I agree with what you are saying @JuliusBorisov but shouldn't this respect go both ways between forum members? That is, for my own clarity, a member can insult multiple people at once but if one of these people sees fit to call them up on it then they are the ones slapped on the wrist? Somehow I really do not think that is fair.
You do not think this is offensive and inflammatory?
"Sure, I TOTALLY get that. Everyone has their own house rules. One player's "cheese" is another player's "great strategy". It's a single-player game, and all that matters in the end is your own personal enjoyment.
But I'm genuinely baffled when people talk spending literally hours re-rolling stats, or even more extreme, running a 3rd-party utility to automatically re-roll endlessly until some minimum threshold is attained. I truly can't see how that's any more legitimate than just using CTRL+8 or EEKeeper.
The most charitable explanation I can think of: Perhaps folks feel they've somehow "earned" their score after they put in hours of mindless button mashing. When the random number generator finally spits out a 95+ after tens-of-thousands of clicks, perhaps that's a sign that the AD&D gods have smiled upon CHARNAME and he/she is the chosen one! (I.e., it's a role-playing thing.) Ooohh-kay!"
Let's count:
1) "cheese" 2) genuinely baffled because equal to cheating 3) CHARITABLE explanation (the fact that someone is presumptuous enough to think they have the right to be "charitable" with you and your ilk) 4) the Gods have smiled on charname 5) chosen one! 6) because you are "role-playing" (I can hear the uh-huh) 7) "Ooohh-kay"
But other than that, this fellow forum member clearly TOTALLY understands.
And I am the one slapped on the wrist?
EDIT: TLDR: To clarify, people here have the right to be condescending/sarcastic towards me but I cannot use the @ function to say exactly what I think about it when I feel it was disrespectful?
Wow, didn't mean to offend or condescend. And of course, it's a ridiculous thing to argue about: If pressing "reroll" countless times (vs CTRL+8) adds to your enjoyment, then I'm not going to persuade you to do otherwise.
I was mostly (genuinely) curious about the underlying motive that drives people to prefer countless rerolls vs ctrl+8 when the outcome is identical. There have been some interesting answers here. I enjoy reading the discussion.
Another possibility that occurred to me: Perhaps spending (literally) hours on the character creation screen is how some folks build a greater sense of attachment to CHARNAME. Listening to the music, thinking about the upcoming adventure, setting the mood. As someone who generally plays a completionist-style, I can relate to taking things slow and enjoying the process. It's just like re-watching the same cutscenes for the 100th time or strolling through Beregost, when you could easily quickly skip / CTRL+J through that stuff.
Of course, that explanation doesn't cover folks who use 3rd-party utilities to automate their re-rolls. I still can't get my head around that one, but I'll stop trying
Thanks for your conciliatory response @Bret I appreciate it. I think for me personally (though I cannot speak for everyone), @Grond0 covered it perfectly when he spoke about character creation being part of the game itself, especially the fact that the game gives you that possibility. There are other games (e.g., NWN or DA) that greatly limit your ability to do such a thing, so there it is illegitimate and not part of the character creation. Considering that BG gives ability, to me it appears completely legitimate - someone might get the roll they want in the first try by luck, same as another might have to roll for days and they won't get lucky. Another part of it is what you described, spending a lot of time on the character and thinking about who they are - conversely, I also spend inordinate amounts of time picking race, skin tone, and any other specs when I create the character. It is pretty much guaranteed with any game that has a character creation process that I will not be able to play the game on the day that I start it, simply because I spend so much time on the character creation screen.
Now on to cheating: I agree with you on 3rd party utilities - for me that is not part of the process I feel comfortable with at all, but have no judgement on folks that want to use it. People spend their money on games to have a good time, so whatever floats their boat. I also play on harder settings, but have no judgement reserved for people that want to play story mode to just see the game. Whatever people want to do to have fun is fine with me. And again about cheating - despite the fact that I feel compelled to create the perfect character, the only reason I have ever used the CLUA console was to shut down the terrible Anomen romance that would *just not end*. I am completely against cheating and did not even go to Watchers Keep throughout SoA even though playing without quivers and extra placeholders for all those annoying things in the backpack drove me nuts after the generousness of SoD with those items. In many ways I am a complete glutton for punishment in my games and a completionist too. I think we have to think about all the little things/obstacles people set for themselves along with the boons they "grant" themselves before we can get a clear picture on how balanced they play the game. Though, again, for me, I don't care if someone plays in a balanced way as long as they are having fun. I only know what 'moral code' I have with my game and how I play it to feel good about myself and that is enough.
