Life doesn't work that way. Here is what I wrote about it in an S&P article once:

"Be true to the spirit of a Howardian character even in character creation. Howardian characters are not created from a 'point buy' system, which smacks of an artificial 'fairness'. Certain RPG's hinge on the artifice of fairness. CR's and point-buy systems are fine for them. Not so for Conan. Howard's characters, in metagaming sense, would not buy into any sort of constraint designed to create a level playing field. Conan would sneer at any tactic designed to provide a level playing field for the combatants. Conan disdains chivalric notions of fair-play. In Black Colossus, Conan refused to give up advantageous position. Do the same during character creation. Refuse to give up the advantage. You may not come out ahead, but the advantage is there if you use the heroic system offered in Conan the Role Playing Game. The heroic system is extremely suited in attitude and style to create Howardian characters, who would rather risk a gamble on the dice than be forced to adapt themselves to the limits of the 'point buy' system. Howard's characters routinely risk everything on the chance of gain. Refuse to submit to the level-playing field mentality."

In short, my players and myself nearly always come out ahead with random stat generation - and we just hate how point-buy systems almost always give a person some poor stats if that person wants an amazing stat in one slot. THAT is why we love random stat generation.

We also get more interesting characters with random stat generation, just as Supplement Four mentioned, although I allow players to arrange the numbers they roll however they want to make sure they get the characters they have in mind to play.

 

[kintire]

So you think that Conan tales would have been better if Howard, with the Character of a strong, clever ironwilled barbarian leader in mind, randomly determined that he was in fact a feeble, bookish, careful scholar with a stammer? I'm not sure that "Conan the Librarian" would have sold as well.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Howard did not bother with "Fairness" in what Conan DID, but he did not allow any randomness in what he WAS. He controlled everything about what Conan and his other heroes were like, and its hard to claim his stories were the worse for it!

 

[Supplement Four]

I don't want to derail your thread into a systems discussion, so i will keep this very brief;

It's a development thread, so no worries. I'll keep posting stuff that I develop for my campaign here.

We don't choose our native characteristics, but we choose our professions... or our professions choose us.

I thought we were talking about characteristics, not character class.

I normally do allow players to choose their own character class (after random stat generation). I don't want someone who wants to play a thief forced to play a cleric.

With this campaign, though, I went a different route. I set out to create a total Cimmerian Barbarian campaign--at the start. Every character would be a Cimmerian Barbarian from the same village.

But, I've also built a sandbox. It's not an event-style adventure. Whatever the players do, wherever they go, is totally up to them.

We could play the entire campaign in Cimmeria. Or, we could start traveling. It's up to the players and the story that they help create.

I set out the "givens" at the beginning, and then handed it off to the players to take it from there--partners in story telling.

Why would the local recruiter pick weak warriors, the local thief choose a clumsy novice, the local scholar train a half wit? this seems less realistic to me, not more.

What's a weak warrior?

I'd say someone with a 9 or less STR, with negatives. 10-11 is average. STR 12+ is above average.

The modifiers bears this out.

My two main PCs have a STR 14 and a STR 15. I'd say that's pretty good. It's definitely above average. And, they can raise it when their stats go up starting at 4th level.

And roll a string of 10s, and say "meh".

That's true. It happens. It's the players job to make that character interesting even though he's got low stats.

As I said in the previous post, many of the most memorable characters from my previous games were characters who were mechanically inferior.

Take that thief character from the second (god awful) Conan movie. He is cowardly and probably would have low stats--or at least average--stats if made into an RPG character. Yet, he was a hell of a character, right? He'd be fun to play.

High stats are not a requirement for having fun playing a character.

Why can't he invent this character himself?

I explained that above, but to add: One thing I dislike about most Conan game groups when I look around is that they seem to be "D&D in the Hyborian Age". You have a "party", with a Scholar and a Soldier and a Barbarian and a Temptress and a Thief, all running around together.

