Re: Stat Boosts.

[Ampere]

We're doing away with player requested stat boosts.

With the option of selecting your stat order, the ability to reroll once, and the stat-affecting age code now in place, allowing stat boosts is no longer as vital or necessary as it once was.  We'll still consider requests for stat changes that impact playability (rangers who cannot use bows, for example).

Any requests to bump for other reasons will be rejected.

This discourages roleplaying. When motivated people are weak, they exercise, and become stronger.

EDIT: Omitted a bit a smart assery.

[Cerelum]

I have never personally used this based on the fact I tend to do short to mid days played characters <15 days.

However, I liked the fact that I COULD sometime in the future if I find a role I don't go bat shit crazy bored in, improve upon my characters stats through creative roleplay, it also opened up a new avenue towards solo rp which would actually reap some type of reward instead of making it what I like to call, "A Masturbatorial Exercise" which is what most solo rp really boils down to, because unless a staff member is watching, you are really just going through the motions.

As I said, I've never used this type of request before, but I feel that for people who put the work in, do the time (however long rl devoted towards it) should be rewarded, the same way if someone works out on P90X for 90 days and follows the plan, they will get larger and stronger and build their stamina.

So for those players, I am saddened and it appears that you must just rely on coded elements of the game to govern your character where before you had a more active role in these things.

I can understand on the staff side there is probably some debate, "Nessalin, why did you boost Amo's strength twelve points because he sent you a log of working out for four weeks." "Cause I thought it merited it." "Nessalin you're a push over..." etc.

Or simply the fact that they get tons of requests as is and don't want to put in the research needed to make sure the logs are valid, and not just someone typing up a text file to doctor a log.

I personally think eliminated the un-coded ways of advancement in any field of the game is a bad thing, but it really doesn't matter what we think, we aren't in control of that stuff, only the producers and administrators are...

[mansa]

In my opinion,

A reroll undo would be a small step to help this.

That's all I got, on this subject.

*shrug*

/I've never "successfully" got a stat changed using this tool
//I've had characters go from Poor strength to Average strength over time, using the time the age code

[Aaron Goulet]

Having never requested a stat boost, I will be largely unaffected by this, but I can see why some people might feel reluctant about this change.  I think the greater benefit of less staff overhead on other requests is worth the trade-off, but I also like Mansa's idea of a 'reroll undo'.

[Synthesis]

I get the feeling many people get stat boosts by suiciding their shitty characters, anyway.

Much faster than "roleplaying."

Just sayin'.

[Kol]

 

I was about to App!!!!

Oh well, i think this will take a huge aspect of the game away from those who dont 'just suicide thier shitty characters anyway'

I think those who worked towards stat changes in the past, and would do so again in the future, are now cheated of that chance for solo, or group RP.

[RogueGunslinger]

This is an interesting decision.

[Jingo]

Stats are ridiculous to begin with. But this decision is about as bad.

What? I can start with three exceptional stats by virtue of character generation and kill a scrab with my three minute character.

But no, don't want us to raise our character's stats through roleplay. Especially not the one that can't even fight a tregil out of the box.

[Twilight]

I agree with the change and the reasoning behind it.

Truly unplayable stats (as in code will not work) not fixable IG without imms were much rarer than people make it out to be, IMHO.

[Delstro]

I do not like this decision. I have used it twice in the past. Once because my elf was too weak to use most bows and too strong to use the rest.
The other was because it ruined my character concept.

This decision will increase my number of characters that suicide over bad stats because now there is no hope.

[Tzurahro]

Not every specific instance has been determined staff-side, yet, but I believe the general thrust is that every character is to be assumed to already be working their hardest to be at the peak of their potential.  The same for age-related changes.  These changes are meant to reflect the peak possible ability of a PC at their particular age with their own inherent potential.

For cases like a half-giant who can't hold two apples at the same time, or other rare comparable situations, then either the racial minimum stats will be adjusted or other obstacle in the gameworld will be re-evaluated.