Once again, thanks for explaining your point more clearly.
@Ayeotiee Thats a really good roll for a Bard. I swear, they are really hard to roll well for.
@bret@Divina I use a halfway method. Once I hit a certain roll for a class, I'll use EEKeeper to get up to that roll on future runs to save time. So I don't CTRL-8 to max my stats, but I'll CTRL-8 a 93 for my bard, because that's the highest "legit" roll I've gotten for a bard.
@ThacoBell maybe I got lucky on that bard, but I think fighters have harder time getting high stat rolls, though technically they don't need it that much expect for maxing out strength, dex and con. But I prefer to have a few points in other abilities just for RP flavor.
I could try a bard playthrough(I prefer the concept of the vanilla bard over any of the kits, blades are cool, but they feel more like sword-dancers than they do traditional bards) but I guess I'd have to get used to my main not being the top dog killing machine in the party like my Berserker, Cavalier or Barbarian.
@Ayeotiee Bards just rely on so many stats that getting a good spread is pretty difficult, of course, I'm a freak who plays every Bard (even non-Blades) as melee characters.
I'm on re-roll team, because I find it weirdly exciting - or maybe not "exciting", but there is certainly some sense of fun when you keep clicking and know that you can get something like 95 anytime. And I need hogh rolls, because my Charnames are Mary-sueish wish fullfilment, so I won't play if they aren't pretty, smart and strong.
100 Roll vanilla Elf Ranger named Noloir for BG2EE. My first BG2EE character. Unfortunately the device I had this char on was stolen so I never defeated the last enemy with that run.
As I understand it though certain races have an easier time rolling high for specific classes than others. Elves roll high with Rangers, Humans Paladins.
I'd imagine Gnomes roll exceptionally well with mages, Half elves with bard, Halflings with thief, Dwarves with Fighter or Fighter/Cleric and Half Orcs with Barbarian but I have yet to experiment with halflings and gnomes. I find it hard to take characters that are half the size of Imoen seriously enough to use them though their bonuses are phenomenal when it comes to saving throws. Particularly gnomes and dwarves.
The division between players who go for point buys, 4d6 rolls, randomised 3d6 rolls etc. stretches back a long way in rpg history. Is an adventurer an exceptional hero or just someone who got caught up in events? I can even imagine various game modes where the difficulty and stat rolling methods could change. Example: High fantasy where your hero has wonderful stats, a starting magic item, and quickly levels beyond the reach of regular foes, but will face some relatively tough bosses. Or at the other end survival horror where you get random 3d6s, little equipment, bandits etc. spawn and move around a lot on many maps, and every recruitable npc you meet has a chance of being dead, dying, or hostile.
For myself it was quite fun no-reloading a 75 character to ToB, but having played Call of Cthulhu I'm not that invested in high stats anyway! What's the lowest roll that you would accept / set?
I know this is a two years old thread but wth, I need to put my 5 cents.
I'm also on the reroll team so I'm used to invest several minutes, hours even in character creation. So starting by the end and answering @Mantis37 interesting question, the lowest roll I'd accept could be a meager 84 (24+60) for a Fighter, even 82 for a Thief (Con 16 and all that), but there's always variations for that. If I'm gonna play a Fighter and not dualing them, then I'll sure pick a half-orc (because I love them) and so I won't accept anything under 86. Caster classes (excluding Sorcerers and Shamans) are tougher because you need the 18 in an otherwise unimportant stat, but also you want (well, I want) to go as high as possible in the physical stats. At least Dexterity and Constitution are unnegotiable. For a Fighter/Illusionist I'm gonna need 93. Obviously 10s are my absolute minimum for any stat, except Charisma if I'm playing a half-orc or faking a drow/duergar (although the game doesn't aknowledge that, but the portrait and the sprite do, right? ). So it depends on the class, basically.
That being said, I'll probably go for the 90s. Like I said above, you can have a great Thief with an 82, but what if she's a really cute halfling, or he's an incredibly handsome and charismatic human? I know that in less than ten minutes I can roll a 90 which will allow me to make a 18-18-16-10-10-18. The top Charisma won't make a key difference but it doesn't hurt either, and I'll be more comfortable with my character so why not? And besides that, I like my protagonists to have a high Intelligence, especially if they don't need them.
