Crappy stats

[Anonymous]

You know what I hate? I hate it when your pc is a ranger who lives off of hunting, yet he has such shitty stats he cant even pull the shittiest of bows or lift a fricking pick for that matter....

[Natalie]

I agree, but I've only had it happen to me once. My current character in fact, can't hold anything larger then a knife in one hand. How am I mean't to hunt with  a measly knife? But no worries, as this is the first time I'm just putting it down to bad  luck and a bad start stat and reroll too  

[Plazgoth]

We have all experienced it and learned to live with it. Stats are one thing you have to learn to live with. Just like in the real world someone has to be great and someone has to be crappy in orther that there is someone who is average. I think I am wording this wrong so I am confusing even myself. What I am trying to say is that there need to be both good and bad stats, what is the point of everyone haivng awsome stats? I feel lucky that the re-roll system was implemnted, prior to that we were stuck with whatever initial roll we got.

[Sanvean]

Most of us have been there. I've found this gripe coming up the most with people running desert elves, who don't realize that the crappy strength of desert elves is a trade-off for their speed and ability to run long distances.  At least, 9 times out of 10, when I see a complaint about this phenomenon, I find desert elf strength is at the root of it. Are there other races that hit this?

[Vositus]

My d-elf had some poor strength but I re-rolled and it was a lot better

But Yeah I remember my third and best character who was a human warrior hunter with below average strength stats

[Angela Christine]

If you can't use a bow, try a slingshot.  The slingshot gets a bad rap, but they are cheap and you can find the ammunition for free.  You can also hold a weapon in your other hand, which is handy if the thing you are shooting at decides to charge at you.  Eventually you may find a bow with a very light pull.

As for weapons, there are some light ones out there.  Even a dagger isn't awful, the 'rinthers seem to love 'em.  In the long run your skills will matter more than your strength.

Good luck,

AC

[Nineveh]

Yep, this can be pretty bad. Best thing to do is suck it up. If you survive you'll get better.

[creeper386]

I think I've yet to have a character with anything better then average strength. It's sad when you see people clubbing each other to near unconciousness and you can hardly tap them when you hit. Very very sad, BUT lived through it, and even my warriors have had some minor success with poor strength and sometimes made up for it with other stats, or just a the right combination of other things. Sometimes with stats you have to adjust things slightly like how your character fights and all that, but normally I think there is something for most any combination of stats.


Creeper

[Rindan]

Nothing off sets stats more then just living a long time.  For raw killing power, I would trade a 5 day warrior with good strength for a 25 day warrior with poor strength any day of the week.  Try and roll with the punches and just out live everyone else.  The longer you go, the less those stats will mean.

[Pale Horse]

Poor stats are a pain many a time, I admit, but think of the advantages.  With such abysmal scores, I doubt that you'll be very eager to solo your character when hunting or such.  This may make it extreamly difficult to earn a living or even to leave the city(outpost for those d-elfs out there) for hunting, assuming you're a ranger, but when you do you leave with backup.  "Safety in Numbers" is very much in affect.

Pale Horse, who is now going to go see about getting some wake up juice....

[witchman]

My tip for playing with bad stats>
Focus on your strengths, defend against your weaknesses.

In RL, I'm much smarter than I am strong.  When I enter a confrontation, I choose the avenue of approach so that it favors me.

A warrior can do the same thing, if you're a physical wuss, use your brain.  That's what makes thinking creatures so dangerous, anyway.

[Delerak]

Maybe some changes should be made to the system.  Like the ability to pick your stats in order to what you would want highest, etc.
strength, agility, endurance, wisdom.
I'm not saying now that the guy will get exceptional strength, but if he gets very good strength, agility cannot be higher then that, if agility is good then endurance will be above average and wisdom below average...these stats are good stats for any race and class I think.

The stat ranking system has been gone over time and time again.. it just doesn't seem like it's going to go in though, unless someone thinks of something radical about it. Sorry to be a spoil sport D:

[Anonymous]

Heck, even a 'primary' stat would be good.  It could take a random percentage (between 10%-20%) of a random stat's value and apply that to your primary stat.

[Dazed and Confused]

Why do stats matter when the true purpose of this game is role-play?

[Anonymous]

To me the answer is in the question.  The game is about *role* playing.  Sometimes people want to play a specific role and having stats that don't fit that role is frustrating.

I've played inept PCs.  I've also wanted to play an elf who can fire a bow.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to play a big buff sword swinger or a sharp-witted merchant.  The problem is when the role you created is handicapped by your stats.  You're strapping young man is weak, your elf couldn't pull a rubber band or your tank of a dwarf could lose an arm to a paper cut.

FWIW, I didn't start this thread.

[Delerak]

because the code makes stats matter. If I want to play a big strong human dude who is really slow but strong, and I get average strength and exceptional agility and very good wisdom, I'm mad because I didn't want that, even though those stats are awesome, I wanted to play a big huge guy who is really strong and uses a five foot long sword.  The only way you can do this is special app it, which is kind of pointless if all you wanted was high strength.  Stats reinforce your roleplay.

[Rindan]

I find that it tends to be better (safer) to base my characters more on personality and proficiency.  Making a character who you have flat out decided I going to use a two handed hunk of death rock tied to a tree to kill people is probably asking for trouble because stats will matter.  Making a character that just likes being flashy and being intimidating is probably safer and more reasonable.  If you end up with the stats to support wielding a tree, then you are fine.  If you don't end up getting the stats, then you just find some other flashy weapon that fits your personality, like a nasty looking spiked knife.  Basing a character off personality makes it so that you are not tied to being able to do a coded thing, just a general personality.

If you just shoot for personality traits instead of stats based traits, you won't have to worry so much if you come away with poor stats.  In a sense, I actually like this.  If we could pick our stats, I think that people would be far more homogenous in their abilities.  All d-elves would want more strength, all dwarves want more wisdom or agility, and all giants would want more agility.  Random stats preserve variations and keeps people from falling into the stereotype for their class.

Choosing some stats has its advantages, but personally, I prefer the variation random stats offer.  I like how they force me to focus more on personality and less on physical characteristics.  I like how they keep people honest and stop everyone from making a pure stereotype.

[Dazed and Confused]

The only way you can do this is special app it,

You answered your own question on how to solve your problem.
SPECIAL APPLICATION.

If I want to play a big strong human

Some kids when they grow up wanted to be the President, a fireman, or maybe an actor. When we grow up, sometimes things do not work out exactly the way we wanted them.

In my real life, when I was real young perhaps 12 or 13 I wanted to be a lawyer.  Then in High School, I wanted to be an engineer because I was good in science.  In College, I graduated as an engineer. Then I went to graduate school and realized that I didnt want to be an engineer.  After a while, I decided to try Law, went to law school and became a lawyer.