It will remove the inherent subjectivity and overhead of staff modifications, which some players seek out with regularity and many others have never received.

[Krath]

I like Nessalin.

However I am against this decision. Why cant I lift stones or do speed drills
icly for a long period of time and get stronger???

Edited to add:

And what about this?
http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,37702.0.html

[Cutthroat]

I could see the reasoning behind this decision. We have a lot of sway over what our PC's stats will be. Two stat choices (or a reroll undo, whatever) would be nifty, but it's pretty unlikely you'll get stats that aren't suitable. You could still RP "stat training", but you'll just have to depend on the slow growth of stat over time rather than a sudden jump.

[MarshallDFX]

Can somebody point me in the direction of information on how the aging code works?  I want some more specifics here.

[Twilight]

Why cant I lift stones or do speed drills
icly for a long period of time and get stronger???

If the assumption that you are at your full potential for the state your body is in, which changes with age, and that is what your stats represent, then working out is not going to improve you.  You don't improve beyond your full potential...your full potential is as good as you can get.

[Krath]

Why cant I lift stones or do speed drills
icly for a long period of time and get stronger???

If the assumption that you are at your full potential for the state your body is in, which changes with age, and that is what your stats represent, then working out is not going to improve you.  You don't improve beyond your full potential...your full potential is as good as you can get.

Twilight, FULL potential, is AI. Not average or below average or exceptional. If you are talking about potential the -sky- is the limit. And saying working out isnt going to improve you is flat out wrong, this coming from someone who -is- a certified personal trainer and dietitian.

[mansa]

Can somebody point me in the direction of information on how the aging code works?  I want some more specifics here.

Announcement of Stats Changing as you get older:
http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,31960.0.html

Discussion about the change.
http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,31961.0.html

[Delstro]

I can only explain my dissatisfaction with poetry as I fear the players are losing their voice in just about every decision that is made.

I do not like this, Delstro I are.
I would like to hit it with a car.
I do not like this in my house.
I would not do this to a mouse-y.
I do not like this here or there.
I do not like this anywhere.

I would like to hit it with a box.
I would like to hit it with a fox.
I would bury it under a house.
I would like to bite it with a mouse.
I do not like this here or there.
I do not like this anywhere.
I do not like this decision.
I do not like this, Delstro's crying.

[Krath]

I can only explain my dissatisfaction with poetry as I fear the players are losing their voice in just about every decision that is made.

TRUTH! We have -no- opinion anymore. I remember when the Old Immortals would ask us
what we thought before doing something like this. There have been several significant
changes which no opinions of the players were asked. Why is this? Isnt it the playerbase
you are trying to appease? What is a mud without players?

[Lizzie]

I'm not seeing any problem. But then, the only thing I ever really have trouble with is sucky stun points. It's all about the stun points.

As for full potential being AI, I disagree. Not everyone is -capable- of being that strong. Some people just plain don't have the natural born musculature. Some people lack the stamina required to train for the duration needed to get that strong. Some people lack the patience. Some people lack the resources. Some people lack the steriods. Some people have the steroids, but then get kicked out of the league, lose their sponsorships, and end up on skid row, drunken, WEAK-ass beggars. They have then, at that point, demonstrated their full potential.

[Intrepid]

People are not made equal in Arm...and the stats are not supposed to be fair.  I like the unfairness of it.  I've never had an AI stat before, but I've been overjoyed to have one or two Exceptionals, since it meant that I was in the upper percentile of that stat type.

[Pheonix]

People are not made equal in Arm...and the stats are not supposed to be fair.  I like the unfairness of it.  I've never had an AI stat before, but I've been overjoyed to have one or two Exceptionals, since it meant that I was in the upper percentile of that stat type.

AI is AI for a reason. Same with poor...although I find it's far easier to have stats in the lower range than upper...

I will put in my vote with the 'stat undo' group though. I think that would help lessen the concerns of the players who care about these things.

[Bogre]

Never requested one, ever.

I didn't think people used it that much.

[flurry]

Never requested one, ever.