I didn't want that at all. If I had five players to play all those characters, I'd much rather have a party of five Barbarians, or five nomads, or maybe a Temptress and the four Soldiers from the squad that she has manipulated into doing her bidding.

That seems more like "Conan" to me, and a lot less like "D&D".

 

[Supplement Four]

We also get more interesting characters with random stat generation, just as Supplement Four mentioned, although I allow players to arrange the numbers they roll however they want to make sure they get the characters they have in mind to play.

I'm allowing that in this campaign, too, it's just that I'm doing it using my alternate Fate System. In effect, even the chance that they'll be able to arrange stats to taste is random.

The way the test is set up, it's a nearly 100% chance that they will arrange to taste even if they fail the first two tests--they'll just start the game with less Fate Points.

And, my players don't know this, but I'm going to engineer it so that they start the game with at least 3 Fate Points anyway. It's a new game to them. I want them to have the security. Maybe later, with additional characters, I'll be harder on this.

Next game session, we're going to play "20 Questions". I'm going to write up 20 questions about the background I've developed. The player who gets five question correct gets a Fate Point for his character.

In this way, they're learning the background story (a story goal), and I'm able to make sure they've got Fate Points to start the game with (once we get out of these story-based learning sessions).

 

[kintire]

I thought we were talking about characteristics, not character class

You said you didn't like everyone having strong soldiers, dextrous thieves etc. I was pointing out that if someone wants to play a soldier, it is realistic for them to be strong.

I don't want someone who wants to play a thief forced to play a cleric.

But you're quite happy with someone who wants to play a strong, handsome but not too smart guy being forced to play a weakling genius?

My two main PCs have a STR 14 and a STR 15. I'd say that's pretty good. It's definitely above average. And, they can raise it when their stats go up starting at 4th level.

Lucky them. And if they'd both rolled 6s?

That's true. It happens. It's the players job to make that character interesting even though he's got low stats

Why? why should one player have the job of trying to make joe bland interesting whereas the others get to play a hero?

As I said in the previous post, many of the most memorable characters from my previous games were characters who were mechanically inferior.

Correlation is not causation. I'm sure those players would have made their characters just as interesting with higher (or lower) stats.

High stats are not a requirement for having fun playing a character

Being a useless waste of space with nothing you can do is not fun. Nor is it realistic that you are kept around. I view your example as... unfortunate. Lets just say that I know what you were TRYING to say, but I would also refer to that same character as an excellent example of a pointless, unrealistic waste of space who resorts to absurd overacting in a desperate effort to make his character interesting, and who strains suspension of disbelief to breaking point that anyone keeps him around!

I explained that above, but to add: One thing I dislike about most Conan game groups when I look around is that they seem to be "D&D in the Hyborian Age". You have a "party", with a Scholar and a Soldier and a Barbarian and a Temptress and a Thief, all running around together.

I didn't want that at all. If I had five players to play all those characters, I'd much rather have a party of five Barbarians, or five nomads, or maybe a Temptress and the four Soldiers from the squad that she has manipulated into doing her bidding.

Your mileage may vary, of course, but I find that when people recruit groups they try to pick people who complement each other. A knowledge spoecialist, two warriors of different specialities, a spy and a scout seems a perfectly reasonable group to me. But if you do want five the same, be very careful: I have played in groups like that and what has a tendency to happen is that, gioven any challenge, someone will be the best at it, and tackle it every time. If someone is not the best at anything, they do nothing.

 

[VincentDarlage]

So you think that Conan tales would have been better if Howard, with the Character of a strong, clever ironwilled barbarian leader in mind, randomly determined that he was in fact a feeble, bookish, careful scholar with a stammer? I'm not sure that "Conan the Librarian" would have sold as well.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Howard did not bother with "Fairness" in what Conan DID, but he did not allow any randomness in what he WAS. He controlled everything about what Conan and his other heroes were like, and its hard to claim his stories were the worse for it!