NOW, I might of been a much better lawyer if I did not spend all that time pursuing other interests and perhaps I would of made a great engineer. I certainly had all the "STATS" for it.  But that was not really what made me happy.  So perhaps I am not the "STRAPPING" lawyer that I could of been if I had trained my whole life to be a lawyer.  However, I am a lawyer and very competent. I get the job done that my clients want and almost all are happy with my performance.

My point is: Perhaps your character holds himself out to be a "strapping warrior" who can beat everyone else with 2 hands and on his knees.  Only his closest friends will know the truth. And to them it doesnt really matter because they will like him for who he is no matter how big of a bow he carries. And if you really want specific stats place an application for it explaining why you feel you should have it and how it will help the role-play in Armageddon.

[Ouch.]

Gee...

When I was weak I joined a weigt training class.  I didn't follow through with it completely, but it made me a lot stronger.  It seems kind of stupid that while flailing big (or small) swords, maces, daggers, etc.  that you would only gain "skill" and not strength.  If you pick up a huge poll everyday and swing it around, I bet my bottom dollar you will eventually get stronger.  Do you think all world class athletes were born and branded with outstanding agility? No.  They trained. I think its overly rediculous that you can't raise your stats through training or just simply by waving a big sword around.  I mean come on.

[Dazed and Confused]

When I was weak I joined a weigt training class. I didn't follow through with it completely, but it made me a lot stronger.

It made you stronger, but maybe the level you reached was it for you?
Do you think you get to ever become Arnold? or The Rock? or XXX? I mean come on, some people have it and some dont.

Lesson: You can only train so much as to reach your potential.

[Ouch.]

In terms of physical possibilities, I could be very strong, the same goes for almost everyone.  However it takes willpower as well as sheer training, something I don't really have in terms of weight training.  However if your character is ambitious enough, and works hard enough at it, you should be able to go from below average to good or at least average.  And you aren't right if you think that the rock is like he is just because "god and mother nature" willed it to be so.  He probably worked his ASS off to be where he is today, same goes for every single good athlete.  Nobody just has it.  I'm sorry, but you are utterly wrong.  And please, type a response in English next time.

"Do you think you get ever become Arnold?"

and who could forget,

"It made you stronger, but maybe the level you reached was it for you?"

What does that mean? And as for,

"Lesson: You can only train so much as to reach your potential"

Alright Confucius, do you carry a potential meter around?   You can't really measure human potential considering if people work their hardest their entire lives they continue to get stronger and better at what they do.  They don't just reach a point and stop.  When old age settles in, that's a different story.  I really want to insult you, but I won't.

He means Genetics, some people have the body type to become exceptionally strong. Our character's ability scores kind of represent the potential of our characters. In the beginning, our actual levels are actually below our potential, hence our skills are bad. And as you improve your skill, you actually become a little bit stronger. You can look at it that way.

But anyway, back to the genetics thing, some people have potential to be Arnold (Sort of like Arnold has that potential, well, you know, 'cause he's Arnold) but someone like myself, does not have that potential. The most I've ever been able to bench (Admittedly, I didn't follow through my weight training either, nor am I fully developed, still 16 yet) has been 150, and that was after a lot of work. (Of course benching is not the only means of measuring strength, but you know what I mean) But I have a concaved chest, long limbs, and an overall thin frame. Arnold, I'm sure, without much of his mucle, still looks pretty imposing.

I'm sorry, that went down the tubes after the first two sentences. Eesh.

[Dazed and Confused]

I guess that I can sum up why the person above me is wrong.

If YOU want to play ARNOLD or THE ROCK, submit an APP.

Wait.. how does that make me wrong? ::boggles:: I don't think I even had a point to be proved or disproved.

[Dazed and Confused]

I was referring to the person above my previous post...... Now the previous previous post.

[Anonymous]

Its silly to me to think that anyone who wants to be assured their PC will be able to pull a bow will have to special app.

Its no different than someone wanting to play a beautiful PC or a PC with certain skills.  Those are not special apped, and the former certainly conveys serious advantages to the player.

I understand why there is no mechanism in place for stat manipulation by players though.  At least I imagine I understand the reason.  I've played PCs that were bad at what they did.  I've played PCs that were stupid (and everyone treated me like a newbie), I've played PCs that charged into certain death because it was IC to do so.  But not everyone likes to RP through a disadvantage.  So a stat ordering system would result in a playerbase of specifically crafted PCs running around.

I still think there is a better way to offer the player an increased chance of getting what they envisioned for the role without having a mudful of Very Good Strength Warriors and the like.

[Twilight]

Well, hmm, there is one way to put the odds in your favor, and that is by picking your race.  Not everyone has access to muls, half-giants, or D-elfs, of course, but within the normal starting races you still have a pretty good way of affecting your stats outcome.  Now, your concept might be an elf that can pull a bow, and that I can't help with.  But a dwarf with even poor strength is probably going to be able to pull a bow.  Of course, you can also sort of do it the other way around, and be making dwarven merchants and half-giant magickers and such...

I've never really thought that stats in the end mattered as much as some people make them out to.  Certainly they affect you, but a good flexible background can handle whatever stats come your way.  Poor stats can be beneficial even.  Heck, take warrior strength for example:  I've had two human warriors with poor strength that lived a long time.  They had no problem with light pull bows.  Both became fairly good at combat, one became pretty badass.  Now, while a nice strength might have helped me kill things, a poor strength actually helped me when training other people.  Like I said, the character was pretty good.  Even with poor strength, there was the chance, when sparring, that I would kill a new opponent in between the time I typed kill and the wait state wore off.  Poor strength was a godsend for training, in this case.

I seem to have wandered off topic.  Anyways, I like the stat system as it is.  Always adds a bit of suspense to a new character.

[Angela Christine]

Race is one way to manipulate your stats, but there are others.  People who are big are usually strong, people who are small are usually agile.  People who are young are agile, people in thier prime are strong, and people in their old age are wise.  This is in the docs, although not neatly gathered into a "help stat manipulation" file.     Most large, 30 year old human newbies will be able to pull a bow.  Even an elf, if he is a large, prime-of-life elf, should be able to find a bow he can use -- although it may take a while since most places have a limited selection of bows.

AC

[Elven Mul]

Dazed and Confused: "Your honor, the previous poster is wrong based on my garbled and incomprehensible ramblings, I therefore rest my case."

Anyway, on the subject of stats I know this sounds a little glib, but don't worry about your stats. I've played Armageddon for about 10 years, and in that time I have had exactly TWO characters with good stats. Two. Both happened to be human warriors. On the other hand, I have had several long-lived bad-ass characters, 40 days plus where stats do matter little. You name it, I've had it with bad stats--humans, half-elves, dwarves (poor dwarves), elves (they actually tend to have good stats apart from strength), and even muls, which was quite disappointing. I guess I'm one of the unlucky ones, but it's never stopped me from having a good time with characters. Generally, unless you are consistently unlucky, there is at least one decent stat you can play off.