Same here. I never really liked the policy of allowing them to be improved this way, in fact. So I'm happy with the change.

I didn't think people used it that much.

It would be interesting to know this. I suspect, as with special aps, that a relatively small number of players accounted for most of the requests.

[Cerelum]

Never requested one, ever.

I didn't think people used it that much.

This was the reason they changed it.  Because it was the same people all the time.

Just like with special apps, it was the same people everytime (myself included) who would throw in a special app soon as the timer wore off.

Do I think it's really right to say, "We will never do this again." no, but do I think it should only be done after GREAT amounts of time and GREAT amounts of roleplay, yes.

What I mean by GREAT amounts is that this shouldn't have been happening if you're under 20 days played with a HIGH concentration on training whatever.

[Good Gortok]

We could be free of this whole dissent over stats that has plagued the community since forever if stats were made less random and less influential to a character's power. It is currently possible for one character to have more than double the total stat values of another character of the same race, guild and age, and I find it grotesque.

[X-D]

Why, never seen anybody IRL that could lift twice as much as you or run twice as fast or twice as far or five times as smart?

[Good Gortok]

That is the most ridiculous and unintelligent argument ever to crop up in every single one of the bi-weekly discussions of how poorly stats are represented in this game. We play characters, characters that we design and affect through choices throughout the game. To leave this one aspect of it up to pure chance is idiotic. If Amos should be able to lift twice as much as Malik, run twice as fast, be twice as smart and twice as healthy, it should be because the character was designed for it*, with the checks and balances that should be in place for it to be reasonable within the premises of the game. Not because of dice.

*and outside of special circumstances, it should not be possible to just design a character who is flat out twice as stat-heavy as another of the same general type. Two human characters where one has been randomly granted an aggregate stat total more than twice that of the other is just stupid.

[Cerelum]

That is the most ridiculous and unintelligent argument ever to crop up in every single one of the bi-weekly discussions of how poorly stats are represented in this game. We play characters, characters that we design and affect through choices throughout the game. To leave this one aspect of it up to pure chance is idiotic. If Amos should be able to lift twice as much as Malik, run twice as fast, be twice as smart and twice as healthy, it should be because the character was designed for it*, with the checks and balances that should be in place for it to be reasonable within the premises of the game. Not because of dice.

*and outside of special circumstances, it should not be possible to just design a character who is flat out twice as stat-heavy as another of the same general type. Two human characters where one has been randomly granted an aggregate stat total more than twice that of the other is just stupid.

You are assuming the game is made to be fair.  It is not.

[Niamh]

Not everyone is created equal.  Just like in real life, some people are strong, some are puny.  Some people are intelligent, some are as dumb as a box of rocks.  And just like in real life, not everyone "wins".  Armageddon is not about winning.  It's about roleplaying out the lives of our PCs.  If you let stats rule your game, then of course they'll ruin some PCs when they don't turn out as good as they could be.

[Thunderboots]

I don't think that's the main point, it would be easy if you could base your characters description and guild ect around stats, and I know the guild and probably size, weight ect make some difference, but it doesn't cut out the fact that you can occationally make a really big muscular character who has something like poor strength. It's a hard problem to solve, since if stats WERE based around how you made your character then the game would probably end up with alot of people with stupidly high strength and other stats, but there's definitely a problem with the way stats work - and making them less changeable certainly won't solve the problem.

[Spoon]

I think you can easily shape a character with stat priorities and a re-roll, and now an undo so people who succumb to gambling easily don't fuck up their PC. I you want a strong PC, then you should be happy with 'good' or higher strength in my opinion. That indicates a strong person. AI is the full potential for the race, not the individual. Hercules gets AI strength, burly joe the stonemason gets very good. One of the things I like about stats is how extreme they get: being exceptional in an area is exactly that. I think people are maybe getting to hung up on numbers without even realising it. They want 18 strength otherwise they won't make a good warrior, something which isn't true at all in this game. I like random stats. If we had a point allocating system pretty soon we'd end up with clones all over the place.