What? I don't understand the relevancy of your post.

No... one should not randomly determine anything with literary characters. I never said that. I said to take the Conan attitude toward stat generation and refuse to give up the probable chance for an advantage. With the heroic method of rolling up characters, the odds are good you will beat out a point-buy system.

That is all I said. I don't know how that is relevant to anything you posted. I suspect you took part of my post out of context and extended it out to absurdity. Not sure why, since that is hardly conducive to the discussion, nor does it make the opposed view-point (that point-buy is better) any more or less valid than my view.

I could take the same tack, and say how would you like it if Howard developed Conan using a point-buy system and... ugh. I can't even imagine it.

My point was that if Conan were here (and inclined to play), and was offered a chance to make a character using a point-buy system or roll up with the Heroic system, he would see the odds (and the fun of gambling) and roll up a character. It was sort of a What Would Conan Do kind of post.

 

[Kev]

It was sort of a What Would Conan Do kind of post.

Apropos of nothing at all in this thread, I just had to say that I would love to have a shirt with "What would Conan do?" (accompanied by a suitable image, of course, so as to avoid the misperception of it being a reference to Conan O'Brien or anyone else).

I think that'd be awesome. 8)

Just sayin'.

Sorry for the off-topic comment.

 

[kintire]

What? I don't understand the relevancy of your post

Allow me to clarify: you are taking the fact that Howard's characters gambled in their actions to support the idea that gambling in character creation is true to Howard's spirit. But that's not the case.

I said to take the Conan attitude toward stat generation and refuse to give up the probable chance for an advantage

Howard created Conan, it seems, much as I create characters (only better!). He visualised the character he wanted to tell stories about, and then designed his capabilities accordingly. That IS the "points buy" system, or the literary equivalent. He didn't allow randomness or gambling any footing at all in developing the character. That's what design systems allow you to do: develop the character you want to play and play him/her/it.

 

[VincentDarlage]

Howard created Conan, it seems, much as I create characters (only better!). He visualised the character he wanted to tell stories about, and then designed his capabilities accordingly. That IS the "points buy" system, or the literary equivalent. He didn't allow randomness or gambling any footing at all in developing the character. That's what design systems allow you to do: develop the character you want to play and play him/her/it.

That has never been my experience with point buy systems. I never get the character I want with them. I always end up with at least two or three scores that are fairly crappy (when I make a few scores exceptional, it always seems to lower other stats). With Conan's heroic method, I always get the character I want. I don't have to borrow from Peter to pay Paul, so to speak (borrow from Wisdom to have a higher Strength, for example). I don't like sacrificing points in one area to have better points in another.

 

[Supplement Four]

So you think that Conan tales would have been better if Howard, with the Character of a strong, clever ironwilled barbarian leader in mind, randomly determined that he was in fact a feeble, bookish, careful scholar with a stammer? I'm not sure that "Conan the Librarian" would have sold as well.

Conan is interesting to read because he's unique in his world. He's decended from Atlantean blood, destined to be a king--the most likely of sorts, a barbarian among the more civilized people.

Not ever character Conan comes into contact with is a big and strong and kick-ass as Conan is. If Howard wrote that way--"Hey, look! ANOTHER strong barbarian type, just like Conan!"--his stories would seem false, unrealistic, and boring.

For me, the same holds true for an RPG.

I don't want every warrior I meet to have his largest attribute in STR and his lowest one in WIS or CHR.

Random generation puts spice in the game. It's also a spring board for major creativity.

 

[Supplement Four]

But you're quite happy with someone who wants to play a strong, handsome but not too smart guy being forced to play a weakling genius?

Not true. I want the players to be happy. The system, as I've set it up, is quite capable of making "good" (mechanically speaking) characters most of the time.

