Don’t forget the 2:1 attribute adjustment. One can roll 3d6 or 4d6 in order and still modify the character to be closer to his desired ideal—just at a cost compared with a player who takes what the dice give him.

mabon5127 wrote:

Interesting story. I wonder how often players are successfully converted to OSR from the newer games?

Well, to be fair, it took me quite a while, and a couple of things stand out: a successful introduction to Classic Traveller (which I also run for them), and the ability to highlight how AS&SH accomplishes similar effects with much less overhead than PF. For example, Fighters are the best at fighting, without having decision trees (feats) at every level; the non-standard task resolution allows them to leverage their backgrounds to attempt just about anything, without a prescriptive list (skills) to consult; and tactics are easier, since there are fewer tactical factors to consider, though the chief one is still one's imagination. 

Grimmshade wrote:

I guess I'm the hippy, although I prefer punk. Even though I come from the dawn of the RPG, I generally allow point spread assigned Attributes.

I am another point-spread DM responsible for the slow decline of Western Civilization. 

Rolling for stats is great for grognards looking for a challenge. There is nothing new under the sun for these veteran gamers; adding the extra layer of challenge and verisimilitude with random stats and 0-level character funnels totally makes sense. 

Personally, I feel that it's important that players have characters that match the vision in their mind's eye rather than being assigned a character by the dice. I've found that most players design characters who are idealized alter-egos, branching out to more novel and challenging concepts as their experience grows. 
 

rhialto wrote:

I think it's important to discuss this before the game begins: I did with my group, knowing they were more familiar with Pathfinder and it's stultifying build process (IMO, of course ) and attribute budget.

Yeah, it is extremely important to discuss player expectations and house rules during session zero. It's frustrating to join a game and regret it because of a misleading elevator pitch or because the DM keeps all the house rules in his head. 

Last edited by Brock Savage (12/19/2017 4:26 pm)

rhialto wrote:

mabon5127 wrote:

Interesting story. I wonder how often players are successfully converted to OSR from the newer games?

Well, to be fair, it took me quite a while, and a couple of things stand out: a successful introduction to Classic Traveller (which I also run for them), and the ability to highlight how AS&SH accomplishes similar effects with much less overhead than PF. For example, Fighters are the best at fighting, without having decision trees (feats) at every level; the non-standard task resolution allows them to leverage their backgrounds to attempt just about anything, without a prescriptive list (skills) to consult; and tactics are easier, since there are fewer tactical factors to consider, though the chief one is still one's imagination. 

Neat insight! Thanks! 

Handy Haversack wrote:

I guess I'm super lucky in that none of my players ever played the newer-school games. But to me this sounds awful. Maybe I just embrace a higher-lethality game, but I find that the blowback is worse when the carefully crafted character dies an hour an in than when the third or fourth "set of stats waiting for a post hoc story" makes it to second level.

I don't know. I feel like even my letting them roll 4d6 is super indulgent and obviates even having dice at all!

It's possible I'm a bad person?

All I know is I like every bad dice roll more than any bad person.

Well said! And no, you're not a bad person. It's just a classic approach. There's nothing wrong with point-buys and superheroes either, it's just a different approach.

Handy Haversack wrote:

I guess I'm super lucky in that none of my players ever played the newer-school games. But to me this sounds awful. Maybe I just embrace a higher-lethality game, but I find that the blowback is worse when the carefully crafted character dies an hour an in than when the third or fourth "set of stats waiting for a post hoc story" makes it to second level.

I don't know. I feel like even my letting them roll 4d6 is super indulgent and obviates even having dice at all!

It's possible I'm a bad person?

All I know is I like every bad dice roll more than any bad person.

Yes, carefully-crafted characters are simply one way to play, but they're as old-school as Call of Cthulhu or RuneQuest. But the blowback consequence is spot on, and the chief reason I don't run that style of game.

foxroe wrote:

Handy Haversack wrote:

I guess I'm super lucky in that none of my players ever played the newer-school games. But to me this sounds awful. Maybe I just embrace a higher-lethality game, but I find that the blowback is worse when the carefully crafted character dies an hour an in than when the third or fourth "set of stats waiting for a post hoc story" makes it to second level.

I don't know. I feel like even my letting them roll 4d6 is super indulgent and obviates even having dice at all!

It's possible I'm a bad person?

All I know is I like every bad dice roll more than any bad person.

Well said! And no, you're not a bad person. It's just a classic approach. There's nothing wrong with point-buys and superheroes either, it's just a different approach.

No, I've met Handy face to face, he is in fact a bad person ;-)

I mean, at least he isn't an &*#%@ *and* a bad person :-)

I remember 25 or so years ago, a guy who used to run Palladium fantasy had us roll 9d6, and arrange the face results as you like on a tic-tac-toe. Your stats, in order, were the sums of the rows and columns.

Last edited by Jimm.Iblis (12/21/2017 4:38 pm)

It honestly produces some interesting results. That is to say, you can optimize a stat or two while the rest of your abilities come out... interesting. Try it out.

Last edited by Jimm.Iblis (12/21/2017 4:41 pm)