[Morrolan]

I think this is a good solution that will free up some of the staff's time, taking away something that looks, even from here, to be a boring chore that affects only one player at a time.

Personally, I've requested stat boosts before, but I can see how they would be difficult to manage from a staff perspective.  The reroll undo option is much cleaner to administrate.

Morrolan

[My 2 sids]

Ironically, I wouldn't care about the change unless the rational was what Cerelum implied.  It's always a bad idea to let a few (instead of many) influence policy.  If a few people are taking advantage the system -- than the fair thing is to deal with them (not make some kind of blanket punishment)

As for the actual change -- I think it will discourage good solo roll-play and may end a few PCs, but also free up IMM's time.

[janeshephard]

Not everyone is created equal.  Just like in real life, some people are strong, some are puny.  Some people are intelligent, some are as dumb as a box of rocks.  And just like in real life, not everyone "wins".  Armageddon is not about winning.  It's about roleplaying out the lives of our PCs.  If you let stats rule your game, then of course they'll ruin some PCs when they don't turn out as good as they could be.

No one is really arguing this. If anything people are upset that they create a big dumb thug and wind up with a dumb wimp.

[RogueGunslinger]

That really shouldn't happen, with stat prioritization, and aging code. I say the first stat prioritized has about a 70% chance of being good or better. I've personally, out of many, many characters, have never gotten a weak character when I prioritized strength, or a dumb one when I prioritized wisdom, etc.

[Riev]

For me, I have never really liked trying to apply for wisdom increases myself (even though most of my characters really need it). However, I feel that even the skinniest, highest metabolism people can eventually eat enough meat protein and lift enough heavy things that they could increase their strength marginally.

Aging code may be the answer, but I had a character live for (almost?) 10 IC years and never saw a stat go up. I have a theory on when it WOULD go up, but waiting for the aging code seems to take forever.

[Sephiroto]

If Amos should be able to lift twice as much as Malik, run twice as fast, be twice as smart and twice as healthy, it should be because the character was designed for it*, with the checks and balances that should be in place for it to be reasonable within the premises of the game. Not because of dice.

I take it you've never played D&D.

I'm glad there was a reroll undo added.  I've never had a successful stat boost, even when a PC had a poor stat.  So, undoing a reroll is an added bonus to me.  Thanks.

[mansa]

Automation is awesome!
Code is impervious to favourtism.

[Akoto]

Personally, I'm thrilled about the option of being able to undo a reroll. It sucks when you create an awesome concept which relies upon stats to some degree (those do exist), only to have a bad roll, and an even worse reroll. At least the former might be salvageable without too much misery.

I wish this had been around for my current character!

[jhunter]

Not everyone is created equal.  Just like in real life, some people are strong, some are puny.  Some people are intelligent, some are as dumb as a box of rocks.  And just like in real life, not everyone "wins".  Armageddon is not about winning.  It's about roleplaying out the lives of our PCs.  If you let stats rule your game, then of course they'll ruin some PCs when they don't turn out as good as they could be.

No one is really arguing this. If anything people are upset that they create a big dumb thug and wind up with a dumb wimp.

You rarely see anyone argue when they created a big dumb thug and end up with a big smart thug. People are only bitching about it when it isn't advantageous.

[Ampere]

While unfortunate, it is as I often say, not my game.  However, it would have been nice had there been a grace period offered for those of us who've been storing our logs prior to the announcement.

Ah well.

[jmordetsky]

On a total tangent, I sort of like the change, but only because I could never actually be bothered emote training and logging it. Ick, how droll...

Oh that and an undo reroll is AWESOME.

It would be interesting however if attributes were treated like very slow moving skills effected by certain actions and time capped like skills. Moving outdoors with heavy encumbrance had a percent chance to bump strength by .01 with a .2 cap per IC year or something like that. That way over the course 2-3 years you could feasibly get stronger.  Draining stamina to 1/10 similar effect.  (I can't think of anything for wisdom and agility.)