If a player gets off a couple of crappy throws, say 7 - 6 - 9 - 14 - 17 - 12. The player has options. I can attempt to re-roll the 7- 6 - and 9 if he throws a Test of Fate. The cost to him is that he'll start the game with less or no Fate Points.

Or, the player can make one Test of Fate and re-arrange his stats to taste.

You can get just about any type of character you want out of that. No, not everybody is going t have 18's. But, I don't want them to. I want a score of 18 to be rare, and if someone gets lucky and gets it, I want them to feel like they've won the lottery.

Correlation is not causation. I'm sure those players would have made their characters just as interesting with higher (or lower) stats.

I don't think so. Certainly, you'll hardly ever see theri highest stat put in CHR or WIS unless they are spellcasters. You sure wouldn't see a Barbarian like that with point-buy.

Yet, it happened in my random gen game.

And, the character is developing quite nicely, in unexpected ways.

Being a useless waste of space with nothing you can do is not fun.

It seems like you base your "fun" and judge the worth of a character based on his stats only.

Stats are only half of it. What the player does with those stats is the other side.

I had a player once who threw 222 for his physical stats in a Classic Traveller game. The guy became a doctor. We made up an elaborate background for him detailing how he was afflicted with this rare disease, spent most of his childhood in hospitals, and became a doctor when he was older.

The guy, because of his stats, got some special equipment. It fit his "story". He started the game with this neat grav chair. You'd think he'd shirk from the action, but, no, this guy was always up front. The Players used the chair to scout a lot, as it could raise its elevation. The player was always in the center of it.

And, he had a great time playing the guy--I can guarrantee you it was much more memorable to him than if he had played a ho-hum, regular, everyday hero. He took his negatives and turn it into a postive for the game.

You don't get that type of thing with point buy. (Well, I can't say "never", but it's highly unlikely that a point buy Scholar in Conan would start the game with STR 3, CON 3, and DEX 3.

It can happen in random gen, though.

 

[Supplement Four]

... A Thought ...

I'm thinking of the future of the campaign. My players seem to be extremely into what I've developed so far, and all indications, at this point, will be that we will never leave Cimmeria.

As I've said before, I'm trying to create a sandbox for my players to explore. If they want to leave Cimmeria for whatever reason, then I'll follow them, trying to stay one step ahead of them.

Then again, if they want to just stay around Seven Stones for much of the campaign, I'm good with that, too. I'm sure I can figure plenty to do.



Given that second thought... I was thinking of something massive happening to Cimmeria. Something along the lines of Venarium again.

I haven't made it clear what time my campaign is set. I could actually play out Venarium by having my timeline set appropriately.

What I was originally thinking is that I'd set the thing when Conan is king of Aquilonia, during some of the troubles he has--either when he takes the crown or during the time of Hour of the Dragon. I was thinking maybe of an Aquilonian Baron or Duke, seizing the opportunity during the chaos, to ride north into Cimmeria and attempt to carve out a new kingdom for himself.

Either way, I've got a major event happening in Cimmeria--an epic one in which I could wrap around the heroes.

Got any thoughts on this?

 

[kintire]

Random generation puts spice in the game. It's also a spring board for major creativity.

So you are firmly convinced that no one can provide their own creativity? That everyone who points-buy designs will produce cookie cutter clones?

That's awful.

It seems like you base your "fun" and judge the worth of a character based on his stats only.

Stats are only half of it. What the player does with those stats is the other side.

Of course stats are only half of it. They just happen to be the half we are talking about. It is hardly fair to take a conversation comparing two kinds of stat generation systems to say that I'm only interested in stats, now is it?

And in fact, that's one of my objections to rolled stats. Lets say for a moment that your player has wanted to play that doctor. Maybe he's just seen X Men and has been inspired by Doctor Xavier. Yes, he's inspired: a weak feeble man who can hardly walk but with a powerful intellect, refusing to be defeated by his physical weakness. He picks up the dice: Str 18, Dex 16, Con 17...