Lastly, about that interesting debate that went bitter for some moments, I just want to note something. Of course, every person here is going to play the game the way they want, there's no point on questioning that. So if someone wants to use EEKeeper or simply Ctrl+8 to play with a shiny perfect albeit far-fetched character I'm so ok with that (and, more important yet, the world doesn't need me to be ok with that ). But when it comes to legitimacy, oh yes, it is way more legitimate to have a high roll by actually rolling it than by simply writing it down just because. And this sort of includes the autorolling mod. I tried it once, saw that I got 98 in less than thirty seconds, uninstalled it. I could be ok with a normal (human) rolling velocity, but if it's going to make like a hundred rolls per second then I feel it's almost like cheating. Almost.
Anyway this doesn't mean that you need to get legitimate stats to have fun with the game, obviously. As @Grond0 excelently put, you can go through the game Ctrl+Ying your enemies, but you probably won't do that even when it saves time. So for me there is no difference with Ctrl+8 in character creation. But in the end this is a videogame and those are for having fun. So let's just have fun the way we can.
These days I tend to build characters that are good at one thing but borderline dysfunctional at others, so I just Ctrl+8 and deduct points accordingly.
Deciding give yourself an 18/00 strength, 18 dex and 18 con is essentially the same thing as deciding to Ctrl+Y your enemies and you only need 63 points to do that. 90 to 100 point rolls barely matter unless you're playing something like a fighter/mage/cleric that needs two mental stats for casting.
Deciding give yourself an 18/00 strength, 18 dex and 18 con is essentially the same thing as deciding to Ctrl+Y your enemies
I'm all for some playful exaggeration as well as playing characters with non-perfect stats for the variety and challenge but let's just be real here for a second: that's not even remotely close to the truth.
I'm not a proponent of ctrl+8 anymore than I'm a proponent of ctrl+y (or even having cheats activated in the first place but to each their own) but there's a world of difference between those two.
There's a post early in this thread talking about the roll process ... it's not quite right, so I'll clarify.
The game rolls 3d6 for each stat, in order. Then, apply racial stat modifiers. Silently discard the roll and retry if the stat total is less than 75, or if the stats don't meet race and class minimums. If the character is a warrior of a race that doesn't have a strength penalty, roll percentile strength, which will apply if that character enters the game with 18 strength.
This produces one visible roll, which can then be adjusted by redistributing stat points while maintaining an equal (or smaller) total.
Classes and races with high minimums are more likely to discard rolls, leading to higher chances of very high roll totals; paladins and elf rangers are the most extreme cases here. The lowest chances of high roll totals belong to classes and races with negative total stat adjustments, such as dwarves and Avengers.
I have a table with all of the minimum stat requirements for races and classes in this post and a table of how hard it is to roll high scores in another post from the same thread.
On topic... I reroll for a bit, but I don't take it to extremes. My most recent character was an elf Archer (highest likelihood of high stat totals) with a total of 92, and 18/99 strength. It takes about a hundred rolls on average to get that stat total - about the same as looking for an 86 on a dwarf fighter.
I used to use CTRL-8 and reduce stats down to my highest roll for whatever class I'm building, like a permanent "store" button. I think I've even said as much somewhere in here.
Nowadays, I do a more restrained version. I go by the 5e race bonuses, but a stat where there is no bonus can only go up to 16. So a half-orc with +2 str and +1 con could get 18 and 17 str and con respectively. Though I do allow one stat max at 18 based on class.Unless the race gets a penalty, then I'll put it at 18 and apply said penalty. I'll give a bard 18 cha. A fighter would get 18 in either str or con, etc. Big rolls still feel fun and powerful, but I'm not cheeseing supergod stats.
Sorry for being a necromancer and raising a dead forum, but I am curious as to why even 80+ is rarer that 70s. Now, I never played with AD&D rules, but 3.5 and beyond, plus pathfinder, with all the characters I have made I have found it is very hard to get a total roll under 80. The average for me personally and those I have played with, the average total roll would be between 82-95 (and you only get to roll once for each ability, with only one reroll allowed for just ONE of the abilities, you don't get all the rerolls like BG allows)
There are many different systems for rolling ability scores. The BG series is based on what is really the most unforgiving of them all - 3d6, in order. That gets you an average sum of 63 (assuming a race/class with no net modifiers - it gets worse for dwarves and halflings), with a standard deviation of about 7. Rolling a 75 total is already nearly two standard deviations above the mean, in the region where the probabilities decline sharply for every additional point.
