Determining Characteristics

[PhilHibbs]

9 hours ago, Jose-san said:

I don't know if this is uncommon, I keep the bonus separate from the skills. If the bonus changes, I only change the bonus, not every skill. The players have to add the bonus every time they roll though.

I do that myself, although I haven't played in a long long time, and one of the players in my group does it.

[Akhôrahil]

6 hours ago, jajagappa said:

That is how I have my players set up their character sheets.

We didn't start out that way, but all my players moved to it over time. They find the addition to be less annoying than having to erase and update all skills when stats (normally POW) change. And experience rolls are actually easier this way (it's a straight roll above "raw" skill, until you start to get very high).

Edited July 20 by Akhôrahil

[Akhôrahil]

On 7/16/2024 at 1:11 AM, Geoff R Evil said:

In my campaigns characters are potential heroes so I allow 5d6 take best Three and 4d6 +6 take best two for int and size.

I did the following:

• Roll two sets, top to bottom. Choose one set when you're done.
• Roll one extra dice and remove one each roll.
• Drop and reroll any set that's below human average.
• Do the stat bonus thing as per the regular rules.

This ensured that no set was painfully bad, and gave some flexibility in what set to use. (one player rolled two painfully average sets and was allowed a re-roll, because while hilariously uneven characteristics are fun, bland ones aren't).

Edited July 20 by Akhôrahil

[Jose-san]

18 hours ago, Akhôrahil said:

I would advise against point-buy - the often oddly statted characters that turn up from ”roll top to bottom” are a charming part of the game, and a driver of roleplaying. This isn’t D&D, where you need an efficient and optimized build and point-buy makes more sense than rolling.

Well, we have runes linked to personality traits, passions, and family history as part of the character creation process. I think those help in fleshing out a character better than the characteristic numbers. They can be a source of inspiration too, of course.

[RandomNumber]

When rolling 5 stats at 3d6, two at 2d6+6 and adding 3 points for Runic affinity you have 19d6+15 for a range of [19, 114] + 15 = [34, 129].  Applying some math, there will be 281 PC's per million that have a rolled total of 92+ (before adding the three for runes). A rolled total of 100+ is 1 PC per million.

But that's on Earth, with math.  On Glorantha, with magic, it's whatever you want.

Rolled total, S	Stat total (S+15)	PMF, P(s=S)	CDF, P(s≤S)	Per million NPCs
66	81	0.053026	0.500000	53,026
67	82	0.053026	0.553026	53,026
68	83	0.052109	0.605135	52,109
69	84	0.050320	0.655456	50,320
70	85	0.047749	0.703205	47,749
71	86	0.044520	0.747726	44,520
72	87	0.040783	0.788509	40,783
73	88	0.036702	0.825211	36,702
74	89	0.032444	0.857655	32,444
75	90	0.028167	0.885822	28,167
76	91	0.024013	0.909836	24,013
77	92	0.020099	0.929934	20,099
78	93	0.016512	0.946446	16,512
79	94	0.013311	0.959757	13,311
80	95	0.010528	0.970285	10,528
81	96	0.008165	0.978450	8,165
82	97	0.006209	0.984659	6,209
83	98	0.004627	0.989286	4,627
84	99	0.003378	0.992664	3,378
85	100	0.002414	0.995078	2,414
86	101	0.001689	0.996766	1,689
87	102	0.001155	0.997921	1,155
88	103	0.000772	0.998694	772
89	104	0.000504	0.999198	504
90	105	0.000322	0.999520	322
91	106	0.000200	0.999719	200
92	107	0.000121	0.999840	121
93	108	0.000071	0.999912	71
94	109	0.000041	0.999953	41
95	110	0.000023	0.999975	23
96	111	0.000012	0.999988	12
97	112	0.000006	0.999994	6
98	113	0.000003	0.999997	3
99	114	0.000002	0.999999	2
100	115	0.000001	0.999999	1
101	116	0.000000	1.000000	0
102	117	0.000000	1.000000	0
103	118	0.000000	1.000000	0
104	119	0.000000	1.000000	0
105	120	0.000000	1.000000	0
106	121	0.000000	1.000000	0
107	122	0.000000	1.000000	0
108	123	0.000000	1.000000	0
109	124	0.000000	1.000000	0
110	125	0.000000	1.000000	0
111	126	0.000000	1.000000	0
112	127	0.000000	1.000000	0
113	128	0.000000	1.000000	0
114	129	0.000000	1.000000	0

 

Edited July 21 by RandomNumber

[Jens]

10 hours ago, RandomNumber said:

On Glorantha, with magic, it's whatever you want.

This is why Ernaldan mothers with Bless Pregnancy are popular 😉

[RossTMcD]

On 7/15/2024 at 10:52 PM, Mugen said:

As for myself, I'm not fond of pure point buy systems in BRP games, because of the thresholds you mentioned, which are present in almost all games, but also because a game like RuneQuest has playable intelligent species which differ a lot from the human standard. Try to stat an Uz with the same number of points as you use for a human, and you'll have a pitiful member of that species.

