Forums of the Megaverse®

For humans...

3D6, +1D6 when needed?
4D6, drop or add the lowest one?
5D6, drop the 2 lowest or add the highest one?
3D8?
4D8, drop the lowest one?
Or what?
Do you reroll 1s, 2s, or is there a number you must roll above?

EVERY GM is different.

I like 3D8, reroll 1s one time.

I let my players, roll 3 line of complete stats , then I let them choose the best line.. NOT the best Numbers, the complete line, they r not allowed to pick and choose the best number from one line and move them to another.. that would unbalance the game IMO.. if they max out a Stat they get to roll on xtra die, if the roll another 6 on a 6d6 they add 3 more points and that's it.
As far as how many die to roll for a race I just use the 2ND EDITION stat roll for the races, and its worked for all of us so far....

I use the rules in the book.

By the book, except that I allow 1 reroll for any stat the PC wishes to do. Stats aren't so important in the sense one does not receive a negative for a low stat. Even if there are no bonuses, I feel the character will do just fine. High stats are not a requirement in PF.

Follow the book.

pblackcrow wrote:For humans...

3D6, +1D6 when needed

reroll 1s, 2s,

these

3D6 for a single stat line, put stats where desired for humans. Other races roll as normal.

Seconded. Higher stats usually translates to less roleplaying and more rollplaying.

This is false. People who like rollplaying usually translate into more rollplaying.

houghtam wrote:Just out of curiosity, when you allow players to put stats where desired, where are the most common destinations? My guess would be PS/PP/PE. Why? Look at the bonuses. Hit harder, hit better, stay alive longer.

..and roll your way through the game...

By the book.

Sometimes in human only games we will roll 3D6 eight times and allocate to attributes of our choosing; sometimes.

MADMANMIKE wrote:I use the rules in the book.

Egads...even Kevin Siembieda doesn't use the rools in da book.

I let my players use the best 3 out of 4 dice.

For humans, I have them roll 3d6 nine times, re-roll all 1's and they get to chose where to place the best eight(IQ,ME,MA,PE,PS,PP,PB,Spd)

If they roll 16,17,18 they get to roll another d6 and ad that to that stat (no re-rolling of dice on the bonuses). If they roll a 6 again, then they get to add one more d6 to that stat, but that is it after that no matter what they roll.

Alot like the book, except I let them chose where they put their stats. I do this for any race that has multiple 3d6 stats, but they are only interchangable with other 3d6 stats

houghtam wrote:

Cinos wrote:3D6 for a single stat line, put stats where desired for humans. Other races roll as normal.

Seconded. Higher stats usually translates to less roleplaying and more rollplaying.

This is false. People who like rollplaying usually translate into more rollplaying.

Hmmm, that's your opinion, but in my experience, those with higher stats, especially PS/PP/PE, are much more likely to choose to attack something to resolve the problem. Weighting stats to be higher only fosters an environment to use those stats.

Just out of curiosity, when you allow players to put stats where desired, where are the most common destinations? My guess would be PS/PP/PE. Why? Look at the bonuses. Hit harder, hit better, stay alive longer.

I.Q and M.E, followed by P.P, then P.E, then a mix between PS, Spd, M.A, and P.B, depends a lot on character concept though. Making a big dumb smashy orc (or say rifts, an implusive, irresponsible jucier who opts for might makes right), is no less Role Playing than being a swave talker. You have a role to play. Most of my players find the Smashy orc to be the most challinging role because you are often forced into fools gambits or poor choices to fit your character, when players know you get more with Honey then viniger, and that fighting your way to winning is typically the most difficult and least rewarding (in terms of material gains, since you're expending resources to get resources, while with talking, you generally don't expend many, if any, resources to gain the same or more resources, since you're also likely to take the resources that would have been used to defend what you where trying to take).

As an example, in my long running game, one character opted to play a brute who liked to live in the moment, was highly antagonistic towards others (love to Moo at minatuars), and almost got their healer killed by being disruptive to his attempts to talk down their opponent. Rather than gaining an ally, and their connects, they got completely cut off, and where forced into a pointless fight, spending weeks (and thus a lot of gold) recovering from it. Trying to look down on a Role player just because they enjoy combat, or more importantly, their character enjoys combat (or just does not think things through) is arrogant at best, You can role play while so called 'roll playing', even the act of fighting itself can tell you a lot about a character. Do they avoid the conflict? Do they actively flee when presented with violance? What if their friends risk getting hurt? What stakes would that character flee from? Death? Risk of another? How does that character fight? Do they brute their way through it? Try and use Shock and Awe? Create flanks and fall back points? WHY does he create fall back points? Is it training? Is it a desire to prove his brains can beat brawn? WHY does he brute through fights? Is he of a stance that spending so much time on practicing for war only encourages it and just finishing it fast is for the best of all? Does he want to bring focus on him, thus protecting others around him?

