Now that we have stat priority...

[Morrolan]

I was thinking about stats and rerolls and stats yesterday, and I was thinking that (now that we have stat priority), stats farther from "average" in both directions should be harder to attain.

I was thinking that it might be good if something were done to lower the amount of deviation from average, to lower the number of super-strong fighters, super-smart mages, super-agi thieves, etc.  One fairly simple solution would be to make the roll the average of two separage rolls, though people with more than college-level stats might simply take a look at the numbers and come up with a more balanced solution.

This would drive the stat-rolls towards the center, but still make it possible to have the higher stats.

Yes, many people are going to hate this idea.  I see it as a solution to the "every warrior has a really good strength, and if you don't, your life will be hell" instead of the random stats we used to have.

Morrolan

[Sephiroto]

Bell curve probability.

[Morrolan]

Yes, I presume there is a bell curve somewhere in there.

Now the questions become:
1) What is considered a standard deviation?
(I really don't know on this one.)

2) If the odds of being in the "average" range equals the first standard deviation, then what percentage of the time would a character be average in all respects (all 4 stats)?
Assuming normally distributed data, this will only happen aout 21% of the time.

That means that approximately 79% will be at least a little special, one way or the other.
I'd like a sdev's worth of characters to be basically average.  It's hard to focus on RP when your character's a cripple, and it's hard to stay in character when you're a born killer who can hardly be stopped.

Morrolan

EDIT: I don't want every character to be an Amos, but at the same time, stat ordering seems to have upped the number of bad-ass warriors, etc. in the world.  I'd like the code to give it a nudge back toward the middle.

[X-D]

I don't agree on any point. Nobody seems to be any better. Matter of fact, I would say that they have become if anything, more average. And you would be suprised how often the "badass" warriors have average or below stats.

[Clearsighted]

I don't agree on any point. Nobody seems to be any better. Matter of fact, I would say that they have become if anything, more average. And you would be suprised how often the "badass" warriors have average or below stats.

I concur.

[Jarek]

Here's one, no stats below average, unless you special request it for your character.

[Yam]

I don't agree on any point. Nobody seems to be any better. Matter of fact, I would say that they have become if anything, more average. And you would be suprised how often the "badass" warriors have average or below stats.

I concur.

I disagree.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Fuck no. Let it be. I'm happy now - don't fiddle any more with the process. Morg already tucked that aging mess into the code. That'll even 'em out, trust me.

[Lakota]

No more tweaks with stats, please. I haven't seen a single AI since the tweak. 

Stats simply matter too much in the game, to too many guilds/races.

[Gunnerblaster]

And we aren't your 'average' commoners. Our PC's were meant to stand out above your typical commoner, in my opinion.

Maybe a total of 150 PC's scattered throughout the Known World compared to the thousands of NPC commoners living in each city-state.

[Sephiroto]

I haven't seen a single AI since the tweak. 

I have.   

[Delstro]

I disagree that we should have more average stats. I like having extremely awesome, or oppressively bad stats. I don't want middle of the road everytime.

[SMuz]

It's good as it is. Don't fix it unless it's broken. Problem with more average stats is that it depends on luck - and the 1 in 40 characters who has absolutely incredibly anything will be much more powerful than most people. It works fine now.. most warriors have above average strength, thieves have above average dexterity, it's as it should be. If it isn't, then reroll.

And like X-D said, stats don't really matter after a while anyway. They only appear to very early on in the game, where an unskilled merchant with exceptional agility and two daggers could cut an average fighter to ribbons. But once that fighter actually gets a few skill points, he'd be able to trash the merchant with no problem.

I'd support optionally tweaking your stats to become more extreme on both sides, though, like someone who has extremely good agility and strength, but very poor endurance and wisdom Makes for some interesting roleplaying. Optional, of course.

[Reiloth]

No more tweaks.

I have to agree with Lakota here.

[Reiloth]

Here's one, no stats below average, unless you special request it for your character.

Part of me says no, and the other part of me says my badass elven crimelord had 3 poor stats, so...Huh.

[Jingo]

Make stats affect combat less.

Especially strength.

Edit: grammer gammer grammer

[Lakota]

lol at Jingo's "edit."

Strength -does- make a bit too much of an impact in fighting. I don't think it should determine whether you hit, but instead, how -hard- you hit someone.

Agility should determine how often you swing, and whether your swing connects.

[Is Friday]

lol at Jingo's "edit."

Strength -does- make a bit too much of an impact in fighting. I don't think it should determine whether you hit, but instead, how -hard- you hit someone.

Agility should determine how often you swing, and whether your swing connects.

Um.

This attribute affects several things within the game world, such as the
amount of weight you can carry before you begin to suffer penalties,
how hard you hit in combat, and modifiers on subduing the inhabitants
of Zalanthas.

Agility is an ability score that measures all types of physical
coordination and swiftness.  Hand-eye coordination, reaction time, balance,
depth perception, and reflexes are all types of characteristics measured
by agility.

... they do.

[Good Gortok]

Stats simply matter too much in the game, to too many guilds/races.

Make stats affect combat less.

Especially strength.

Strength -does- make a bit too much of an impact in fighting.

These. I don't like how much those initial dice rolls affect our characters throughout their lives. It's just too much of a factor, especially strength.

[Lakota]

I'm not referencing documentation, I'm referencing reality.

In hindsight my post was a bit obtuse.

I understand that agility determines how often you strike. I meant to say that in addition agility should determine whether said attempt lands.

Currently, strength factors in to whether you hit an opponent or not, not agility.

[RogueGunslinger]

I'm not referencing documentation, I'm referencing reality.

In hindsight my post was a bit obtuse.

I understand that agility determines how often you strike. I meant to say that in addition agility should determine whether said attempt lands.

Currently, strength factors in to whether you hit an opponent or not, not agility.

What? Are you sure? If so, this should definitely not be so.

[Morgenes]

I'm not referencing documentation, I'm referencing reality.

In hindsight my post was a bit obtuse.

I understand that agility determines how often you strike. I meant to say that in addition agility should determine whether said attempt lands.

Currently, strength factors in to whether you hit an opponent or not, not agility.

Staff disclaimer: We do not discuss code specifics, however, I will say that what is in the documentation is accurate.  Agility affects the chance of hitting them as well as how often you swing.  Strength only comes into play for damage calculations.  Any perception to the contrary are just that, perceptions.  I have reviewed the code to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering or that it had somehow changed, but Lakota is wrong in this case.  Strength has no play in the accuracy of blows.

[RogueGunslinger]

Whew, that'll teach me to listen to Lakota any more.

[Lakota]

Whew, that'll teach me to listen to Lakota any more.

Seriously. That fucking moron.

[SMuz]

I don't want to go too code based into this, but strength and dexterity really give the same advantage. It's just that both require the use of different fighting styles.

The problem is that people with low strength and AI agility are using really lame weapons. I mean, seriously, IRL, nobody could kill a rampaging bull with two daggers. Use a real weapon!

Low strength is permanently crippling though, because a fighter with low strength won't be able to dual wield maces or walk around in heavy armor. And strength affects a person's performance against (natural) armor. A fighter could survive with low dex with the right style, but a low str one won't be able to do any damage at all.

Also, back on the OP of doing bell-curves, you should note that tweaking the stats would make humans much stronger on average than elves, dwarves stronger than humans, but dwarves will be much, much slower than elves. And half-giants..!