Then most of this nastiness is hidden from you; the game silently drops any roll that doesn't meet a 75 total and the race/class minimum scores. Even a forgiving choice like a fighter drops nearly twenty failed rolls before finding one the game will display. If you take a bell curve and cut off everything but the tail, what you get is a probability distribution clustered at the minimum and steeply declining after that - which is what you see in the BG series.
Whatever system you were using to roll, it was something else with different biases.
I think it actually boosts all scores up to the race/class minimums and then does the check to see if it is 75 or above.
Should be easy enough to figure out if it does or not anyway - ff it bins all rolls that don't make those minimums, then if you were rolling a paladin, you'd only see the rolls displayed where charisma was a natural 17 or 18. Charisma of 18 would therefore occur about 25% of the time. If on the other hand charisma is boosted to 17 if it is less than 17, then you'd rarely see charisma 18 as that is still 1 in 216.
Charisma of 18 is not unusual for a paladin, i.e. it's as @jmerry says - the whole roll is natural and it's only those rolls that meet requirements that are displayed.
yesterday I was rolling a elven Fighter/Mage (for testing 2.6 purposes). I clicked past a 93... clicked back. I thought lets try that again... and it worked I even rolled a 96... and clicked past it. Ctrl+8 and made my female Fighter/mage (I might change her to a him, and I might kit her/him to Fighter/Diviner).
I didn't realize you could go over 100. The highest natural roll I've ever seen was 97, though I was positive it was theoretically possible to go higher.
However, I never take the ability allocations. I only look for total roll, then spread the points as needed.
Rolls can theoretically reach as high as 108 for a race/class that doesn't have negative overall stat adjustments, but you get into absurdly unlikely territory well before that. A human ranger or paladin gets 100 or better about once in every 100,000 visible rolls, and other classes find it even harder to reach that level.
Blade 99, not the most difficult to get but the highest I've ever seen.
98 Cavalier, 18/93 str. Pretty smart Pally at 13 starting int.
98 elf fighter/mage/their. All 18z and 19 dex 17 con and 9 wis. At finish all 19z, 20 dex, 18 con, and 12 wis.
Berserker 95 with a 18/95 str. A pure human fighter, its incredibly rare to get anything over 92 and so this is my favorite roll of all time, rage mage with max int and a good charisma too!
Comments
You do not think this is offensive and inflammatory?
"Sure, I TOTALLY get that. Everyone has their own house rules. One player's "cheese" is another player's "great strategy". It's a single-player game, and all that matters in the end is your own personal enjoyment.
But I'm genuinely baffled when people talk spending literally hours re-rolling stats, or even more extreme, running a 3rd-party utility to automatically re-roll endlessly until some minimum threshold is attained. I truly can't see how that's any more legitimate than just using CTRL+8 or EEKeeper.
The most charitable explanation I can think of: Perhaps folks feel they've somehow "earned" their score after they put in hours of mindless button mashing. When the random number generator finally spits out a 95+ after tens-of-thousands of clicks, perhaps that's a sign that the AD&D gods have smiled upon CHARNAME and he/she is the chosen one! (I.e., it's a role-playing thing.) Ooohh-kay!"
Let's count:
1) "cheese"
2) genuinely baffled because equal to cheating
3) CHARITABLE explanation (the fact that someone is presumptuous enough to think they have the right to be "charitable" with you and your ilk)
4) the Gods have smiled on charname
5) chosen one!
6) because you are "role-playing" (I can hear the uh-huh)
7) "Ooohh-kay"
But other than that, this fellow forum member clearly TOTALLY understands.
And I am the one slapped on the wrist?
EDIT: TLDR: To clarify, people here have the right to be condescending/sarcastic towards me but I cannot use the @ function to say exactly what I think about it when I feel it was disrespectful?
My warning was for everyone, not for a certain user.
I was mostly (genuinely) curious about the underlying motive that drives people to prefer countless rerolls vs ctrl+8 when the outcome is identical. There have been some interesting answers here. I enjoy reading the discussion.