To continue this tangent a moment (those reading for the OP of the thread, feel free to stop reading two paragraphs ago), in another game, the group was 100% pure evil, split into 3 characters, each a general arch type of evil, one was passionate, though thoughtful, he was prone to bursts of rage when offended, acts of true diabolicalness, but deep down, he wanted to be loved, to be praised and admired by others, he simply did not care HOW that praise came. He never engaged in an active fight, and would let minions do that, and would flee like a little girl if directly confronted by a real opponent (unless provoked or insulted, he'd then rush headlong into foolish engagements and often need saving, the player, KNEW of course these were nearly unwinnable fights, and his party hated him for it, but it was his character). His brother, was all about control, he didn't care about the praise or the love, he cared about control, he wanted power and did everything he could, beyond lower his pride, to get it. He took no insult and any informality from anyone but his brother would instantly make a lasting grudge, and he'd spend entire sessions getting back at NPC's how had affronted him (even allowing an entire flank of their growing little kingdom to collapse, setting the group back months of effort). The last was a Nihilist, and just wanted the world to end. He was the most difficult to play character, as his motivations where exceedingly hard to cope with and understand, so to avoid just being arbitrary it was the most demanding job to play, his character set up was Assassin / Barbarian (While that seems odd at a glance, understand this is with mods, the two classes work very well together as a combo with the rule set i"m using). His goal was to end one on one fights almost instantly. He'd call out the biggest opponent and use them as an example, he'd brutally take them down in the bloodiest, most wanton way possible. He'd insult them, get under their skin, and provoke them to an emotional state of poor judgement. For no reason but that his character understood it could end an entire war instantly, much less small group dealings. He had no desire to waste time and resources on bickering, he'd rather take over his opponents, so he could in the end, destroy his two 'partners', and everything else in one go. It was the most brilliant merge of roll and role playing I had seen up to that point for such a hard to play character.

Now, back to the topic. Or closer to the topic at least, rather than a complete tangent set to provide examples of why I hate the term Roll Player when used to talk about any player or group that doesn't want to get rolled in a fight (see what I did thar?). The Whys; I.Q Few players want a reason to be denied the ability to use a clever plan because their character is too dumb, and skill use is huge, and I.Q is the only good way to get skills up. M.E; this one is a game mechanic reason, people want resolve in their characters, and know how potent say, Mind Mages can be, and this is the only way to defend against that. Once I started adding in ways to get some Save vs Psi into classes and Skills, M.E's focus lowered a bit. P.P; Too good, Dodge and Parry grouped as one, with some strike added in? What's not to love? The remaining stats only depend on the character's role in the group, not everyone needs a High M.A, one, maybe two for the average party, someone's gotta be the mouth piece of the party, though low MA groups are really funny to watch flounder and it often makes for good RP. PS if they're melee, in Rifts, this stat is almost completely ignored. Physicals you want for PP can bump it up anyway, and PS just doesn't do much in Rifts. YA I have more carry weight, good thing I don't have a car, or a cyborg, or PA's, or a hand truck. P.E since no on likes to get one shot in Palladium, so little bits of HP help, and more to the point, the same reason ME is taken, it's hard to find Save vs Magic to avoid things like Charm, Carpet (post nerf when saving did something), and stuff like that. After I added skill ways to get save vs Magic, it dropped off the radar until I made it leave a bigger footprint in P.P.E and HP.

Two of my players always put an above average roll into P.B as well, out of personal dignity.

Carpets. They hold the blood in better than straight plastic.

The Beast wrote:Carpets. They hold the blood in better than straight plastic.

Ohhhhhhhh. That's what this thread is about? Man, see I can't suggest rolling at all then, better to chop first.

Depends on the game- the current epic one, 1 year into a 5 year campaign, I have allowed best of 2 rolls for each stat. This has led to some interesting facts- a player will choose a lower stat if it fits his image of the character. It has happened more than once.
Usually, though, I go by the book.

houghtam wrote:A weakness is not having "only" three PCs with exceptional strength and Monty Hall's Treasure Trove of Magical Awesomeness to face a horde of 10 Grimbor. A weakness is having three more or less average PCs running across 1 Grimbor and your character having the SPD of 6...but the IQ of 16. Quick! What to do?

This is still faulty logic, a Spd of 16 and IQ of 6 is still a weakness, and those 3 PC's with exceptional strength can tell a story just as easy as the average ones, it has nothing to do with their stats. It's not an underdog story, but that hardly invalidates it as a story. Superman still has a story, even when there's narry a Kyptonite to be found. In the Sandman, it is Rare to see Dream confronted with something he can't easily deal with in a combative sense, but he still has a character arch, and the suspense is in what and why's of what he's doing, not the "How's he gonna survive this?". And both of those characters would be the most munchkined's statlines I've ever seen (I mean Superman even has a freakishly low IQ, since clearly it's not needed for fighting!).