You could imagine this being terribly abused by every bynner wearing rock filled backpacks (um - wait don't they already do this?) and sprinting everyday. But with a high enough time caps (total time alive caps, not play time caps), it would probably be fine.


***Edited cuz im dum and smelly

[jmordetsky]

That really shouldn't happen, with stat prioritization, and aging code. I say the first stat prioritized has about a 70% chance of being good or better. I've personally, out of many, many characters, have never gotten a weak character when I prioritized strength, or a dumb one when I prioritized wisdom, etc.

Seconded. I haven't had a problem with this.

[Myrdryn]

What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

[Pheonix]

What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

My initial reaction to this is positive, but I can think of so many ways people would try and take advantage after knowing their stats...

It would no longer be about players playing their concept, but playing what they roll.

[Cutthroat]

What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

SoI currently does this with its new character generation process, actually. There, the roll stays the same with the chosen role and area even if you try to make a new character before completing the app process. I imagine that a roll could be saved for each attempt for every guild, so if I make an assassin with str/end/agi/wis then see my stats and quit out before I write my description, if I try to make another assassin with str/end/agi/wis I'll just get the same roll back.

[Fathi]

My initial reaction to this is positive, but I can think of so many ways people would try and take advantage after knowing their stats...

Such as?

I'm not being sarcastic - I'm just curious what specific downsides you're predicting.

[crackerjack]

What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

I generated a poll with a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer for this question, here: http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,37743.0.html

I think this would be a great idea and would be curious on how a vote would turn out.

[Synthesis]

My initial reaction to this is positive, but I can think of so many ways people would try and take advantage after knowing their stats...

Such as?

I'm not being sarcastic - I'm just curious what specific downsides you're predicting.

Off the top of my head:

1.  Strong positive correlation of "my character is a heartless, merciless n00bkiller" backgrounds with monster truck stats.

2.  Strong positive correlation of "my character doesn't give a fuck and does crrrrrazy wild things!" with shitty stats.

For example, every time you roll stats where you don't get "very good" or better for your primary, you could just make a background that states "ARR, I'm a silt pirate" and go out and be a silt pirate, with predictable results; or a background that states "I hate elves and always attack them on sight," again, with predictable results.  While this isn't much different than intentionally suiciding a character with shitty stats, the problem is that it allows a modicum of justification, since the death in question wouldn't technically be a violation of the rules (at least, not the rules governing in-character behavior).

That being said, I am marginally in favor of the proposal, because control over the chargen process is more important to me than worrying about what munchkins are up to.

[Nyr]

This is already in the works for Arm 2 and will not be done for Arm 1 at this time.

[janeshephard]

My initial reaction to this is positive, but I can think of so many ways people would try and take advantage after knowing their stats...

Such as?

I'm not being sarcastic - I'm just curious what specific downsides you're predicting.

There's a very simple one. Disconnect if you have bad stats and go back to chargen again after.

Seriously, the only fix for this is a point system with some randomness introduced by weighting.

[Synthesis]

Man, I hate getting pagerolled.

[RogueGunslinger]

My initial reaction to this is positive, but I can think of so many ways people would try and take advantage after knowing their stats...

Such as?

I'm not being sarcastic - I'm just curious what specific downsides you're predicting.

Off the top of my head:

1.  Strong positive correlation of "my character is a heartless, merciless n00bkiller" backgrounds with monster truck stats.

2.  Strong positive correlation of "my character doesn't give a fuck and does crrrrrazy wild things!" with shitty stats.

For example, every time you roll stats where you don't get "very good" or better for your primary, you could just make a background that states "ARR, I'm a silt pirate" and go out and be a silt pirate, with predictable results; or a background that states "I hate elves and always attack them on sight," again, with predictable results.  While this isn't much different than intentionally suiciding a character with shitty stats, the problem is that it allows a modicum of justification, since the death in question wouldn't technically be a violation of the rules (at least, not the rules governing in-character behavior).