If you get stats contradictory to your description, contact the game to change your description. Usually it's strength that is the immediate problem, although I do not believe this is the most important stat by any means. Regardless, I don't think stats are changed after your reroll, so changing your description is probably your best bet.

[swordmaster]

My tip for playing with bad stats>
Focus on your strengths, defend against your weaknesses.

In RL, I'm much smarter than I am strong.  When I enter a confrontation, I choose the avenue of approach so that it favors me.

A warrior can do the same thing, if you're a physical wuss, use your brain.  That's what makes thinking creatures so dangerous, anyway.

ok focus on my strengths....wait a minute i dont have any! :x

[Flaming Ocotillo]

In Armageddon MUD, character stats have an enormous impact on what your character can get away with code-wise. Characters with high strength rolls will do much, -much- better in combat than characters with average strength rolls. I've played characters with the best of stats (unbelievable stats), good stats, mediocre stats, and poor stats.. and when it comes to combat, stats will make or break a character. No question about it.


Example:

I am a human with exceptional strength.. I am standing beside a human with below average strength.  The rest of our stats are all equal at "average".

Before us is a dwarven warrior with some heavy armor. He is ready to kill someone.

In one scenario, I attack the dwarf with my stone warhammer and hit him on the head with my best roll on his armored greathelm - the dwarf is knocked out - I win the fight in a single blow.

In another scenario, the human beside me uses the same stone warhammer (weighing him down considerably) and hits the dwarf on the head with his best roll - it just isn't enough strength to knock the dwarf out and fully penetrate his armored greathelm - the match continues and the dwarf is wounded. Maybe the dwarf will hit the human on the head and kill him in the next round.

In a third scenario, the human beside me uses his dagger (which won't weigh him down) and hits the dwarf on the neck with his best roll - the armor deflects most of the blow but the blow goes through - the dwarf is injured and engages the human. Unfortunately the human's low strength does not permit him to wear a great deal of armor in defense against the dwarf.

In a fourth scenario, I use the same dagger and hit the dwarf on the neck with my best roll - the blow goes through for heavy damage as it pieces the armor - the dwarf is heavily injured and engages me. With my high strength, I am armored heavily in defense against the dwarf.


The above four scenarios serve a rather mundane purpose: to remind the reader how stats work in a coded system. When the stats are high, they give bonues.. sometimes really, really high bonuses. When the stats are low, they give penalties.. sometimes really, really severe penalties.. particularly when considering what options are open to each respective character in terms of equipment selection. The character wtih high stats has a choice of every piece of equipment he finds (barring class limitations). The character with low stats can't effectively use a lot of what he might discover (heavy weapons, armor, missile weapons with a strong pull, number of weapons on his body, etc.)

Here's an example list of things high strength characters can do:

Subdue opponents with much more ease - knockout oppoent
Break subdue with much more ease
Kill an opponent in a single blow
Wear any choice of armor
Carry a broader range of weapons
Use a wider selection of bows
Do severe damage (including stun damage) with weapon attacks
Do more damage with non-weapon attacks (kicks, wrist razors)
Break an opponent's weapon in combat


Anyone have the sudden urge to blurt out how having a high agility is more advantageous than high strength? But the argument here isn't about strength. It's about having high stats. Strength, agility, wisdom, and endurance.. if you've got high rolls, you're definately going to have a lot more paths open to your character in what they can and can't get away with in-game. And with that said, does anyone have the urge to blurt out how this is an RP MUD, and that stats shouldn't ever restrict what you can or can't play? Go ahead. Say it. But do you honestly believe it?

[krelin]

If the point of the game is to be the best at everything, then of course stats matter.  But for many that simply isn't the point.

[Anonymous]

If the point of the game is to be the best at everything, then of course stats matter.  But for many that simply isn't the point.

I agree.  Its about playing arole to its fullest.

But there are times when I want to play the rugged, buff conan-like person, and not having the strength to match my desc feels lame.  To me there is nothing wrong with wanting to play a big tough PC.  

The buff, massively-armed man strains as he picks up an agafari chair.
An agafari chair partially rises from the ground.

I'd be all for a system which allowed for you to focus on one stat to the detriment of another or all others.  Even if that single stat was strength, just so I could play a desert elf ranger with the guns to pull back on a slingshot.

This isn't about being the best, its about having the strength stat to match a particular role you envisioned.

[Khorm]

I don't see the problem here, if you get the occasional desire to play Conan, then write up a special application for it. As long as your concept doesn't include killing everything in sight, it really shouldn't be an issue. As far as rolling up a warrior with poor strength goes... First: don't make your background so specific that you feel like your character can't live without a massive strength score. Second: find a reason to train more, a character with poor strength is going to need to focus on hitting more vulnerable areas (and I think this is what higher skill = higher damage means). Third: choose your battles, if you have a weak guy on your hands, is it really IC to go ahead and try to bash on some angry dwarf? Sounds like a death wish to me.

And who really says warriors need to be that involved in PvP anyhow? My current character has an excellent strength score, which in my 10 days logged, hasn't even been put to use in a situation where I'd need it.

[Carnage]

I don't see the problem here, if you get the occasional desire to play Conan, then write up a special application for it. As long as your concept doesn't include killing everything in sight, it really shouldn't be an issue.

I don't think they were referring to playing an Armageddon version of Conan, as much as playing the strong warrior type. I doubt anyone cares to wait a month or two with a special app just so they can play someone with above average or higher strength.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Adressing a specific example, I think that too many people play desert elves and then get frusturated when they find out they can't even use a bow.

Zalanthian elves are NOT the fair-featured, expert marksman that you'll find in any other fantasy game.  Physically, they are very weak.  This makes it difficult for many of them to use a bow.  Deal with it.  Only the most elite of elves, the upper percentile, will be capable of using a longbow, but even so an elven ranger with above average strength can use a shortbow or a sling no problem.  I've actually seen slings do a lot more damage than one might expect.

If you want to play a desert elf ranger, you will find that there are a LOT of benefits that desert elves get in that particular role.  Having more than a shaky chance of using a longbow is not one of them.

On a further note, even without having a priority system for stats, there are ways you can affect the outcome.  I'm not sure if size has anything to do with it, but race definitely does.  Do you want to be strong or tough?  Be a dwarf.  Agile or wise?  Be an elf or half-elf.  I understand there are RP requirements for these races, but with a little thought you can approach the flexibility of a human.  For instance, a dwarf's focus could be to find a focus, giving you a lot of freedom in choosing your actions.  An elf might be more mischevious than criminal, not a dark, hooded cloak-wearing, rinth-accented, backstabbing wonder.  A half-elf could look like a human (or an elf for the matter) if you want access to certain jobs or positions.

[Kalden]

I put this in another thread, but I'm going to repeat it.

Stats define your character.