Cinos wrote:

houghtam wrote:A weakness is not having "only" three PCs with exceptional strength and Monty Hall's Treasure Trove of Magical Awesomeness to face a horde of 10 Grimbor. A weakness is having three more or less average PCs running across 1 Grimbor and your character having the SPD of 6...but the IQ of 16. Quick! What to do?

This is still faulty logic, a Spd of 16 and IQ of 6 is still a weakness, and those 3 PC's with exceptional strength can tell a story just as easy as the average ones, it has nothing to do with their stats. It's not an underdog story, but that hardly invalidates it as a story. Superman still has a story, even when there's narry a Kyptonite to be found. In the Sandman, it is Rare to see Dream confronted with something he can't easily deal with in a combative sense, but he still has a character arch, and the suspense is in what and why's of what he's doing, not the "How's he gonna survive this?". And both of those characters would be the most munchkined's statlines I've ever seen (I mean Superman even has a freakishly low IQ, since clearly it's not needed for fighting!).

I'm not arguing against you here, but I am with houghtam; I find the underdog story much more entertaining, and much more relatable. My oldest gaming buddy prefers to have characters that cannot be harmed and can usually defeat his opponents with ease; I cannot fathom where the fun is in that... it seems to me that instead of trying to get into a character, he's trying to hide from himself within it...

houghtam wrote:

Cinos wrote:

houghtam wrote:A weakness is not having "only" three PCs with exceptional strength and Monty Hall's Treasure Trove of Magical Awesomeness to face a horde of 10 Grimbor. A weakness is having three more or less average PCs running across 1 Grimbor and your character having the SPD of 6...but the IQ of 16. Quick! What to do?

This is still faulty logic, a Spd of 16 and IQ of 6 is still a weakness, and those 3 PC's with exceptional strength can tell a story just as easy as the average ones, it has nothing to do with their stats. It's not an underdog story, but that hardly invalidates it as a story. Superman still has a story, even when there's narry a Kyptonite to be found. In the Sandman, it is Rare to see Dream confronted with something he can't easily deal with in a combative sense, but he still has a character arch, and the suspense is in what and why's of what he's doing, not the "How's he gonna survive this?". And both of those characters would be the most munchkined's statlines I've ever seen (I mean Superman even has a freakishly low IQ, since clearly it's not needed for fighting!).

Yes, a SPD of 16 and an IQ of 6 is still a weakness, but tell me, how are you going to roll a 6 if you're re-rolling 1's and 2's? I'm no statistician, but something tells me you're going to have a hard time doing it. Re-rolling or modifying stats has one purpose: to make characters more survivable. If there is another use for re-rolling stats, I'd love to hear it. Now to me, if I need to make my characters more survivable, I'm looking at my style of GMing to determine if, maybe I'm doing too much fighting? Maybe I'm asking too much of my PCs? Something to figure out why I need to go against what's stated in the book.

What is a challenge to me if all of my stats are above average or better?

Now, like I said, everyone has their own style of play. If it weren't for all of us, Palladium, D&D, none of that would have ever survived. I just don't understand the fun, challenge, or interest in playing a character who is at least decent at everything. That's why I divorced myself from the second edition system and stuck with what I liked. I mean seriously? Boxing, Body Building, Athletics and Martial Arts? Dude, you're first level and you've been asked to escort a delivery of fine wines to a neighboring kingdom. You're not Bruce Lee.

Just my $.02.

As to "Whats a challenge" obviously opponents with above averages or better. Many players don't care for a game where they're escorting fine wines. They want some high adventure and not a game where they feel like they're stuck in the same dead-end job they're in during life. Now don't get me wrong, if doing the low end stuff is your cup of tea, go for it, I'm all for wide range of play. But most players want some spice of combat and a feeling of power from their games (I don't mean offence, but I tend to term that point of a players gamer life span as the adolencet phase, many players stunt their growth here, just as many people do). I personally don't like players who can't gimp themselves during character creation.

You know what other character would take Boxing, Body Building, Athletics, and Martial Arts? A character that likes sports. Perhaps one who's planning on using this wine delivery money to pay for a renown military academy. Hell, my brother has practiced Marital Arts, ex-Military, now getting really deep into boxing. He's a cook. Clearly not a single one of those helps him cook. But it's what he fell into to pay for the bills and his hobbies. He's still ripped and easily capable of fighting. You can have your level 1's be just fine by taking skills like that, because any opponent they might fight have access to the exact same stuff, and should be rolled up (or have their stats) selected in the same manner as the players where given.