Another, and simpler, way to construct a point-buy system that allows for different species could be based on the part in RQG where the rulebook says that (for human adventurers) if your characteristics total 92 or less you can add 3 points. One could take this as meaning that 95 points is a reasonable total to divide among characteristics (for a human) and in fact you can build a pretty solid character using 95 points of characteristics.

To extend it to other species, we can observe that the total of the average rolled characteristics for a human is 78.5, and if you multiply 78.5 by 1.2 and round up you get 95. So a possible generalized point buy system could go like this:

1. Total the average rolled value for all characteristics for this species (maintaining fractions)
2. Multiply this total by 1.2, rounding up if necessary
3. Distribute that number of points among the characteristics; every characteristic must have a value within its possible rolled range
4. Then add your elemental rune bonuses as usual

So for instance to build a dark troll, the total of the average rolls is 90, multiply that by 1.2 and you get 108 points for building your Uz.

(This also, amusingly, lets you quantify exactly how "above average" adventurers are. They are 20% above average. 20% cooler, if you will 🙂)

[Susimetsa]

12 hours ago, RossTMcD said:

Another, and simpler, way to construct a point-buy system that allows for different species could be based on the part in RQG where the rulebook says that (for human adventurers) if your characteristics total 92 or less you can add 3 points. One could take this as meaning that 95 points is a reasonable total to divide among characteristics (for a human) and in fact you can build a pretty solid character using 95 points of characteristics.

That is not really true, though. I've rolled numerous characters and I pretty much always get to add that 3 points and still the total is somewhere below 90, often even below 80 points. As RandomNumber posted above, "there will be 281 PC's per million that have a rolled total of 92+". That's pretty rare.

A mathematically accurate way to determine point buy would be to calculate the average rolls for each stat, which, for humans, would be (5 * 3d6) + (2 * (2d6+6)) = 78.5. Add to that the 3 promised to "below 92 rolls" and you get 82 points. So, you could say that everyone gets to spread 82 points between the stats, but with a minimum of 3 to 5 stats and 8 to 2 stats.

That's by the rules, of course. It doesn't seem that most (any?) official NPC or pregen follows this method. Rather, it seems that the characteristic generation system, as stated in the rulebook, is not actually the one used for any of them. Basically, you'd be better off playing a pregen than trying to roll your own character if you made the choice on the basis of the characteristics.

Edited July 26 by Susimetsa

[Diadochoi]

I often use: Assign the following scores between your six attributes: 17, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10.  Then modify by race, runes etc. Some races have limitations on which scores can be used for which attributes e.g Drultz, strength must be one of the two lowest attributes at the start. Other modifications e.g. if pre-initiate child or more elderly also exist.

 

This method ensures people can work towards the character type they want and ensures some sort of "parity" between starting party members i.e. no "I rolled 16+ for all six" vs "I never managed higher than a 10". Large disparity can be fun, but it can also cripple fun depending on the players.

[French Desperate WindChild]

On 7/16/2024 at 7:52 AM, Mugen said:

Try to stat an Uz with the same number of points as you use for a human, and you'll have a pitiful member of that species.

it depends on the number of points 🙂 you may have average Uz and powerful humans.

I think that the difference between races could create other issues. You raised one of them if you compare the uz pc with the uz people. But if you compare the uz pc with the human pc what does that mean to have so many differences ?

If GM and players don't want to play a game including racism (because too sensitive for some of them), what could be the reason to not play a troll in a very open-minded human setting ?

 

I m not fond at all of the "all races  / all sexes / all genders / all XXXX must have same potential", in the other way I flee game/group (that's not only the game but how people play the rules) when the concept is "this race is for barbarian / this race is for ranger / this race is for ...." but I don't like also to create a too big difference between two pc.

IMO there should be a kind of balance to avoid frustration (again, it depends on the players). I m not talking about rule, but more about GM's work. (poor GM responsible to fix everything all the time !)

 

[PhilHibbs]

19 hours ago, RossTMcD said:

Another, and simpler, way to construct a point-buy system that allows for different species could be based on the part in RQG where the rulebook says that (for human adventurers) if your characteristics total 92 or less you can add 3 points. One could take this as meaning that 95 points is a reasonable total to divide among characteristics (for a human) and in fact you can build a pretty solid character using 95 points of characteristics.

7 hours ago, Susimetsa said:

That is not really true, though. I've rolled numerous characters and I pretty much always get to add that 3 points and still the total is somewhere below 90, often even below 80 points. As RandomNumber posted above, "there will be 281 PC's per million that have a rolled total of 92+". That's pretty rare.