That being said, I am marginally in favor of the proposal, because control over the chargen process is more important to me than worrying about what munchkins are up to.

[MarshallDFX]

This is already in the works for Arm 2 and will not be done for Arm 1 at this time.

Can I ask what this is referring to?  Is it this?

What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

[Nyr]

Yes, sorry.  I meant to quote it so that it would be attributed correctly in context.

edit:  and it would be a lot more robust than just "rolling stats in advance."

[MarshallDFX]

The way I see it working alright:

Select height, weight, guild, subguild, and race.  Write a basic background.
You are now committed to playing this setup.  You must complete this application before you can play.
Stat roll.
Check to see if you are an absolutely behemothly strong person.
Write description, and have the option make additions only to your background.

Submit.

This is just an idea to try and balance Synthesis' points with the "stats don't fit concept" problem.

Also just like to point out that Niamh locked the wrong thread.  The only real imm-bashing I found actually occured in this one.  The other one seemed pretty tame.

Edit to note:  I guess this doesn't change the fact that somebody could still add "ARR I'm a silt pirate who kills elves on sight!" when they get AI strength, but I think that this is something staff would have to moniter.  It would be fairly clear if somebody went form being Anxious Andy in their pre-stat background to Mass-murderer in their post-stat.

[number13]

What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

It could be discouraging to see a row of shitty stats, to the point where it could be the tipping point between apping a character or deciding otherwise.  And this:

1.  Strong positive correlation of "my character is a heartless, merciless n00bkiller" backgrounds with monster truck stats.

2.  Strong positive correlation of "my character doesn't give a fuck and does crrrrrazy wild things!" with shitty stats.

It would be better to go for some kind of stat obfuscation with a simple point buy system, so that characters appear roughly equal. Or go for a full out point-buy system, with merits and flaws to balance/compensate characters with very high or very low stats.

[LoD]

I would probably encourage a system like this:

1. Everyone begins with their stats at poor at character generation.
2. Everyone is granted a minimum number of points to distribute at character generation in line with their concept.
3. Everyone is granted a small, and random, number of additional points after entering the game to further distribute immediately or whenever they so chose to reflect character growth/potential. (e.g. A character could immediately assign their current attributes, or save them to apply to their attributes at a later date.)

This type of solution would accomplish many of the things people currently dislike:

1. You would be able to tailor your character's skills fairly well to a particular character concept at character generation.
2. Everyone would share the same minimum values, so the Staff could better control the low/high end of the spectrum.
3. There would still be some randomness/excitement about stats that you wouldn't see until you actually entered the game, which would discourage people from being disappointed in their stats at generation.
4. This gives people even more control over how their characters come out, while also being able to keep it within appropriate boundaries. 

The chance of getting an absolutely incredible without being forced to accept some below average stats might still require a high number of random points to assign, whereas, someone could, if they wanted, make some one-dimensional freak if they wanted to accept penalties in other areas.

I further believe that this style of stat allocation would need to be paired with a completely revised system of how those stats tie into various skills and abilities.  Bonuses for each stat should be fairly even across the board, and players should be forced to carefully consider the pros and cons to min/maxing their abilities.  Gone should be the days were an extremely high strength immediately trumps experience, or has such a profound impact upon combat that it trivializes the other choices.

-LoD

[path]

LoD's is the first idea I've heard that I like.

[Aaron Goulet]

I would probably encourage a system like this:

1. Everyone begins with their stats at poor at character generation.
2. Everyone is granted a minimum number of points to distribute at character generation in line with their concept.
3. Everyone is granted a small, and random, number of additional points after entering the game to further distribute immediately or whenever they so chose to reflect character growth/potential. (e.g. A character could immediately assign their current attributes, or save them to apply to their attributes at a later date.)

I've always believed that an allocation-based system would be best, but I'm not too fond of point #3, simply because there are people who will feel cheated if they don't get as many points for the random roll as someone else might.

What this does, in the end, is give full control over a character's statistics to the player.  The only unrealistic concepts are the ones that involve a character being awesome at everything (and then, there's always special applications).