As to how re-rolls affect, that's very hard math, and it's open to some interpretation. Like are only the first 1/2's of the roll set re-rolled? Or are the players not allowed to roll 1/2 at all (At which point, they're not rolling D6's, they're rolling D4+2's), which should make the average character's stat around a 12 to 13, so as far as Palladium games is concerned, 0 sum, since you're still not getting a bonus. It favors Physically set characters a bit more, since you'll expect +2-4 HP, and you're closer to being able to push over into bonus' via physical skills. With the standard D20 attributes which are common, 4D6, Drop the lowest, you change the deviation by about 2.7, making average 12-13, but it's more likely to spike, and favors the high end.


And lastly;

If there is another use for re-rolling stats, I'd love to hear it.

To make the game more enjoyable for your players. If it is what -they- enjoy, should you not be paying attention to this desire / need?

I use the base rules with some modifications. I am off the opinion that these adventurers are above average, and such will have a better chance at exceptional attributes. With that in mind I begin with the rule using D6 that 1=6. Next for assigned number of dice to be rolled, add one extra die and toss the lowest when tallying the total.
This means there is a good chance for the character to get a bonus die added to their stats! Here there is aslight change, and 1=1, not 6, however if a nat 6 IS rolled, they can roll again and so on up to a limit of 30.
Exceptional rolls are 17 or 18 on 3d6 rolls and 12's on 2d6 rolls. Any roll that has a + or over 3 die do not get that option, except for all natural 6's.
I let every player have the option of re-rolling a single stat of their choice, but hey must take the result even if it is lower than the first go.
Humans do not get the above choice. They may roll one extra stat period, then assign the stats to the location of their choice since all rolls are a 3d6 base.
for Psionics I follow the basic rules and table with a minor twist-
roll a 00 (read as 100) then the character is a minor Psionic with double power and spells. I extend this also to those races listed as having no Psionics also. If a Troll char rolls a 00 then he is the Double minor psi
I do this as the all minds are amazing, even those of Orcs, Ogres and Gnomes.

3d6 reroll ones, move the stats to where you want them.
more than 50% of the time everyone at the table has a char with a high IQ and what ever stat is best for their OCC and less just walking beef sticks searching for battle.

I go with the standard rules with a slight twist (and only apply this to the 3d6 average stats)

4d6 Remove the lowest If 16 or greater allow to add the lowest.


6,6,5,5
6+6+5=17 +5 would be 22

If by some chance someone got four 6's i would cap it there

pblackcrow wrote:For humans...

3D6, +1D6 when needed?
4D6, drop or add the lowest one?
5D6, drop the 2 lowest or add the highest one?
3D8?
4D8, drop the lowest one?
Or what?
Do you reroll 1s, 2s, or is there a number you must roll above?

EVERY GM is different.

I like 3D8, reroll 1s one time.

4d6 drop/add the lowest.
Re-roll 1s, sometimes 2s depending on the power level of the campaign.

Complete stat set, if first blows, can roll a second & choose. A third set might be allowed if it's a high-power game, or especially heroic.

I haven't played PF yet, but in HU, we always did 4D6 drop lowest. In PF, I would just do 1 extra D6 per attribute, drop lowest. Roll in order, but attributes with the same number of dice can be swapped to qualify for O.C.C.'s

As a GM, I like characters to have at least one or two bonuses. a +1 or 2 to strike is not going to be a huge deal in the long run, but it gets players excited at low levels. As a player, I always like playing quick, agile smooth talkers, so I would always look to max my PP, MA, and at least have a decent PB.

MaxxSterling wrote:Follow the book.

This.

3D6 per attribute, in the order they're listed.

The only time I allow an alteration is to raise an attribute to a minimum required to play the class the player wants. I don't believe in restricting class selection based on random chance.

J. Lionheart wrote:

MaxxSterling wrote:Follow the book.

This.

3D6 per attribute, in the order they're listed.

The only time I allow an alteration is to raise an attribute to a minimum required to play the class the player wants. I don't believe in restricting class selection based on random chance.

I Agree with that second part whole heartly, if a pc wants to be a mage let them be one.

By the book, but I also don't watch people roll up stats. Which means I know they do whatever until they get something they're happy about. If I had them roll in front of me, I'd probably let them re-roll their whole line if it just sucked or didn't allow them to play what they wanted. You don't need high stats, but some people like them. To limit a player in any way just because you don't like it is detracting from their enjoyment. If a character is going to be a problem in your game, talk to the player about it and wrangle them a little more inline. But if someone naturaly rolls a killer set of attributes right in front of me, I gaurantee I'll let them play it.

Bottom line is that the GM has to take all characters into consideration. I've always had a "roleplayer vs rollplayer" dynamic in my games. The key is synergy. Let the roleplayers investigate and play their background rich characters. And when combat starts, they can hide behind the rollplayers. It's about respecting the other players no matter what aspect of the game they enjoy. Attributes are just a numerical means of interracting with the imaginary environment you've created. To put so much focus and energy into them seems like a waste.