Another possibility that occurred to me: Perhaps spending (literally) hours on the character creation screen is how some folks build a greater sense of attachment to CHARNAME. Listening to the music, thinking about the upcoming adventure, setting the mood. As someone who generally plays a completionist-style, I can relate to taking things slow and enjoying the process. It's just like re-watching the same cutscenes for the 100th time or strolling through Beregost, when you could easily quickly skip / CTRL+J through that stuff.
Of course, that explanation doesn't cover folks who use 3rd-party utilities to automate their re-rolls. I still can't get my head around that one, but I'll stop trying
Now on to cheating: I agree with you on 3rd party utilities - for me that is not part of the process I feel comfortable with at all, but have no judgement on folks that want to use it. People spend their money on games to have a good time, so whatever floats their boat. I also play on harder settings, but have no judgement reserved for people that want to play story mode to just see the game. Whatever people want to do to have fun is fine with me. And again about cheating - despite the fact that I feel compelled to create the perfect character, the only reason I have ever used the CLUA console was to shut down the terrible Anomen romance that would *just not end*. I am completely against cheating and did not even go to Watchers Keep throughout SoA even though playing without quivers and extra placeholders for all those annoying things in the backpack drove me nuts after the generousness of SoD with those items. In many ways I am a complete glutton for punishment in my games and a completionist too. I think we have to think about all the little things/obstacles people set for themselves along with the boons they "grant" themselves before we can get a clear picture on how balanced they play the game. Though, again, for me, I don't care if someone plays in a balanced way as long as they are having fun. I only know what 'moral code' I have with my game and how I play it to feel good about myself and that is enough.
Once again, thanks for explaining your point more clearly.
@bret @Divina I use a halfway method. Once I hit a certain roll for a class, I'll use EEKeeper to get up to that roll on future runs to save time. So I don't CTRL-8 to max my stats, but I'll CTRL-8 a 93 for my bard, because that's the highest "legit" roll I've gotten for a bard.
I could try a bard playthrough(I prefer the concept of the vanilla bard over any of the kits, blades are cool, but they feel more like sword-dancers than they do traditional bards) but I guess I'd have to get used to my main not being the top dog killing machine in the party like my Berserker, Cavalier or Barbarian.
@Ayeotiee Bards just rely on so many stats that getting a good spread is pretty difficult, of course, I'm a freak who plays every Bard (even non-Blades) as melee characters.
And I need hogh rolls, because my Charnames are Mary-sueish wish fullfilment, so I won't play if they aren't pretty, smart and strong.
When trying to see what racial enemies rangers have to choose from, I rolled an unkitted human ranger. First roll:
I didnt even need the character so I scratched it...
As I understand it though certain races have an easier time rolling high for specific classes than others. Elves roll high with Rangers, Humans Paladins.
I'd imagine Gnomes roll exceptionally well with mages, Half elves with bard, Halflings with thief, Dwarves with Fighter or Fighter/Cleric and Half Orcs with Barbarian but I have yet to experiment with halflings and gnomes. I find it hard to take characters that are half the size of Imoen seriously enough to use them though their bonuses are phenomenal when it comes to saving throws. Particularly gnomes and dwarves.
For myself it was quite fun no-reloading a 75 character to ToB, but having played Call of Cthulhu I'm not that invested in high stats anyway! What's the lowest roll that you would accept / set?
I'm also on the reroll team so I'm used to invest several minutes, hours even in character creation. So starting by the end and answering @Mantis37 interesting question, the lowest roll I'd accept could be a meager 84 (24+60) for a Fighter, even 82 for a Thief (Con 16 and all that), but there's always variations for that. If I'm gonna play a Fighter and not dualing them, then I'll sure pick a half-orc (because I love them) and so I won't accept anything under 86. Caster classes (excluding Sorcerers and Shamans) are tougher because you need the 18 in an otherwise unimportant stat, but also you want (well, I want) to go as high as possible in the physical stats. At least Dexterity and Constitution are unnegotiable. For a Fighter/Illusionist I'm gonna need 93. Obviously 10s are my absolute minimum for any stat, except Charisma if I'm playing a half-orc or faking a drow/duergar (although the game doesn't aknowledge that, but the portrait and the sprite do, right?