Well, that's a very promising character idea crashing and burning before his very eyes.

(oh and note: contrary to your hints, this is a character idea defeated by the fact that stats are too GOOD. Its not just about getting all high stats).

And, he had a great time playing the guy--I can guarrantee you it was much more memorable to him than if he had played a ho-hum, regular, everyday hero. He took his negatives and turn it into a postive for the game.

You don't get that type of thing with point buy. (Well, I can't say "never", but it's highly unlikely that a point buy Scholar in Conan would start the game with STR 3, CON 3, and DEX 3.

It can happen in random gen, though.

In random gen, what you will often get is exactly the average character you complain about above. I notice you don't quote any memorable characters who rolled a whole string of bland averages.

Okay, I have taken up enough of your thread... apologies for the jack. To sum up, you believe that people should not be allowed to play the character they want because they are unimaginitive minimaxers who need to be forced to be creative by a random element, and that someone who does develop a strong idea of what they want to play must be penalised fate points in exchange for the right t play a character a bit more like their inspiration.

Once again, I just do not get it.

 

[Supplement Four]

So you are firmly convinced that no one can provide their own creativity? That everyone who points-buy designs will produce cookie cutter clones?

That's awful.

I didn't say that. If you read my first post on this, I say that I do see a place for point buy. It's an optional rule in some games (as it is in Conan) for people, like you, who like that sort of thing. Typically, though, I think random roll is a superior method. (Of course I do, otherwise, I'd be using point buy.)

I've got a 1st level Cimmerian Barbarian in my game, right now, who's highest attribute is Charisma.

He's not looking to be an Oracle or Blind Bard (at least, he hasn't indicated that to me, yet), so he's not looking to be one of the few spell-casting Cimmerians (although I may try to steer him that way in the game and see if he bites, playing to his strengths).

Right now, he's just a Cimmerian Barbarian Warrior. With a 17 CHR.

Don't get me wrong, but I doubt that would happen in point buy.

In random gen, what you will often get is exactly the average character you complain about above.

I've got a Barbarian with a CHR rating has his highest score, three points above his STR!

I wouldn't call that "avg".

I'd call it unique and interesting. Which is why I like random gen over point buy.

Obviously, you're wrong about random gen providing bland characters.

To sum up, you believe that people should not be allowed to play the character they want because they are unimaginitive minimaxers who need to be forced to be creative by a random element, and that someone who does develop a strong idea of what they want to play must be penalised fate points in exchange for the right t play a character a bit more like their inspiration.

That's a lot of words you've put in my mouth with a heck of a spin. I've never said any of that quite the way you put it.

Once again, I just do not get it.

If you've never experienced the fun of discovering a character rather than making a pre-conceived design, then you never will "get it".

It's a different approach to character building.

Point-buy is a method whereby a player, with an idea for a character, allocates his resources in order to best create that ideal.

Random gen is a method where you start with little (usually some) idea of what the character will be, roll the dice, and then discover what you've got.

You let the dice tell you, and you make decisions about the character based on the rolls.

It's quite fun. It's very creative. And, it addicts me with a pull much stronger than I've ever gotten with a point-buy game.

 

[kintire]

Obviously, you're wrong about random gen providing bland characters

"Obviously" you have found one character who isn't. d6 rolled stats tend strongly to the average value. Most stats will be average. Characters with all average stats are frequent. You don't get that under points buy...

That's a lot of words you've put in my mouth with a heck of a spin. I've never said any of that quite the way you put it.

And yet you sharply penalise anyone with a prior character conception: they have to spend fate points to change anything, and if they fail your test of fate (randomness again... why?) then they spend fate points for nothing.

If you've never experienced the fun of discovering a character rather than making a pre-conceived design, then you never will "get it".

I've tried it: many times. For every wonderful discovery there's a Klutzo the clumsy nonentity with no role in the party and three Mr Blands.

Still, each to his own.