3d6 + 1d6 if 16 or higher
reroll 1's and 2's. (GM house rule)

But to be fair to the GM (My uncle) he was teaching a 10yr and a 7yr old to play. While we were able to play our attributes to an extent (Matt your character is strong and tough, but can't take being teased very well. Nate your character is very smart, ok in a fight, but he's not popular with others and once he reaches a certain point of teasing he snaps. He'll either break down crying [remember we were little kids] or start tearing things up).

The rerolls and higher stats we were given were largely given to keep inexperienced (in gaming and making smart choices) players/pc's alive. It might not have been canon or even close, but we had a blast playing. Having fun, IMHO, is what RPG's are all about.

That said my brother and I are now in our mid 30's. I still play using the same rules..because that's what I've always used and until I started trying to teach someone the PB rule system I didn't know it wasn't cannon. Old habits die hard, but they're good for keeping new players from getting discouraged when there pc is too low statted to survive even the weakest encounter.

--Nate

I roll by the book, but allow OCC stats to be raised to the minimum if required.

If a player had a real grievance, I'd probably allow the additional rules in RUE to help compensate for a really bad stat. I see "bad" stats as good character hooks myself.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

pblackcrow wrote:For humans...

3D6, +1D6 when needed

reroll 1s, 2s,

these

Same here.

can't the GM make stats irrelevant. If you have a party with exceptional stats and the GM adjusts the encounters to include more advisarys and high level ones, then any GM can effectively negate any overpowered players. I don't see the problem. If they players are mowing through things, and it's not fun, then as GM you adjust the difficulty of the campaign. If the players are getting mowed by every encounter, then the GM adjusts the difficulty down.

I don't see what the stats have to do with it, if you have a GM that can see what's happening and adjust the campaign to the difficultly level that makes it fun for the players.

Tyberius wrote:can't the GM make stats irrelevant. If you have a party with exceptional stats and the GM adjusts the encounters to include more advisarys and high level ones, then any GM can effectively negate any overpowered players. I don't see the problem. If they players are mowing through things, and it's not fun, then as GM you adjust the difficulty of the campaign. If the players are getting mowed by every encounter, then the GM adjusts the difficulty down.

I don't see what the stats have to do with it, if you have a GM that can see what's happening and adjust the campaign to the difficultly level that makes it fun for the players.

I imagine I will do what I do for all games 4d6 drop the lowest or 3d6 reroll all 1's. I let the PCs choose before rolling them up. I also tend to do max HP rise at every level.

Here's how it works for me...

Roll xD6+1d6 for each attribute
Re-roll any 1's if desired (mostly used for first timers)
Drop the lowest of the die.
Add in any bonus dice for 16+ scores using 3D6 (or 12's if you rolled 2D6)
Add any racial modifiers and there's your score.

I also add a special little rule for anyone making a "lowly" Human character by allowing them to arrange their scores however the player desires. This works out especially well since Humans are the only race that get 3D6 across the board for their attributes. Works out well enough for me and my players.

I find that non-humans are tough to handle, particularly if a player has a particular class in mind. I allow houserules that bias characters towards higher scores.
-Players can re-roll 1's, once.
-If a stat has at least 3d6, the player rolls an extra die and drops the lowest.
-When all stats are generated, players may add 4 to the stat of their choice and 1 to a second stat.
-Any stats with duplicate dice bases can be swapped (thus, if a race has 4d6 for PP and ME, they can assign the scores as they see fit).

I allow whatever is normal for the race, however humans are very adaptable so i let the humans place their stats where they want and allow the non-humans to burn 2 down and 1 up on their stats.
I tell people straight out that there will things that challenge the party, so if you roll a character who has all 24's you will end up fighting, say orcs with all 26's.
The toughest characters i dm always start with the lowest stats, poeple who have rolled 3 20's for the main physical stats rarely get any bonuses, but the healer who started with a strength of 6 ended up with a strength of 50(for 13 months, see jon carter if you want an idea of how i dm'd it, the orc swings at you you dodge and end up in the next kingdom taking fall damage hehehehe, being strong doesnt mean the ground doesnt hurt when jumping through the air at 100kph)

I like the simplicity of the 3d8. It gives you the range of the 24 with the chance to roll a 3.

How they role up character depends on if I know I have an 'over the top stat monger' player or not.

enhancer wrote:

robertbc73 wrote:How they role up character depends on if I know I have an 'over the top stat monger' player or not.

Rolls alone won't stop that. One can go from wimp to warmonger even as a Rogue Scholar pretty quick with enough skill choices. Or choosing the right spells, trinkets, or abilities. Granted, it can make them worse, like those who try and pick Sea Titans or Godlings, but it won't stop a knowledgeable min/maxer.