Think about yourself. I'm sure everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. Personally, I'm not too strong, but like reading and thus I'll probably be in some sort of intellectual career. My lack of strength and agility defines who I am, always has. People say this is about roleplaying: your stats are part of the role.

An example of a role: a gruff, ripped tribal human who looks down upon the weak city people. He has to be strong. That is why is he a leader, and why he has confidence.

Another role: a quick, stealthy pickpocket. You can put all the personality of that in, but if he isn't quick and agile, he's not much of a pickpocket, and he's going to die. A character with low agility should not be in the pickpocket guild.

Your stats are the innate abilities and characteristics of your character. They aren't just code. They are your character. If you're low on wisdom, then you're dumber than the average guy, and that's how you've been your entire life. If you're really strong, you're probably a lot more dominant than the weaker people.

Height and weight also affect strength more than anything else, but I won't get into that...

[EvilRoeSlade]

So how high do your stats have to be before its acceptable?  Is a pickpocket with above average agility acceptable, or is he as well too bad of a thief to be a pickpocket?  Maybe you should just suicide any character that doesn't have the stats you want, if stats define your character so much.

Let me let you in on a little secret.  I once played a burglar that probably had the crappiest stats you could imagine.  And do you know why?  He was a half-giant.  Its a poorly kept secret that no race has worse agility than that.  You know what else?  Not only did I have a BLAST playing him, I also succesfully utilized many of his skills, including hide and sneak, steal, and pick.  If I could get by as a burglar with half-giant agility and size penalties, than I'm sure that your elven pickpocket with below average agility or whatever can get buy too.

Stats do NOT define your character.  Role-play defines your character.  If you want to play a ripped, gruff tribal who looks down on city humans, then I don't care what kind of stats you have, because you can.  If your description is written properly, all you have to do is look intimidating.  Now, if you want to actually attack the city dwellers then even if you have a high strength you'll probably be somewhat dissapointed, because until your more than a newbie warrior, you'll get your ass kicked no matter what your strength is.  It seems to me like you just want to play a bad-ass from the start, and the fact is stats won't do that for you unless your playing one of the karma races.

[Rindan]

I put this in another thread, but I'm going to repeat it.
Stats define your character.

I think that it would have been more accurate to say,

Stats define your character, if you let them.

Sure, it is easy to make a background about being the fastest hands in the south, but you are doing so at your own risk.  Not everyone who is strong becomes a warrior, not everyone who is fast becomes a pick pocket or assassin.

It is far wiser to build your character around his personality.  When you start your skills are so low that it is safe to say that either you have no clue what you are doing, or if you have had any practice it is very minimal.  If you build your character around his personality it lets you be free to determine the next course in your character's life based upon how he would decide what to do.  

If you are that burly warrior and start with poor strength, then just say you had an injury.  It easily explains away your low strength.  How your character deals with his disability is up to you.

If you are a pick pocket, then simply make your background be that you are an aspiring pick pocket.  If you start with very poor agility, then RP wise it means that you must focus heavily on distraction over actual speed.  Code wise, a high agility is nice, but without a doubt secondary to actual skill.  True, you need to work harder, but ends up meaning little in the grand scheme of things when you are truly skilled.

As far as wisdom, that is something that I think should be flat out ignored.  Code wise, wisdom just affects magik and how fast you learn.  How fast you learn to swing a sword is completely independent of how smart or cunning you are.  Bill Gates is a very smart man.  It doesn't mean that he is stupid if it takes him a long time to figure out sword play.

Finally, if there is a certain stat you absolutely want to make sure is average or better, it is generally very easy to get this if you are not greedy.  If you want to be a buff warrior and roll average strength, be satisfied and stick with it.  Average is good enough.  If you are greedy, then you might very well get yourself very poor strength.  You get two chances.  It is damned near impossible to get very poor in anything two times in a row.  

You can certainly base your character off stats if it pleases you, but you are doing so at your own risk.  It is far safer to base your character off personality.  

If these threads about stats prove anything, it is that a lot of people want high stats.  No one is satisfied with average, much less below average.  That is exactly the reason why things should be left as they are.  If it is truly that important that your character have the perfect stats, then special app it.  People vastly over estimate the affect stats have on their characters.  Skill is absolutely paramount in Armageddon.  The fear that less then perfect stats leads to a worthless character is absolutely unfounded.

[Carnage]

Higher stats will help you a greater deal. There's no question about it. If I have an exceptional agility warrior and you have an average agility warrior, both are similarly equipped and with the exact same skills, there's a decent chance my agility monster is going to kill yours, but not by much.

If these threads about stats prove anything, it is that a lot of people want high stats. No one is satisfied with average, much less below average. That is exactly the reason why things should be left as they are. If it is truly that important that your character have the perfect stats, then special app it.

Agreed. Don't touch the attribute system, it's fine as intended. Sometimes you get damn good rolls. I had five characters in a row get exceptional endurance. Hell, one of them had v. good strength, exceptional agility, extremely good wisdom, and exceptional endurance. Sure, he could have gone far, but if he was up against a slightly better warrior, he would have lost. Skill > stats.

[Kronus]

You know, I don't think I've ever had a character get a stat better than 'good'. I tend to end up with everything falling between average and above average for my PCs, which has never been a problem for me. I'd much rather be slightly above average in all areas than be supremely strong and vastly deficient somewhere else.

Right now I'm playing a character with below average in a stat. And, unfortunately, it's a stat which is already reduced on account of race, which probably puts it pretty far down on the overall scale of stats. Below average. Kinda sucks, right?

Well, my last character had 'above average' in wisdom. Pretty cool. A neat little juice on getting skills up just a little faster than everyone else. Well, after about 15 playing days with that character, I noticed I was still having a LOT of trouble contacting people over the Way, so I wrote the account asking someone to look into it. The imm mailed me back saying, basically, "Well, the skill is maxed out and your wisdom isn't that good, so the skill isn't that high and it won't ever get better."
My wisdom isn't good?! It's above average! How good does it have to be before it's good? - That's what I was thinking at first. I was, honestly, kinda pissed that my character sucked at the Way and had no potential to get better despite being above average.

But then I got to thinking about what 'Average' and 'Above average' and so on really mean. I hope Sanvean will forgive me for this while I delve into the real of numerical values and stats.
In stock Diku, stats are measured from 1-100. I have no idea if Arm follows this trend, but for this example we'll stick with that range. Obviously, all races except human get modifiers to these stats. For example (and again, this is in no way accurate of actual Arm mechanics), a mul might get a +25 strength, making the range for mul strength 26-125.
Barring that, let's have a looksie at how it might break down:

1       - Pathetic
2-15   - Very Poor
16-25 - Poor
26-40 - Below Average
41-60 - Average
61-75 - Above Average
76-85 - Good
86-99 - Very Good
100    - Exceptional

I have no idea how close this is to Arm methods, or even if I included all the possible categories for how a stat can look when you type 'score'.  The main point of making this list is to help prove my point, which I think still applies to Arm's stat system, regardless of how it actually works

That point is, on 'score', there's a huge apparent difference between above average and good.  In reality, that difference could only be one measly point. Have a 75 Strength? It's above average. Have a 76? It's good. Does one point make a difference at all? No.
In the above chart, I think my 'above average but bad' wisdom character might have had a 61. Just barely enough to nudge out of average, but not enough to actually be above average. But I had no idea.