That being said, I'll probably go for the 90s. Like I said above, you can have a great Thief with an 82, but what if she's a really cute halfling, or he's an incredibly handsome and charismatic human? I know that in less than ten minutes I can roll a 90 which will allow me to make a 18-18-16-10-10-18. The top Charisma won't make a key difference but it doesn't hurt either, and I'll be more comfortable with my character so why not? And besides that, I like my protagonists to have a high Intelligence, especially if they don't need them.
Lastly, about that interesting debate that went bitter for some moments, I just want to note something. Of course, every person here is going to play the game the way they want, there's no point on questioning that. So if someone wants to use EEKeeper or simply Ctrl+8 to play with a shiny perfect albeit far-fetched character I'm so ok with that (and, more important yet, the world doesn't need me to be ok with that
Anyway this doesn't mean that you need to get legitimate stats to have fun with the game, obviously. As @Grond0 excelently put, you can go through the game Ctrl+Ying your enemies, but you probably won't do that even when it saves time. So for me there is no difference with Ctrl+8 in character creation. But in the end this is a videogame and those are for having fun. So let's just have fun the way we can.
Edit: typos.
I'm all for some playful exaggeration as well as playing characters with non-perfect stats for the variety and challenge but let's just be real here for a second: that's not even remotely close to the truth.
I'm not a proponent of ctrl+8 anymore than I'm a proponent of ctrl+y (or even having cheats activated in the first place but to each their own) but there's a world of difference between those two.
The game rolls 3d6 for each stat, in order. Then, apply racial stat modifiers. Silently discard the roll and retry if the stat total is less than 75, or if the stats don't meet race and class minimums. If the character is a warrior of a race that doesn't have a strength penalty, roll percentile strength, which will apply if that character enters the game with 18 strength.
This produces one visible roll, which can then be adjusted by redistributing stat points while maintaining an equal (or smaller) total.
Classes and races with high minimums are more likely to discard rolls, leading to higher chances of very high roll totals; paladins and elf rangers are the most extreme cases here. The lowest chances of high roll totals belong to classes and races with negative total stat adjustments, such as dwarves and Avengers.
I have a table with all of the minimum stat requirements for races and classes in this post and a table of how hard it is to roll high scores in another post from the same thread.
On topic... I reroll for a bit, but I don't take it to extremes. My most recent character was an elf Archer (highest likelihood of high stat totals) with a total of 92, and 18/99 strength. It takes about a hundred rolls on average to get that stat total - about the same as looking for an 86 on a dwarf fighter.
Nowadays, I do a more restrained version. I go by the 5e race bonuses, but a stat where there is no bonus can only go up to 16. So a half-orc with +2 str and +1 con could get 18 and 17 str and con respectively. Though I do allow one stat max at 18 based on class.Unless the race gets a penalty, then I'll put it at 18 and apply said penalty. I'll give a bard 18 cha. A fighter would get 18 in either str or con, etc. Big rolls still feel fun and powerful, but I'm not cheeseing supergod stats.
I almost always settle for a score in the mid 80s, an 85 or above is perfect for me.
Then most of this nastiness is hidden from you; the game silently drops any roll that doesn't meet a 75 total and the race/class minimum scores. Even a forgiving choice like a fighter drops nearly twenty failed rolls before finding one the game will display. If you take a bell curve and cut off everything but the tail, what you get is a probability distribution clustered at the minimum and steeply declining after that - which is what you see in the BG series.
Whatever system you were using to roll, it was something else with different biases.
Should be easy enough to figure out if it does or not anyway - ff it bins all rolls that don't make those minimums, then if you were rolling a paladin, you'd only see the rolls displayed where charisma was a natural 17 or 18. Charisma of 18 would therefore occur about 25% of the time. If on the other hand charisma is boosted to 17 if it is less than 17, then you'd rarely see charisma 18 as that is still 1 in 216.
However, I never take the ability allocations. I only look for total roll, then spread the points as needed.
Blade 99, not the most difficult to get but the highest I've ever seen.
98 Cavalier, 18/93 str. Pretty smart Pally at 13 starting int.
98 elf fighter/mage/their. All 18z and 19 dex 17 con and 9 wis. At finish all 19z, 20 dex, 18 con, and 12 wis.
Berserker 95 with a 18/95 str. A pure human fighter, its incredibly rare to get anything over 92 and so this is my favorite roll of all time, rage mage with max int and a good charisma too!