I used to have a player that was always PP ungodly and a juicer gun slinger. Even when I watched him roll the dice he would still get 6s when he wanted...

If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

zyanitevp wrote:If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

Hey so what's to stop players from getting good stats from physical skills? Or Heck, good rolls? Should I eliminate those too?

Cinos wrote:

zyanitevp wrote:If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

Hey so what's to stop players from getting good stats from physical skills? Or Heck, good rolls? Should I eliminate those too?

So just why shouldn't a player get to enjoy good stats, particularly if they roll it? I'd be quite perturbed at a GM saying 'Gee sorry but even though I just watched you roll 4 six's and a five you only get to have a 12 because I don't believe in anyone being exceptional it's only average or below average'. Or that in spite of playing a very physical character that he doesn't get to enjoy the bonuses from his physical skills for similar reasons.

The easiest way to stop min-maxing (imo) is to require a reasonable explination for your OCC/Race combos and for your skill choices at character creation. Everything that character accumulates after creation is really on the GM ultimately, if they allow it to happen they shouldn't punish the character for it.

Nightmask wrote:

Cinos wrote:

zyanitevp wrote:If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

Hey so what's to stop players from getting good stats from physical skills? Or Heck, good rolls? Should I eliminate those too?

So just why shouldn't a player get to enjoy good stats, particularly if they roll it? I'd be quite perturbed at a GM saying 'Gee sorry but even though I just watched you roll 4 six's and a five you only get to have a 12 because I don't believe in anyone being exceptional it's only average or below average'. Or that in spite of playing a very physical character that he doesn't get to enjoy the bonuses from his physical skills for similar reasons.

Yes but when the character gets stats better than any non-deity npc its just wrong.

enhancer wrote:

robertbc73 wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

Cinos wrote:

zyanitevp wrote:If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

Hey so what's to stop players from getting good stats from physical skills? Or Heck, good rolls? Should I eliminate those too?

So just why shouldn't a player get to enjoy good stats, particularly if they roll it? I'd be quite perturbed at a GM saying 'Gee sorry but even though I just watched you roll 4 six's and a five you only get to have a 12 because I don't believe in anyone being exceptional it's only average or below average'. Or that in spite of playing a very physical character that he doesn't get to enjoy the bonuses from his physical skills for similar reasons.

Yes but when the character gets stats better than any non-deity npc its just wrong.

Oh you mean like Dragons, Sea Titans, Altess, Heroes Unlimited, Cosmo-Knights, Seljuks, Machine People, Mega-Juicers, Dragon Juicers, Bio-Wizard Juicers, Bio-Borgs, Holy Terrors, Invincible Guardsmen, Prometheans, Ultra-Crazies, Dominators, Rune Warriors, Anti-Monsters, Demon-Dragonmages, Lizard Mages, Achilles Neo-Humans, Amazons, Demons and Dyvals, Spirits of Light, Royal Kreeghor, Rahu-Man, Titans, Pheonixi, Vampires, Splugorth High/Power/Overlords, Splugorth Conservators, Were-Beasts......

Better than those too sadly. Least that player has moved on.

enhancer wrote:

robertbc73 wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

Cinos wrote:

zyanitevp wrote:If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

Hey so what's to stop players from getting good stats from physical skills? Or Heck, good rolls? Should I eliminate those too?

So just why shouldn't a player get to enjoy good stats, particularly if they roll it? I'd be quite perturbed at a GM saying 'Gee sorry but even though I just watched you roll 4 six's and a five you only get to have a 12 because I don't believe in anyone being exceptional it's only average or below average'. Or that in spite of playing a very physical character that he doesn't get to enjoy the bonuses from his physical skills for similar reasons.

Yes but when the character gets stats better than any non-deity npc its just wrong.

Oh you mean like Dragons, Sea Titans, Altess, Heroes Unlimited, Cosmo-Knights, Seljuks, Machine People, Mega-Juicers, Dragon Juicers, Bio-Wizard Juicers, Bio-Borgs, Holy Terrors, Invincible Guardsmen, Prometheans, Ultra-Crazies, Dominators, Rune Warriors, Anti-Monsters, Demon-Dragonmages, Lizard Mages, Achilles Neo-Humans, Amazons, Demons and Dyvals, Spirits of Light, Royal Kreeghor, Rahu-Man, Titans, Pheonixi, Vampires, Splugorth High/Power/Overlords, Splugorth Conservators, Were-Beasts......

I can't help but point out that with the exception of a very few classes you've listed here that all have a "best used as NPCs" warning on them, all of the rest were created by C.J. or Coffin.. So that give's a pretty easy way to reduce the creep, just don't use the books they wrote...

robertbc73 wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

Cinos wrote:

zyanitevp wrote:If there is a problem, eliminate the OCC...