And neither do you Your below average strength warrior could well be one point shy of average. A 39 versus a 40 wouldn't matter to anyone if they could see the actual numbers, so I really don't think it's worth it worrying about the difference between average and below average either.

I like that stats are given to the players in the way they are. It gives you a very rough idea of how to play your character, and at the same time makes it pointless to try to min/max or second-guess the reroll to get more powerful. One nice things about Arm is that there's almost always a way to work around a deficiency. It just requires a little work and a little strategy.

That low strength warrior who's forced to wear light armor and only carry one weapon has nothing to worry about if he's a skilled parryer and disarmer. A decent throwing skill and a friend who can poison his knives makes it even better.

Stats help, but getting low ones should be seen as a chance to exercise creativity, not as a crushing defeat.

[Anonymous]

My main concern is when stats do not match your physical description or keep you from doing something.  I'm not saying doing it well, just not being able to do it period.

More prevalent low-str requirement bows would be a good answer.

The problem of drawing up a physical description as some buff dude only to have crappy Str is an annoyance.  Its hard to feel good about your huge desc when you can't lift a crate.

I've played exactly one oh so super duper buff guy and his str was fine.  But I've come across some others who couldn't lift the toilet seat to pee despite their rippling muscles.  Either that or their pack was weighed down by a few too many tenstone of obsidian because they struggled and strained.

My workaround for this has just been to not attempt to make the big buff dude unless its a race that's going to be ripped no matter how bad the role is (mul or hg), but that's my choice.

The best solution to this I could dream up involved more work than the issue warrants.  That would be revealing stat rolls during chargen and changing the order of character creation so that stats are revealed right before the last two steps which would be sdesc and desc entries along with saving stats so that people can't keep disconnecting until they get a roll they like.  This way someone with bad str can account for that in their description without having to send a revised desc/sdesc to the mud.

The next best thing I could envision was tagging a single stat so that it would get the highest role, or a random bump up while one of the other three received a decrease.

The idea of a Zalanthan working out with weights seems like a rare concept to me, so its not something I've ever pursued.   Like someone else posted, my martial PCs are more interested in soaking up the shade.

[Kalden]

One of my main points was that stats define your goals and your life. The point is that someone without good strength and endurance would not pursue the warrior career, and wouldn't be able to get the skills. It's a fact of life, and in a harsh world like this, a boy doesn't get to go with his dreams. He does what he is good at. Unless you have some background with him getting drilled as a warrior even though he was puny and frail as a kid...

The thing I used to like about random stats was that it forced you to come up with more original characters, and take their innate abilities into mind. On some muds, people have the tendency to make beautiful characters, and more beautiful characters. Using random stats, the imm can just chuckle and say, "10 charisma..  you're plain looking, girl." On here, there's only 4 stats, so that doesn't happen

I still have to argue with people who say stats don't matter, even if they contradict your description.
Might as well get rid of the damn things if you don't consider them valid ICly! I mean, come on. The stats are part of your character. Roleplay it.

That said, perhaps the best way is having point based stats. If you put a lot of points into strength, you can play a good, realistic warrior. Takes away the twinkishness, too. I suppose you could decide to play an intellectual or sneaky warrior... I just don't really understand it. Would most people here hate point based stats, where you apply points where you want them when creating?

[Boggis]

I just don't really understand it. Would most people here hate point based stats, where you apply points where you want them when creating?

I wouldn't like it myself. They way they are now is kind of vague which I think is good. Ok, you know your strength is above average but is it a tiny bit above average or are you a hair's breadth away from good strength?

I wouldn't mind seeing a tag system that would allow you to select one stat from the four as your primary stat, the other three being randomised. I think if something like this was added it would be better if it was something you chose right when you enter the game after your PC has been approved and all that. Maybe would cut out all the disconnections that would occur if you got to see your stats during character creation as people searched for super statman. I know it's possible that you could get four crappy stats but I think odds are very good that you'll get at least one decent one. If you did get four crappy ones well then I guess you'd just have to deal with it much like people do now but it should happen a lot less.

[Kronus]

That's not a bad idea. Maybe it's changed now (I didn't check last time I was up there), but I remember in the past, your stats didn't even get rolled up at all until you pointed to a location from the Hall of Kings.
It seems like it would be pretty easy to add another command to that room that tags a stat to recieve the highest one rolled, and leaves the other three randomized.
And then, of course, that stat remains tagged if you choose to take your reroll after you get into the game.

[crymerci]

Heh, yeah. I recall typing either 'stat' or 'score' when my last character was in the hall of kings and immediately panicked: "Holy Crap! Every single one of my stats is awful!"

[creeper386]

I still don't think tagging a stat to be "the highest" well help that much. Most the time, either my stats are great, or they are all below, above and just average. Maybe thats a good thing, I'm not sure if I've seen anything below that. If I did it was along with a higher stat that I didn't care about it.

Now, I well say stats really aren't that important except at the very begining. And I'm thinking at higher skill points, if two even people are fighting equipment might end up being more important then skills(Rather it's light/heavy, good or just made for parade ground). I think the most problem that comes with stats, is when you try and wear equipment goes against who you are.

Sure it sucks to make up a big buff guy and end up being completely weak, or making an assassin that trips over his own feet... But when you make a character, you must know, right off the bad, he is going to ABSOLUTELY SUCK. Stats may make it so it takes longer to get good, or it be quicker, or make it so you can't use that massive ten foot tall obsidian sword, but I've found low stats to sometimes a blessing when it comes to RP. Specially when I utilize little quirks and such so I don't have to drastically change my character idea.

And for people who think they should email the MUD to have a description change just because of stats, I beleive your just plain silly. That sort of thought has never even came close to passing through my head. Sometimes I might feel alittle down and not really care greatly about playing my character, but when I'm thinking the worst, more often I get surprised and those characters end up being quite rememberable.

In closing, I guess I have to say, when making a character, you have to go along just like you would from an OOC aspect. Aspect the worst. That doesn't mean you have to go about making weak characters, or dopey characters, or ones that trip over themselves, it just means that you shouldn't except uber stats JUST because your characters big and your description says he's buff as hell, or because he's thin and toned and is an assassin. Heck, if I do plan on stats, it isn't that they are going to be high it's that they are going to be low. All it takes is alittle bit of rethinking the way you go about creating you character.


Creeper who had a LONG closing, SHORT opening... And non existant middle, and truthfully has no clue whats in most of this post.