A static number of points that is consistent for all characters leaves little room to complain;  the choice is up to you whether your character has two absolutely incredible stats and has two poor/below average ones, or whether he or she is slightly above average across the board.   (Keep in mind that this is just an example to demonstrate a concept, so don't bother picking it apart.  The amount of points issued could be adjusted by the staff for maximum fairness.)

Also, if everyone gets the same amount of points, the problem of suiciding goes away, since the random factors are removed entirely.  It's all player choice.

[Twilight]

I've never like point allocation systems.  I like it where some characters are exceptional, and some are blah.  Over time, such systems are fair to everyone, although not obviously for any particular character.  When everyone has to make the same choices it makes it so...drab.

[spawnloser]

The one thing point allocation systems have is that people all start on even ground.  I like that, actually.  The biggest problem is min-max, however.  Both systems have pluses and minuses to them.

I'm fine with the system as it is now (edit to add that by this I mean the way it will be), but like I said in the other thread on this topic, I'm disappointed that old characters which never got the chance to reroll/undo are being forbidden to have stat boosts along with the characters that get a reroll/undo.  I would be happiest if all old characters got this chance too, if desired.

[RogueGunslinger]

This seemed more like a quick-fix that staff didn't foresee much reaction from, and when they got that reaction, they had to toss out the Reroll undo just to appease people.

Once again, this was a strange decision.

[LoD]

I've never like point allocation systems.  I like it where some characters are exceptional, and some are blah.  Over time, such systems are fair to everyone, although not obviously for any particular character.  When everyone has to make the same choices it makes it so...drab.

This is why I advocated the combination of a static point-system couple with a dynamic, and random, point system so that you get the best of both worlds.  What you really do is create a more stable environment for people to create their characters.  They have more initial control in making their characters adequately average, or lopsidedly-exceptional.  The random points would then provide players with a little extra something to look forward to and potentially give them access to a a more exceptional character than the others.

I, too, think a completely static point-system would be somewhat boring.  The randomness, for me, does make the world seem a little more exciting and unpredictable, where people can be superior/inferior to their peers.  It's also harder to pinpoint a mix/max build when people have a random number of points compared to the static ones.  It also gives people something to look forward to when making a new character.  The stat-generating process is always one of the first exciting moments of the game, and I like that factor.

I understand that some of us will just have to agree to disagree as to whether equal or random stats is better/more fun, but I think we can agree that this type of system would offer a nice compromise.  More control, less disappointment, and, yet, still some room for the hand of fate to give your character an exciting boost.

-LoD

[Tzurahro]

This seemed more like a quick-fix that staff didn't foresee much reaction from, and when they got that reaction, they had to toss out the Reroll undo just to appease people.

Once again, this was a strange decision.

Actually, it went about how we expected it to.  The "reroll undo" option had been inconclusively discussed staff-side previously, but Mansa's post just brought it to the fore again, and the matter was finally decided.  Morgenes was just lightning fast on implementation is all.

[RogueGunslinger]

This seemed more like a quick-fix that staff didn't foresee much reaction from, and when they got that reaction, they had to toss out the Reroll undo just to appease people.

Once again, this was a strange decision.

Actually, it went about how we expected it to.  The "reroll undo" option had been inconclusively discussed staff-side previously, but Mansa's post just brought it to the fore again, and the matter was finally decided.  Morgenes was just lightning fast on implementation is all.

Ah. My view-point is limited, of course. Morgenes is pretty impressive.

[mansa]

"Reroll undo" was also something I've mentioned in the past before, too.
Like 2 years ago or something.

Maybe it was someone else who brought it up.  I just remembered it.

[AmandaGreathouse]

I did.

Do I think it adds anything to the game? Not really. Do I think it takes away from the game? A little. That said, I can't recall having ever asked for a stat boost, so I'm fairly unaffected by this. I would like to see mansa's undo reroll option, though.

Actually. And am glad to see it went in.

YAY and Thank you, Morgenes.