Hey so what's to stop players from getting good stats from physical skills? Or Heck, good rolls? Should I eliminate those too?

So just why shouldn't a player get to enjoy good stats, particularly if they roll it? I'd be quite perturbed at a GM saying 'Gee sorry but even though I just watched you roll 4 six's and a five you only get to have a 12 because I don't believe in anyone being exceptional it's only average or below average'. Or that in spite of playing a very physical character that he doesn't get to enjoy the bonuses from his physical skills for similar reasons.

Yes but when the character gets stats better than any non-deity npc its just wrong.

Uh no, nothing wrong about it at all. See the game is about the player characters and NOT the NPC, and a GM that insists the only one allowed to have powerful characters is himself and the players can never have anything comparable or better has failed as a GM as he's gotten confused and thinks it's all about him when it isn't. Certainly in a choice between a PC or NPC the PC should be the one better favored for having high stats since, you know, the GM gets to just HAND whatever stats he wants to the NPC. The player meanwhile especially with nothing but 3d6 for each stat has to beat long odds to get exceptional let alone ultra-exceptional stats.

enhancer wrote:

MADMANMIKE wrote:

enhancer wrote:

robertbc73 wrote:
Yes but when the character gets stats better than any non-deity npc its just wrong.

Oh you mean like Dragons, Sea Titans, Altess, Heroes Unlimited, Cosmo-Knights, Seljuks, Machine People, Mega-Juicers, Dragon Juicers, Bio-Wizard Juicers, Bio-Borgs, Holy Terrors, Invincible Guardsmen, Prometheans, Ultra-Crazies, Dominators, Rune Warriors, Anti-Monsters, Demon-Dragonmages, Lizard Mages, Achilles Neo-Humans, Amazons, Demons and Dyvals, Spirits of Light, Royal Kreeghor, Rahu-Man, Titans, Pheonixi, Vampires, Splugorth High/Power/Overlords, Splugorth Conservators, Were-Beasts......

I can't help but point out that with the exception of a very few classes you've listed here that all have a "best used as NPCs" warning on them, all of the rest were created by C.J. or Coffin.. So that give's a pretty easy way to reduce the creep, just don't use the books they wrote...

So don't use the Main Book, Conversion Book, England, Underseas, Phase World, Phase World Sourcebook, The Anvil Galaxy, Heroes Unlimited(all), Juicer Uprising, Atlantis, Splynn Dimensional Market, Japan, China, China 2, Wormwood, South America, South America 2, Psyscape, Africa, Vampire Kingdoms and any book with a Demon/Dyval. So that's MB, Conversion Books, Heroes Unlimited, all in the Three Galaxies, and books 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25.....

Left out that many of those don't have 'best used as an NPC' labels either, rather than all but a few as he erroneously claims. That and at least some that label has more to do with them being 'always evil' than 'too powerful'.

enhancer wrote:

MADMANMIKE wrote:

enhancer wrote:

robertbc73 wrote:
Yes but when the character gets stats better than any non-deity npc its just wrong.

Oh you mean like Dragons, Sea Titans, Altess, Heroes Unlimited, Cosmo-Knights, Seljuks, Machine People, Mega-Juicers, Dragon Juicers, Bio-Wizard Juicers, Bio-Borgs, Holy Terrors, Invincible Guardsmen, Prometheans, Ultra-Crazies, Dominators, Rune Warriors, Anti-Monsters, Demon-Dragonmages, Lizard Mages, Achilles Neo-Humans, Amazons, Demons and Dyvals, Spirits of Light, Royal Kreeghor, Rahu-Man, Titans, Pheonixi, Vampires, Splugorth High/Power/Overlords, Splugorth Conservators, Were-Beasts......

I can't help but point out that with the exception of a very few classes you've listed here that all have a "best used as NPCs" warning on them, all of the rest were created by C.J. or Coffin.. So that give's a pretty easy way to reduce the creep, just don't use the books they wrote...

So don't use the Main Book, Conversion Book, England, Underseas, Phase World, Phase World Sourcebook, The Anvil Galaxy, Heroes Unlimited(all), Juicer Uprising, Atlantis, Splynn Dimensional Market, Japan, China, China 2, Wormwood, South America, South America 2, Psyscape, Africa, Vampire Kingdoms and any book with a Demon/Dyval. So that's MB, Conversion Books, Heroes Unlimited, all in the Three Galaxies, and books 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25.....