[Angela Christine]

Heh, yeah. I recall typing either 'stat' or 'score' when my last character was in the hall of kings and immediately panicked: "Holy Crap! Every single one of my stats is awful!"

Yeah, and your encumberance is unbelievably heavy just from carrying your coins and that spiffy disappearing outfit.  It sure puts things in perspective though, when you get into the game and find you have one or two stats below average; at least they aren't all awful!

I don't know that stat-tagging would help me at all.  It would probably just leave me paralyzed in the Hall of Kings for an hour trying to decide which stat to tag.

Strength - I don't often play warriors so I shouldn't care about strength, right?  But I often play characters who like to collect stuff, bags and bags of stuff.  It sucks to not be able to unload your pack animal because you can't carry that much weight, if I couldn't carry that much weight, how did I pack it all on there in the first place?!  Great for anyone without a storage room.

Agility - Yeah, baby.  A stat that helps you avoid getting hit, untill you can recover your wits and run away from the viscious vestric, what's not to love?  It also helps with archery, something all my doomed rangers appreciate.  Important for nearly everyone, except perhaps tavern junkies.

Wisdom - Learn fast, woo.  High wisdom gives me some chance of getting good at something or even branching a skill before I accedently run my character into the silt sea or off a cliff while having Wile E. Coyote flashbacks.  Great for everyone.

Endurance - Meh.  Since most of my characters are fond of the "run away from the slightest sign of danger" stratagy, an extra 10 or 20 hitpoints doesn't mean much to me.  Either I run away successfully, or I get killed, having high endurance might keep me alive an extra round or two but the end will be the same.  It is helpful with the Way though, you can never have stun if you like to use the Way.  Helpful.

Is it better for my merchant to have high wisdom so he can branch to Wagonmaking as quickly as possible, or should I gamble on strength so he can carry around a large inventory of raw materials and finished products?  I don't know, and actually haveing to choose which stat was most important each time I created a character would slowly drive me insane.

AC

[Master Z]

Either I run away successfully, or I get killed, having high endurance might keep me alive an extra round or two but the end will be the same.

And if your stamina is poor, you won't be running too far

I'm pretty sure I've noticed some other effects of high endurance not mentioned in the docs or anything, just because of playing a character who's edurance is really good. Not sure how many of them are just my imagination though. Anyway, I don't really have a point, besides that endurance does effect stamina as well as stun and hp. Maybe it factors into carry weight along with strength too. Not sure there.

AC Wrote:
"Strength - I don't often play warriors so I shouldn't care about strength, right? But I often play characters who like to collect stuff, bags and bags of stuff. It sucks to not be able to unload your pack animal because you can't carry that much weight, if I couldn't carry that much weight, how did I pack it all on there in the first place?! Great for anyone without a storage room."

I used to think about the packing problem, but I learned that when you actually wear a pack full of stuff it weighs less then when you hold it. So in that rush to remove your pack and pack it. Your actually going to have a harder time taking it off the mount if your encumbering yourself more.

Your the goddess of Arm knowledge so you probably knew this... but its an opprotunity to possibly teach someone something so... there you go!

[Rindan]

I wouldn't mind seeing a tag system that would allow you to select one stat from the four as your primary stat, the other three being randomised. I think if something like this was added it would be better if it was something you chose right when you enter the game after your PC has been approved and all that. Maybe would cut out all the disconnections that would occur if you got to see your stats during character creation as people searched for super statman. I know it's possible that you could get four crappy stats but I think odds are very good that you'll get at least one decent one. If you did get four crappy ones well then I guess you'd just have to deal with it much like people do now but it should happen a lot less.

A tag system is an excellent way to make sure that every single desert elf ever made tags strength.

[Lazloth]

This thread is long and overly thrashed, but I'll say (again, as elsewhere) that the OOC baggage with viewing a char's particular stat(s) is trivially and simply removed/remedied by nixxing the two lines from 'stat' or 'score' or wherever it is that shows up.

To a large degree, this was evidenced with the [d-]evolution of 'skills'.

[creeper386]

Lazloth, if you cut out those two lines in "score" you might stop the complaining of people getting low stats, but it's just going to make a BIG problem for people that play with the stats. If my characters have higher strength and low agility, they are more likely to get heftier armour and big weapons. If they have the oppossite, they are likely to wear VERY light armour, small weapons, and really on being quicker then their opponents. If I can't tell rather I have high or low wisdom, my characters are all going to be generic. I play most my characters as fairly intelligent, but I use what my wisdom is to determine other various things that I don't normally think about ICally. Also, if my character has lower endurance, he's going to be paying alot more attention to where and how far he's traveling, although you can see how much stamina you have it seems to me higher endurance tends to affect how much that goes down when moving and how fast you recover. Lower endurance means I may end up stopping to rest more often instead of waiting the first time I get completely tired, I sit down and rest, and it takes most the day before I recover and by then I've already gotten aten by three scrab, a mek, and several other creatures.

All of this is IC knowledge. It's something my character would know that would effect how my character acts, not something I know that I let it effect how my character acts. It also helps me set up who my character is, although I get a general feel for who my character is when I submit it, I don't finish it up completely, fold everything together and touch it up, untill I'm in the game. Without those two little lines, I'm probably going to be loosing a whole lot of characters and have no chance of not loosing them. Either they get stuck out in the dunes, or they starve/dehydrate because I spent so much money on armour that they can't even effectively use, and so on and so forth.

Creeper who still thinks it'd be funner to see a hot-head noble join the Byn.

[Stroker]

Lets think about this for a moment - do you want to be the best? Well personally I do in RL, same goes for the human characters on Zalanthas, or at least I think so. Well some other races may not be influenced by the human desires of being the best and they just feel that their best is more expressed in their clan, etc. Anyways, getting to the point, yes it is okay to try and be the best as long as you do not abuse the code to do so. Getting good and bad stats - well you have to live with that and like someone mentioned before, once you get good at a certain skills your stats are not that important anymore.

[Dwarven Gigolo]

Of course, you can also sort of do it the other way around, and be making dwarven merchants and half-giant magickers and such...

Don't ever, -ever- understimate the raw haggling ability of a dwarven merchant, intent on selling you something.

Belated and off-topic, but such is life these days as well.

*passes out waterskins to all the participants of this posting marathon, gone horribly wrong*

-Dwarven Gigolo

[Anonymous]

The only thing I would like to see done different with stats is to see them before I write a desc up. I hate when I put in the desc the massive, red-haired man, and then get poor strength. If I would have known my stats before writing my desc, I could have fit it more into my physical reality insted of what I hoped it would be.. am I making sense? I might have written it the skinny, crippled man, or the flabby-armed, red-haired man, you get my point. Again just an opinion..

peace...kiddgoth...again this damn gdb hates me wont let me log in...

