Why we role for 18

Sharguild

Well why not?
Obviously I will do better in the game if my stats are higher, which means i have a better chance to win.
All too true. Then why do some of us not do so?
I suggest it provides opportunity to put a more realistic aspect on an unrealistic scenario when we role under 18 and determine that is more me, that is who I want to be.
When BG 1 first came out, I was amazed they had texts that could upgrade my stats. Coming from a PnP world, that was unheard of.
Mind, rolling ad infinitum for my stats was a shocker as well and the first time through, thought only 3 roles were allowed, so took what I was given. As a Fighter/Thief it was hard to role badly regardless.

But rolling 18 was and always now seems to be, the play-style most common.

Of course there are always those (who've put a few game notches in their belt) that will take first role offered but not as the norm.

I give reason for supporting the 18 role as follows;

- you are playing a computer: regardless of whatever idiosyncrasies you consider your character capable of, the computer does not care. You cannot bluff, cajole or threaten your way through a scenario. And regardless of what NWN and Dragon Age suggests, you can't either. It is a computer, it does not care.
- you have a closed loop world. Your scenario is finite. There is no embellishment to be achieved or future escapades that will alter your reality. You will start at entrance A and proceed to exit Z. Then the game is over. Hope you had fun. If not, try again.
- why the hell would you expect to be given special circumstance? Well you are given special circumstance aren't you, you are the prodigy of a god and provided unique powers. But they are limited. You cannot exceed the bounds placed upon you so gimping your stats at initial creation sort of limits your godhood what?
- no fun being a wimp. True, and dying often is no fun. Those wolves at BG1 outset are merciless. It takes experience and knowledge to game the game.
- I have no idea what I'm doing. I do what others suggest. Until I learn the game. then I play for myself.
- Fair? THIS IS SPARTA! I take all advantage provided.

I also give reason for not supporting the 18 role as follows;

- real life (in an unrealistic scenario) given chance opportunity. Probably the biggest card to play, sort of a "John Carpenter on Mars" scenario or "Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" if you will. Put into a scenario where you elect to use your guile and intellect against adverse odds vice instantly adopted strengths of attributes is brought to play.
- Just too damn unrealistic. 19 strength - really? 21 Wisdom - really? Did anyone ever even READ the DnD rule-set? I can maybe swallow that in Planescape as even with those levels, you are still in Kindergarten compared to some Planars but not in Faerun.
- It gimps my game, I can swat Ogres before I can spell Ogre. I can use weapons I couldn't even lift without years of training. I can use spells that take years to learn. All true but it's a finite game not a life experience. Still, BG1 did a better job of limitation than the succeeding games did.

So just some of my thoughts. I'm sure you have others. Quite sure.

JuliusBorisov

You know, in my country when you role for 18 it means you're an adult.

JuliusBorisov

As for rolling an 18 in an attribute while creating a character, it's very much up to one's personal taste.

For example, I just like to give my characters 18 in DEX no matter the circumstances. I like to know they're evasive and skillful.

Tresset

my half-orcs roll for 19

Crowseye

The game also supplies you with relatively powerful companion characters. It's natural to want your character to feel the most adept of the bunch, especially given the child of a god reason.

I find myself rolling for 18s in BG all the time, but when I get to Icewind Dale and create the party myself, I'm far more comfortable working with more realistic sets of scores. However, to the extent that certain things are closed off to you if you lack high enough ability scores (high level spells for example), not playing with a high score is willfully removing access to part of the game. So inevitably mages get max INT, clerics get max WIS, somebody gets to be the 18-strength melee warrior, and so on.

reap_ii

I tried playing through with a pc (fig/mage) who has straight 9's. The 9 str prolly hurt the worst. Not to mention how easy illithids could eat his small brain in just a couple of nibbles and his spell pamphlet instead of a spell book really gimped him. I did NOT finish the run.

Jarrakul

Early editions of D&D have a somewhat bizarre allocation of stat bonuses, in that they're weighted heavily towards the high and the low ends of the spectrum. This creates a situation where it's not worth upping a stat above 8 or so unless you can get it to about 15 (depending on the stat), and once you're there suddenly every point yields substantial dividends, so there's a strong incentive to get to 18. Don't get me wrong, in any system that allows unlimited rerolls you'll see your share of big numbers, but the incredible focus we BG players tend to have on "go 18 or go home" is entirely a result of the mechanics of the game. If this were Neverwinter Nights, for example, we'd still see high statlines using BG's rolling system, but we'd be much more inclined to settle for a 16 in one area so we can get a decent number in another.

Quartz

@Jarrakul Yessir, that is an aspect of 1st and 2nd edition D&D that I honestly think future editions did better on.

Reticent

Starting with especially high stats makes the game feel sort of artificial and less enjoyable to me. More interesting to go with whatever the game gives you on your initial roll and seeing where you can take it.

by_the_sword

I have twice played the game as a Wizard Slayer. Since they may not use any of the stat-boosting items, i.e. girdles, gauntlets, ect, I try to get an 18 Strength and at least a 15 Dex.

Having even an 18(01% +1 to hit, +3 dmg) str is a far sight better than having a 17 str (+1,+1). Also being stronger helps a Wizard Slayer wear the best armors and shields. So it gives him an edge in combat that he or She would not have otherwise.

DetectiveMittens

Reticent said:

Starting with especially high stats makes the game feel sort of artificial and less enjoyable to me. More interesting to go with whatever the game gives you on your initial roll and seeing where you can take it.

I'm just too lazy to hit that re-roll button and skip the 96 and go "Oh nooooo!"

JoshBG

I think we should remember that we're assuming the role of a god's-blood-in-my-veins character. Imoen, Sarevok, Grominr(19/19/19/9/10/12), Balthazar(22/20/20/15/15/13), Melissan(13/16/12/18/17/15), Viekang(14/17/14/14/20/15), all of them have exceptional abilities. Baldur's Gate series is, as they say, an "epic". It's quite hard to RP a "normal guy", and it's against the story, basically.

However, IWD is a completely different story. There, we're playing absolutely ordinary adventures. So a Fighter with 16/12/15/10/11/10 is a norm for me.

wubble

I prefer starting slightly weaker and gaining power as the game progresses. I don't like getting extraordinary stats at the start but I want to be really powerful by the end. unfortunately in order to have those supreme stats in the end you have to have them at the start.

SionIV

wubble said:

I prefer starting slightly weaker and gaining power as the game progresses. I don't like getting extraordinary stats at the start but I want to be really powerful by the end. unfortunately in order to have those supreme stats in the end you have to have them at the start.

I agree.

Sadly there isn't much difference between 14 and 15 STR. But it's massive between 18 and 19, or big between 19 and 20. CON let's you regenerate once you hit 20, while 8 all the way up to 14 gives you nothing at all.

So if you want to be powerful at the end of SoA and ToB. You need to have that 18 as a base, or you won't feel any difference.

DJKajuru

Once I went through the path of true power and tremendous attributes and skills ... and I got bothered by reaching Brynlaw.

Moczo

As a demigod, I reserve the right to roll those sweet, sweet 18's. You think Heracles settled for 17 STR? That Perseus outwitted Medusa with a paltry 17 INT? Gilgamesh spent awhile having sex with every new bride in his kingdom, so I assume his CON must have been at LEAST 19 or so.

This is the illustrious (or in some cases 'illustrious' with sarcastic airquotes) company we stand in, people. And while being too much like them will get you arrested, you can at least have the stats for it!