Can you attempt to explain what you're trying to say here? I say "don't use the books written by C.J. and Coffin", and you list off a random list of books, many of which neither had anything to do with... Seriously, if you are going to be part of a conversation, there has to be some semblance of reason and relevance to what you input...

enhancer wrote:

MADMANMIKE wrote:

enhancer wrote:

MADMANMIKE wrote:

enhancer wrote:
Oh you mean like Dragons, Sea Titans, Altess, Heroes Unlimited, Cosmo-Knights, Seljuks, Machine People, Mega-Juicers, Dragon Juicers, Bio-Wizard Juicers, Bio-Borgs, Holy Terrors, Invincible Guardsmen, Prometheans, Ultra-Crazies, Dominators, Rune Warriors, Anti-Monsters, Demon-Dragonmages, Lizard Mages, Achilles Neo-Humans, Amazons, Demons and Dyvals, Spirits of Light, Royal Kreeghor, Rahu-Man, Titans, Pheonixi, Vampires, Splugorth High/Power/Overlords, Splugorth Conservators, Were-Beasts......

I can't help but point out that with the exception of a very few classes you've listed here that all have a "best used as NPCs" warning on them, all of the rest were created by C.J. or Coffin.. So that give's a pretty easy way to reduce the creep, just don't use the books they wrote...

So don't use the Main Book, Conversion Book, England, Underseas, Phase World, Phase World Sourcebook, The Anvil Galaxy, Heroes Unlimited(all), Juicer Uprising, Atlantis, Splynn Dimensional Market, Japan, China, China 2, Wormwood, South America, South America 2, Psyscape, Africa, Vampire Kingdoms and any book with a Demon/Dyval. So that's MB, Conversion Books, Heroes Unlimited, all in the Three Galaxies, and books 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25.....

Can you attempt to explain what you're trying to say here? I say "don't use the books written by C.J. and Coffin", and you list off a random list of books, many of which neither had anything to do with... Seriously, if you are going to be part of a conversation, there has to be some semblance of reason and relevance to what you input...

I was listing all the books, at one point in order, that would be excluded by your advice of eliminating books with power creep based on the fact that they contained O.C.Cs already listed. Many of the O.C.Cs you were referring to are in the world books 1-5 or conversion books, before C.J Carella or Bill Coffin, such as Dragons, Deevils, Demons, Holy Terrors, Lizard Mages, Spirits of Light, Rahu-man, Titans, Phoenixi, Vampires, Splugorth minions, Heroes Unlimited and Were-Beasts. Many as Nightmask already stated are not 'best used as NPC' either. Is that relevant enough for you?

Okay, so you were making no sense because you misread my post, got it. And fyi, I haven't listed any O.C.C.'s, and had I, they wouldn't have been from RIFTS books because this is the Palladium Fantasy forum...

MADMANMIKE wrote:

enhancer wrote:

MADMANMIKE wrote:

enhancer wrote:

MADMANMIKE wrote:I can't help but point out that with the exception of a very few classes you've listed here that all have a "best used as NPCs" warning on them, all of the rest were created by C.J. or Coffin.. So that give's a pretty easy way to reduce the creep, just don't use the books they wrote...

So don't use the Main Book, Conversion Book, England, Underseas, Phase World, Phase World Sourcebook, The Anvil Galaxy, Heroes Unlimited(all), Juicer Uprising, Atlantis, Splynn Dimensional Market, Japan, China, China 2, Wormwood, South America, South America 2, Psyscape, Africa, Vampire Kingdoms and any book with a Demon/Dyval. So that's MB, Conversion Books, Heroes Unlimited, all in the Three Galaxies, and books 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25.....

Can you attempt to explain what you're trying to say here? I say "don't use the books written by C.J. and Coffin", and you list off a random list of books, many of which neither had anything to do with... Seriously, if you are going to be part of a conversation, there has to be some semblance of reason and relevance to what you input...

I was listing all the books, at one point in order, that would be excluded by your advice of eliminating books with power creep based on the fact that they contained O.C.Cs already listed. Many of the O.C.Cs you were referring to are in the world books 1-5 or conversion books, before C.J Carella or Bill Coffin, such as Dragons, Deevils, Demons, Holy Terrors, Lizard Mages, Spirits of Light, Rahu-man, Titans, Phoenixi, Vampires, Splugorth minions, Heroes Unlimited and Were-Beasts. Many as Nightmask already stated are not 'best used as NPC' either. Is that relevant enough for you?

Okay, so you were making no sense because you misread my post, got it. And fyi, I haven't listed any O.C.C.'s, and had I, they wouldn't have been from RIFTS books because this is the Palladium Fantasy forum...

Seems more like you failed to keep track of the actual post and the responses. enhancer gave a list of races and settings that fit your 'well just don't use books by those writers' statement, you erroneously declared that they were almost all 'Best as NPC only' races when they weren't, and now are trying to shift the goalposts to 'well we're just talking Palladium Fantasy here'. Many things he's listed are common to both Rifts and Palladium Fantasy, you can't dismiss one without dismissing the other since they exist in both places.