[jhunter]

Look at it this way you go through the character creation, you have a preplanned background and personna, now I'm here to roleplay as much as the next guy, but when you create a character to be a woodsman or hunter and when you get into the game with your new char he is average strength, average wisdom and his higher than average stats have no impact on the way you had created your char to be it is really disheartening to have to change your roleplay of the char in order just to keep him alive. I mean, I wasn't born to be a bodyguard, I just don't have and won't have what it takes for the job. Most any intelligent being alive won't choose a job they cannot possible excel at. What good is a hunter who cannot take down a single critter even at the age of 30 and he's supposed to have been a hunter by trade? Same applies to say a thief that cannot pick a single pocket without being arrested or killed and he's supposed to have been surviving that way? I love Arm but I see many ways poor stats can impact the roleplay of the char you have created to play, I don't know about everyone else but I create my chars to be a role that I will enjoy playing through their lifetime.

[creeper386]

jhunter... I think you have a misconception. Even with terrific stats you well still suck when starting out. It's just that. No matter rather you are 13 or 70 your going to suck when your starting. If your making a character thats 30 years old. You can put as much in your background about how he survived on his trade. He's still going to suck. It doesn't matter. You start out sucking. You SUCK. Period.

Stats well have an affect at the start. But your characters life isn't dependant on stats. A moronic player can day with great stats just as easy as he can die with bad stats, but your still going to suck at the begining.


Creeper who says you suck  :twisted: .... at the start.

[jhunter]

Creeper,
I don't think you get the point I'm trying to make here.
Of course as a brand new char your going to suck, but if your char has been created to work a certain career then most likely that is where the char's strengths would lie. Stats and roleplay of the char would be in line for the career you chose. Not every baseball player is a Barry Bonds, but even the worst player in pro basball(who has chosen this profession and made it a career because his mental and physical talents showed strength in the proper areas or it wouldn't be his profession) is still better than the average joe at his job.

What I'm saying is this:Yes of course as a new char you are going to suck because you will need to practice the necessary skills for your chosen career. It would make sense that your char would have the proper attributes as a base to start with or why would they have ever tried to make a living at it?? Or how would they have survived this as long as they have?

When you create a char you cannot effectively change the skills they have to do their job, it would be nice to have the proper balance of attributes for work they have chosen to base their survival on.

I'd like to hear more of what you guys think about this.

-jhunter

[Impska]

I've recently rolled a human ranger with a poor strength. On a reroll (I've never rerolled a character and gotten better stats, always worse, so they've got to be pretty bad in the first place for me to risk it).

With poor, I had some somewhat better, but also crappy stats, hovering around the average range.

And actually, poor strength did define how I played the character. It didn't make it less fun. What's frustrating, however, is that in order to focus on "strengths", there must actually be some strengths.

In the case of this character, where I would have chosen to focus on wisdom as a strength, and ditched every other stat down to poor if I could get a decent wisdom, there was no way to focus on a strength. I could and did role play it, but the learning curve faced by the character was abismal. That doesn't reflect "wisdom/intelligence as a strength" too well.

If stat ranking were an option in the game, I could have picked wisdom as my top priority though, and possibly had other stats suffer by comparison. Even if stat ranking were only an option, one which did cause other stats to suffer, I would still have done it.

It's an idea that's been brought up time and time again, with no reponse (except usually one of support from the playerbase). I've never once read something that stated a clear reason why the staff objected to it. I'd be interested to know, because it seems a sensible idea to me.

[Rindan]

I am fairly sure that the staff objects simply do to the disgusting predictability in stats that it would lead to.  Every desert elf would, almost without exception, pick strength as their main stat.  Thieves would pick agility, warriors strength, and everyone else wisdom.  I would bet that the staff wants people to be different and for not everyone to play the stereotype for their class.

Personally, I am perplexed at people who say that they can't change due to stats.  I have had warriors serve as merchants and spies, thieves serve as body guards and assistants, and magikers pretend to be just about everything under the sun.  Armageddon is, first and foremost, a role playing game.  Some skills are nice to have, and it is nice to have stats that offer a small boost in those skills, but they are by no means required.  The only type of character in my mind that is truly limited are merchants.  Merchants would have a hard time being a guard type person.  Everyone else though has the potential to be anything they want.  If you roll a warrior with poor strength, and are absolutely convinced it is an irreconcilable defect (and you would be wrong as any old warrior will tell you... but that is off the point), then you can easily become an assistant, merchant, informant, spy, or whatever else tickles your fancy.  If you are something other then a warrior then our options only expand further.

People need to leave the box.  Stats DO NOT mean that much.  At worst, it might mean you can't use a bow and have to throw spears.  A 25 day warrior is a 25 day warrior.  I don't care what your stats are, he is going to manhandle everything under the sun that isn't as old as he is.  An old pick pocket will tear the sword off your belt without you noticing, regardless of how poor his agility is.  An old ranger is downright fearsome and his skills plentiful and diverse, regardless of whatever stat deficiencies he might have.  Stats simply matter very little.  At best, they give a slight edge on people who are of equal skill.  The older you get, the fewer people you will find of equal skill.

[Anonymous]

My biggest concern about stats would go away if there was some fullproof method for you to know your stats when creating a physical description, but at a point after guild/race selection.

It annoys me to no end to draw up a 'graceful' human only to have professsional wrestler stats and vice versa.

If stats were revealed during chargen as the next to last step and were then followed by the desc/sdesc creation step (AND if chargen status was saved so people wouldn't logout-relog until they got stats they want) then my personal concern over having a desc not in keeping with the stats would go away.

However, my assumption is that would be far more effort than the issue warrants.  So, personally, I will go on with making PCs whose musculature is not described in the desc.

[Angela Christine]

If all else fails you can always claim an old football injury, or scrab hunting injury.    You are a big, muscular fella, but due to tennis elbow or carpal tunnel syndrom you can't hit as hard or carry as much as people might expect.  Or you could have the body of a professional dancer, but then you hurt an ankle or knee, and now you can't move as gracefully as you used to -- still pretty graceful at some things maybe, but under strain the injury acts up and slows you down.  You were a very bright person, untill the day you got lost in the desert with no shelter and suffered major sun stroke and a brain injury -- you are no retard, but you don't pick things as quickly or remember as well as you used to.  And knowing that you used to be smarter (stronger, more agile, healthier) burns you up inside.  This happens all the time in real life, many promising athletes have had their careers cut short by injury.  If your character is 30 he may have been well suited to his career when he was 17, but since then something has happened and he isn't the man he used to be.  If your character is 30 year old warrior, he almost certainly has some old aches and injuries.  I'm not a warrior or in a dangerous line of  work, but at 30 I have some chronic aches and pains anyway, someone who is constantly being attacked would undoubtably have a few more.

It isn't perfect, obviously.  You wanted to play a certain type of character, but due to your stats you feel you have to play a slightly different type of character, and that is unpleasant.  But the football injury excuse at least lets you use the background and description you have, even if it means a slightly different future than you had planned.

