Amazing stats roll!
laeknir
Member Posts: 58
Rolling up a new ranger, just for fun, and got this amazing stats roll so I had to come brag!
Of course, it took more than 8 min of rerolls to get this, but still... I've never rolled this for any other character in my decades of replaying this game. *dance dance!*
Of course, it took more than 8 min of rerolls to get this, but still... I've never rolled this for any other character in my decades of replaying this game. *dance dance!*
18
Comments
At least I would have been if I hadn't recently found out the cheat..........Nah, still jealous.
Never, ever got higher than 93 total.
Well done and enjoy.
My best rolls (after MANY years of playing the game):
Cavalier with 97 (18/00 str)
Inquisitor with 101 (18/51 str)
Human fighter with 95 (18/99 str)
Human invoker with 99
100 Cleric
only times i saw the 3 magic digits.. since then i don't feel bad for EE keepering this values. (i probably spend 2 days of my life on the re-roll screen)
However, my most recent charname (a halfling fighter/thief) managed to roll a solid 98 within my first ten clicks.
Read the next half of this post at your own discretion. You've been warned.
That's right. I deliberately skipped a 98 and kept an 86. Tomas already had 19 dexterity, there was no need for him to have insanely high numbers in every stat, especially not wisdom and intelligence. It just didn't suit the character.
I'll see my own way out.
I think someone here once calculated the likelihood of reaching such high numbers. Yeah, not likely. You're one lucky fella.
So, naturally as a power gamer you want to have 18/18/18 physical stats for almost any character but then your roleplayer side tells you that for example a 3 in intellect, or any other "dumping stat" (which doesn't exist for roleplayers) is not acceptable.
I had major trouble when I rolled up a berserker I wanted to dual to >druid, after 2 hours of nonstop rolling I managed to get a lower-mid 90s roll (yay fighter 3s..), enough to satisfy the dualing req. but needless to say the lowest of goblins could have thaught the guy a thing or two......or probably even more. ~_~
Needless to say soon after I lost interest in him because the unrealistically low int bugged me from an RP standpoint. ~_~
I was reminded of fallout 1 and it's hilarious low-int dialog choices:
1.uuuhhhhh..
2.blaaaarrgh..
3.nnnmmmm..
* I've been told it does, but I don't know if that's true.
Here's the odds for 95 through 108. Same caveats. You have a better chance of winning the Powerball jackpot than you have rolling a 106 or better.
Rolling all 6s is as likely as rolling all 1s, or all 3, or any other combination of numbers.
If you ignore minimums, every roll should be equally likely.
I.e. rolling all 13s as a Human Fighter(where the only minimum is 9 Strength and the 75 total) is as likely as rolling all 18s.
This is why going after 100 is almost a prerogative of rangers and few others classes.
Rangers have so many high minimums, this is why a lot of threads about stats are made by people that took this class.
Rangers are also good, (and Ranger/Clerics even better with a guaranteed minimum roll of 13/13/14/4/9/3), but for truly spectacular rolls having one crazy-high minimum (like the Paladin's 17 CHA) is a bigger boost to your odds, just given how uncommon rolls of 17 and 18 are relative to rolls of 13 or 14, (and how many 17s and 18s you need to break 100; even with a guaranteed 17 in charisma, you need to *average* 16.6 on every other stat to hit 100.)
I've seen a two or three 100s in my time playing the game, and all of them were paladins. Every 95+ I've gotten has been a paladin or ranger, except for one extraordinarily lucky 96 or 97 I got on a single-class fighter. (Shame he was a dwarf instead of a human because that's the kind of roll that begs to be dual-classed.)
At least with the no-reload style I play, those high rollers are a real let down when/if they get killed.