The average of a character rolled with the re-roll ones rule is 88, though, 95 is only plus one per characteristic above this average. You could make a case that 88 is enough though, as it is average (which is already above human average, due to rerolling ones).

On 7/21/2024 at 11:51 AM, RandomNumber said:

When rolling 5 stats at 3d6, two at 2d6+6 and adding 3 points for Runic affinity you have 19d6+15 for a range of [19, 114] + 15 = [34, 129].  Applying some math, there will be 281 PC's per million that have a rolled total of 92+ (before adding the three for runes). A rolled total of 100+ is 1 PC per million.

Do you have the numbers for rerolling ones? That's the equivalent of each die being 1d5+1, hence the 88 number above (die average 4, 19 dice, 76 total, plus 6x2 for SIZ and INT).

[TrippyHippy]

I just say 80 points to spend on seven Characteristics, no less than 8 and no more than 18. 

OR/ Distribute the following anywhere you like: 16, 14, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8

 

Done.

 

Edited July 26 by TrippyHippy

[PhilHibbs]

2 hours ago, TrippyHippy said:

I just say 80 points to spend on seven Characteristics, no less than 8 and no more than 18. 

Less than the average of the reroll-ones method?

18, 15, 14, 13, 11, 9, 8 would give 88, the same average. I don't mind giving everyone an 18, better than no-one getting one.

Edited July 26 by PhilHibbs

[RossTMcD]

It's interesting that the book's rule of "if your total is 92 or less, add 3" implies that 93 points is the minimum total at which you no longer need a lil' boost.

And, as @PhilHibbs points out, if you take the book's suggestion of re-rolling 1s, then the average total is 88 (to which you would be able to add 3 to get to 91.)

And -- not in the book, but a very common method of rolling somewhat-above-average scores -- if you add one die to every roll and remove the lowest result -- i.e., roll (4d6 drop lowest) 5 times and ((3d6 drop lowest) + 6) twice -- the average total is 90 (plus three is 93.)

So there seems to be a consensus among these methods that around 91-93 characteristic points is a pretty good total for an adventurer; enough above average to be heroic, not so much so as to be absurd.

[RandomNumber]

On 7/26/2024 at 11:34 PM, PhilHibbs said:

The average of a character rolled with the re-roll ones rule is 88, though, 95 is only plus one per characteristic above this average. You could make a case that 88 is enough though, as it is average (which is already above human average, due to rerolling ones).

Do you have the numbers for rerolling ones? That's the equivalent of each die being 1d5+1, hence the 88 number above (die average 4, 19 dice, 76 total, plus 6x2 for SIZ and INT).

OK, so I haven't checked this thoroughly but from a brief inspection, it looks plausible... 

This is the same table but for 19 rolls of 1d5+1 plus 15 (2 x 6 for SIZ and INT and +3 for runic affinity).  That gives a randomised range of [19,95] and an overall range of [53, 129].

There will now be 467,919 PC's per million with 92+ i.e. re-rolling 1's makes a huge difference. 84,418 per million will have 100+

In case of interest... the dice roll sum problem distribution is really interesting for those who like that kind of thing: https://www.lucamoroni.it/the-dice-roll-sum-problem/.  This website is also RPG friendly: https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice

Hope this helps.

Edited July 27 by RandomNumber

[PhilHibbs]

8 hours ago, RandomNumber said:

There will now be 467,919 PC's per million with 92+ i.e. re-rolling 1's makes a huge difference. 84,418 per million will have 100+

Okay that makes sense, 88 average, +3 for the runes is 91, nearly half will have 92 or more.

8 hours ago, RandomNumber said:

Er... not sure how that lines up with what you said. Doesn't this say that 63,352 per million will... ah thats the number for exactly 92, not 92 or more.

So to get that 467,919 I need to take the 0.532081 from the line above, subtract it from 1, and shift the decimal.

And the magic one-in-a-million will have straight-17s or average thereof.

Edited July 27 by PhilHibbs

[PhilHibbs]

8 hours ago, RandomNumber said:

This website is also RPG friendly: https://www.omnicalculator.com/statistics/dice

Okay I'm up and running, thanks!

[TrippyHippy]

On 7/27/2024 at 11:03 AM, PhilHibbs said:

Less than the average of the reroll-ones method?

18, 15, 14, 13, 11, 9, 8 would give 88, the same average. I don't mind giving everyone an 18, better than no-one getting one.

For my tastes, this is too high. My preference for rules comes more from RQ2, however, and I prefer the notion that characters have room for improvement in their characteristics from the beginning of play, as they campaign. 

[RandomNumber]

5 hours ago, PhilHibbs said:

So to get that 467,919 I need to take the 0.532081 from the line above, subtract it from 1, and shift the decimal.

And the magic one-in-a-million will have straight-17s or average thereof.

Yes, that's exactly right.  Looks like my spreadsheet was right after all. 🤓