               * * *

Another possibility is to always start your character as a teenager.  With a teenager your background will mostly deal with your childhood, and your future is flexible.


AC

[Kalden]

What the hell is stopping us from at least having a priority system, where your highest stat goes where you want them? Just old traditions and fear of new ideas and concepts, or coding?

And I hate having to say this so many times... stats define your character, if they aren't IC(Yes, stats are IN CHARACTER!!) then you should rip them out. OOC things like stats should never affect your roleplay and your success in the mud.  :roll:

I repeat: STATS are IN CHARACTER!

[John]

What the hell is stopping us from at least having a priority system

Because people will focus more on stats (which only define characters at the beginning of their lives) and less on other things. I hate games that let you chose your stats because they tend to be very H&S.

All IMO.

[Kalden]

This wouldn't make make people focus on their stats more at all, after creation. They would simply get a lot of strength if they were a warrior, or more agility if they were a thief. Their stats would fit their character more. Am I not getting through here?

And... this game is pretty H&S, but in a good way. Their is a lot of fighting, and a lot of code surrounding it. It decides a lot of rp.

[Angela Christine]

Bah.  Why not just allow infinite rerolls?  Well, not infinite I suppose, but as many as would fit in the first two hours.  If you want a specific distribution you can spend up to two hours typing "reroll self" over and over until you get one you like.  This would make poor stats rare, and Absolutely Incredibles much more common than they are now, but since stats don't have much long-term affect it wouldn't matter.  It might make it seem like more emphasis is being put on stats, but I think it would end up being less emphasis and a less disruptive influence.  For some people, if they had a very specific character concept planned and they think that their stats make that concept impossible, then they may not try quite as hard to keep the character alive.  If they are being "forced" to abandon their concept and pick a new one due to the vagaries of random rolls, then they might as well pick "reckless daredevil" and have a little fun followed by an early death.  Infinite rerolls would let determined people get the sort of stat distribution they want, but it would still be within racial norms.  A bonus to a specific stat could drive it over the racial maximum.  A priority system would allow people to chose the inverse of their normal racial priority, for example letting elves max Strength or half-giants make thier wisdom their strongest stat, which is a little silly.

To me it seems like the more people dwell on stats the more likely it becomes that the staff will simply hide stat descriptions they way they did with skill percentages.  I would prefer that it didn't happen, I like knowing what my stats are like right off the bat; if nothing else it makes it easier to choose equipment.  But since folks seem determined to flirt with fate, not just dwelling on stats but stridently arguing the importance of stats,  I thought I'd toss out the infinite reroll idea.  My other idea was to be able to undo a reroll that makes things worse, but I decided any idea that misuses the the word "infinite" is more exciting.

AC

[Kalden]

Um, maybe you aren't understanding what a skill priority system is.

Create your character:

Which stat would you like to put your highest roll in?
Agility

Your next?
Wisdom

Next?
Strength

Next?
Endurance

Maybe that clears it up a bit. Or maybe you're just twinkish and thought infinite rerolls would be cool. I dunno.

A priority system would allow people to chose the inverse of their normal racial priority, for example letting elves max Strength or half-giants make thier wisdom their strongest stat, which is a little silly.

Even if their best roll went to wisdom, then their negative racial modifierwould still be added. It would be no different from it is now, except not quite as random. Yes, you could make a semi-intelligent giant, at the cost of a lot of his other stats. His stats might read: above average wisdom, average for the rest. And if this particular half-giant was a mage or thief, then that would probably make sense, eh?

[John]

Maybe that clears it up a bit. Or maybe you're just twinkish and thought infinite rerolls would be cool. I dunno.

I agree it's hard to tell with AC but she was PROBABLY joking.

How many Warriors are going to pick Strength as their highest stat? How many thieves will pick agility as their highest? The Guild you choose already helps put certain stats higher then others, any extra bits IMO is unneccessary.

At the moment we have forced diversity, I think if you took that away then people would tend to choose the stereotypical roles. Sure you'll get people who'll go against the norm but IMO they'll become the exception rather then the rule.

Just my opinion

[jhunter]

How many warriors are going to pick Strength as their highest stat?
How many thieves will pick agility as their highest?

Well a good number of them will of course, which would make sense with a persons strengths and weaknesses determining what type of job they will choose to pursue in their lives. There will still be those rare occassions where a player will choose to create a weakling warrior or a clumsy thief, and a priority system would help out with making the stats fit with the char design that the player has created.

Also, even with the best of stats, a PC can still get themselves very easily killed in Zalanthas, ESPECIALLY when the player tries to go hack and slash.
You just can't get by in Arm without roleplaying, you WILL die one way or another. And even with a priorty system in place, getting to choose which one will be your highest stat and so on, doesn't guarantee that your highest score won't be average or above average anyway. The actual stat rating would still be randomly generated, the player would just get to prioritize them to fit the char they would like to play, for better OR worse.

Hack and slashers, from what I've seen, just don't survive on Zalanthas long...the chars I see stick around are played by good, if not great roleplayers.

Just throwing in some more of my opinion.

-jhunter

[jhunter]

Oops, sorry about the mess above, was doing too many things at once.
:?

[Angela Christine]

Maybe that clears it up a bit. Or maybe you're just twinkish and thought infinite rerolls would be cool. I dunno.

I agree it's hard to tell with AC but she was PROBABLY joking.

Be nice, I was sleepy.    But my point was that I believe no good can come from discussing ways to "improve" the stat system.  The most likely result is that stat levels will be hidden the way skills are.  :x

If you must mess with the stat system, go with something simple.  We already have the reroll command, I assume it wouldn't take much to change the allowed number of rerolls from 1 to 10, 100 or 1000.  Then if you think stats don't matter you go with your first set and get into the game, if you think stats are terribly important, you keep rerolling until you get something you like or hit the 2 hour limit.

Another option would be to completely eliminate random stats.  You get whatever "average" is, and then modifiers based on race, class, size and age are applied.  Every 25 year old, 69 inch, 7 ten-stone, human ranger would have exactly the same stats as every other 25 year old, 69 inch, 7 ten-stone, human ranger.  Take away the randomness and no one can ever claim their concept was ruined by a bad roll.  The variety between individuals would be based more on roleplay and skills than stats.

AC

[John]

Stats aren't that important. Seriously. If you got Absolutely Incredible stats for everything then you would STILL suck (unless fighting other newbies). Someone with poor stats will still be able to beat you.

By the time you have gotten your skills up and if you've roleplayed correctly and send in logs asking for a small stat increase (to help you with armor etc) I'm sure the Imms will do something for you. All it takes is patience and roleplay and "bad stats" can be overcome while still keeping your character concept.

Also, if you get terrific strength and terrible agility and you wanted it the other way around and you continuously take the brunt of people's attacks (but beat them cause of your amazing strength) then just RP that your side-stepping their blows. I'm sure no-one will mind.

So yeah. Stats AREN'T important (IMO).