Why do you enjoy Rolling to determine character attributes?

[Farwalker]

To address it from a slightly different angle: there's an investment principle involved.

What you invest in (including time) you will naturally care more about. For example in this case because it took some "effort" - in this case time spent getting a good roll - not only is there a sense of accomplishment when you get a "really good roll", it's also not so easy to just dump that character and start a different one. Net result, you value the character more, you get into the game more, you enjoy it more, and so forth.

Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

[silverkitty]

My answer to the Original Poster is: "I don't enjoy it, but I have to click it a few dozen times to get a good character in this game, so I put up with it."

My response to intermediary posts is that, while I see your points, I value things more based on mental investment rather than time investment. Give me 75 attribute points and I'll spend more time thinking about how to allocate them than I spent spinning random numbers, and I'll care more because of the thought I put into it.

Nevertheless, it's a fact of the game - it is what it is - so I put up with rolling and click a lot hoping for 14s where I need 'em.

[MaximB]

I do not like this "random" system so much.
If there were "sets" of character classes with "some" points allocated to them, and you still have points left to add - it would be so much better imo.

Like, wanna play a fighter ? why waste points on int and wisdom ?
Choose a fighter "set" without all the useless wasted points and add your own.

P.S
I am NOT talking about "full" sets like we have already, the point is waste as little points as possible and make the customization suite your character by adding the points later (after the "set").

Maybe for Book 3 ?

[Farwalker]

My response to intermediary posts is that, while I see your points, I value things more based on mental investment rather than time investment. Give me 75 attribute points and I'll spend more time thinking about how to allocate them than I spent spinning random numbers, and I'll care more because of the thought I put into it.

True enough - although with an allocation system once you figure out how to spend those points you can very quickly do it again if you want another character a bit different (where you can't just use a "start" saved game).

Which is fine with me, for myself at that point I pull out the hex editor and pretty much skip the roll process.

[Forral]

Which is fine with me, for myself at that point I pull out the hex editor and pretty much skip the roll process.

That's a very interesting approach. I might consider doing that myself. I'd have to determine some house rules for deciding what would be the default minimum & maxium stats, and the total amount of allowed points for allocation though.

It's important for me to optimize my character, while at the same time being able to tell myself that I'm not cheating. Otherwise there'll be no accomplishment to my victories and successes in the game. It relates closely to the topic I started a while back, about the implementation of books and trainers (Yeah, the one that got locked ). In the case of those trainers and books, I found myself caught between a rock and a hard place in trying to decide where the line was drawn between intelligently taking advantage of the system in place, and where it turned into lame abuse of the mechanic.

I guess it's somewhat similar with the attribute rolling for me. I feel that if I just roll and get shitty stats I'll have a really weak character. If I keep re-rolling untill I get an impressive distrubtion of statistics, I feel like I'm undeserving of the power granted to me, and that I'm a lame little cheater that might as well have played on reduced difficulty. Finding the middle ground is damned near impossible for me.

That's why I often lobby for gameplay mechanics that relies as little as possible on randomness, and instead rewards tactical choices in gameplay and character building. When you finally win, it would then be because *you* made the good choices and you prepared well for the occasion, rather than having lady luck on your side- which gives you all the more reason to drum your chest and howl like Tarzan.

[Kelakhai]

I see a good point to rolling attributes.
When you already know the game well, you can still play a "new adventure" by telling yourself you'll take the first roll to come out and adapt to it. And, so far, that's the only real interest I see.

Now, why it's enjoyed... (beyond the vintage "I like the dice !" thing)
Well, that's obvious... Reroll until you get the higher stats ever and be far stronger than any point-based character ever made. Don't ever accept any without at least 96 stats points.

I personnaly don't like that system since I really think everyone'll be doing the same so it's pretty much useless. It's even more useless because of the additionnal stats points to add... They clean up all the small differencies that could have existed, to the point I ask myself really why it's not "you got to create your char with 110 stats points".

All for the sake of dices ?

Sorry, bad english, I hope I got myself understood well...

[Kendahke]

I use this method to give me more double digit stats without having to use up the points allotted when building the character at the beginning.

[Lightning]

Yeah, this is one aspect of character creation in these two games that I strongly dislike. One simple change in it would make me happy with it: do not set-in-stone assign where each randomly rolled attribute goes. Let the player decide. This way, if you have it in mind to play a mage, you don't have to constantly re-roll because you're getting craptastic scores in INT/WIS. You can just put whatever your highest random rolls are in the attributes that are important for the kind of character you want to play. This is how pretty much every tabletop RPG I've played does it (if the GM isn't using point-allocation systems). I don't see any reason why this shouldn't also be an option in Eschalon.

[tungprc]

I'm of the gambler persuasion. I love gambling a good roll on the chance of a great roll. It's a favorite mini-game of mine and I love that it's in Eschalon. It's very similar to the reload mechanic also prevalent in the game. Maybe in Book III, if there is one, BW could add a 10% bonus to the player who takes a point buy option versus optimal roll. I'll always spin till I win, but I don't mind people who want a different style.

[Farwalker]

I'm of the gambler persuasion. I love gambling a good roll on the chance of a great roll. It's a favorite mini-game of mine and I love that it's in Eschalon. It's very similar to the reload mechanic also prevalent in the game. Maybe in Book III, if there is one, BW could add a 10% bonus to the player who takes a point buy option versus optimal roll. I'll always spin till I win, but I don't mind people who want a different style.

Now that's an excellent idea! Setting a total number of points that can be applied as desired, with some min/max of course, where the point "budget" is less than any self-respecting power-roller would ever accept, and then give them a score bonus for playing with the standardized (and somewhat lower) number of points... I like it!

[OobleckTheGreen]

I prefer the point pool system.

It only takes 30 seconds to figure out the MIN/MAX numbers a given rolling system, and once you understand the system, it's not really gambling. I think Eschelon II gives up to 14 points to base stats, and it doesn't seem to have a MAX SUM. I'm guessing it's actually possible to get 14 in all of them (though I'm nowhere near patient enough to actually test my theory).

[Gorgon Rider]

I'm guessing it's actually possible to get 14 in all of them (though I'm nowhere near patient enough to actually test my theory).

I would say yes, it is. I know I've rolled six 14s with the other two numbers as double digits (although I can't recall exactly what they were), so I don't doubt if you wanted to roll for hours/days/years/ you could eventually hit all 14s.