Is it possible to decrease a species' characteristics at the time of character generation?

If it's possible, where is that in the rules?

Lastly, if it's possible, do you just get back the same amount of experience as I it would cost you to get that statistic to that level, but in reverse?

No I it's not possible within the RAW (at least not anywhere in the rules I've seen)

Holy triple post, Batman.

Along with what Bunny said, you can always just try a different race with stats closer to what you want. Check out the Unofficial Species Menagerie for more options or homebrew a new one.

It's what I thought. Sorry for the triple post.

I had not thought of this until recently when I started working on my new campaign. I am running a Cowboy Bebop style game (all humans, in our solar system) and one of my players wants to play a little person (influenced by the little person on the TV show Carnevale). We were going to reduce his Agility to 1, but I realized we cannot.

I am going to handle this kind of thing with a special rule that all his Agility Checks have a Downgrade or perhaps 1 or 2 setback.. Mechanically this more or less works the same, while also adding some interesting things that could interact with other dice alterations.

Like the post when someone wanted to make a child NPC, you surely can decrease the stats.

You can make it so pelicans are used as weapons if you want. The main thing is to get the consent of the Players and GM. If everyone agrees pelicans are a viable weapon, *poof* it becomes viable. The world is yours!

2 points to make.

1. Decreasing starting Characteristics should NEVER free up extra XP. That is silly and almost game breaking. This isn't a video game this is an RPG, some rules are gospel.

2. Don't allow it unless there is a very very very good reason. It is a bit weird and if it is for a PC they will seem picked on if they are the only one gimped this way.

So, the long and short of it is those 2 rules. RAW says nothing on the issue because nobody would normally want to do that, so why bother calling out something that is not going to be done.

Personally, I would allow a player to voluntarily lower a characteristic if they wanted to (it can lead to cool stories), but I wouldn't give them anything in return. Otherwise you have every player looking for a dump stat.

As others have said, this cannot be done officially by the rules as written.

It's easy enough to figure out what the rules "would be", however:

- If a player voluntarily lowers a Characteristic of 3 to 2, then he receives 30 XP in exchange to spend on other things.

- If a player voluntarily lowers a Characteristic of 2 to 1, then he receives 20 XP in exchange to spend on other things.

(Theoretically, you could also permit a Characteristic of 1 to be lowered to 0 in exchange for 10 XP; but this would be a weird special case since zero-value Characteristics is not something the game is really designed to handle.)

1. Decreasing starting Characteristics should NEVER free up extra XP. That is silly and almost game breaking. This isn't a video game this is an RPG, some rules are gospel.

I think you're grossly exaggerating the issue, and I can't even imagine what you mean by "gospel".

However, there is, admittedly, some potential for "min-maxing" if you allow players to voluntarily lower Characteristics in order to shuffle around XP.

For the most part, voluntarily lowering your character's Characteristics is a terrible idea since Characteristics are so valuable and they cannot normally be raised again after character creation. Indeed, the usual advice for "min-maxing" your character build is to raise your Characteristics as much as possible at creation and not bother "wasting" XP on anything else. So normally a player who is interested in a powerful and optimised character would never ask to trade Characteristic points for XP anyway - it's a poor trade.

The one potential "min-maxing" issue, though, is with someone wanting to trade points in one Characteristic in order to free up XP to boost another Characteristic (e.g. lowering his Cunning and Presence to try to boost his Agility even higher at creation).

But all things considered, it should be fine to allow players to trade Characteristic points for XP at creation if they really want to. It's almost always going to be to their detriment , so you'll rarely see it done. Most occasions would probably be for thematic reasons like the example BrashFink described. And if you think a player is somehow trying to gain some special advantage, just don't let him to do it if he can't give you an acceptable reason.

Actually, voluntarily lowering characteristics is ideal for min-maxers. Generally the goal of min-maxing is to get really, really good at one thing, not at everything. So, for example, someone who wanted to make a Marauder might take a Wookiee and drop Intellect and Cunning down to 1 (or 0, as you suggest) so as to free up XP for more Brawn.

Sure, that's what I said.

But my point was that given the way this particular system works the tradeoff is almost always very poor. This isn't a game like, for example, 4th Edition D&D where there is almost zero value in Ability scores other than the one or two that are directly relevant to your class (meaning that lowering the others to gain even a small improvement to the key one or two would be a bargain).

In this system, the best a player could do would be something like lowering two Characteristics from 2 to 1 to free up 40 XP and then using that to raise a single Characteristic from 3 to 4. Hardly a big deal; and that small benefit in one area cost him a lot in two other areas. Most likely the character will suffer much more from what he gave up than he will benefit from what was gained.

Plus, as I said, if you think that a particular player is somehow trying to abuse the system, just don't let him.

This isn't a video game this is an RPG, some rules are gospel.

If you want to make your game about min-maxers and turn it into a video game, go ahead let them decrease the stat and give XP and make the whole point of a Race choice next to worthless.

it seems to sum it up there are 3 methods to go about it.

1. Help min maxers get bored of the game quickly by allowing them a bunch of XP from the start, heck why not just give it out like candy.

2. You should not do this.

3. If you do it make a penalty.

1 and 2 have been explained in this thread already. Anytime Evil gets involved in a thread it is stupid to go against him because he will spend the next week tearing every comment apart until you stop responding...

but for 3, to avoid making min maxers drool over it. Make a penalty. If you want XP sure give it, but do it at a lowered rate. If they would get 30 XP, give them 10 or 15 (aka 1/3rd or 1/2) not the whole thing. So it is "a benefit" but not totally mechanically moronic.

I will tell you this. I stuck with RAW with my characters except I started them without gear. The benefit they got was they ended that starting story with some better gear than they would afford. Also they more fully appreciated the struggle and learned to use their characters non-combat abilities in a combat situation. They learned better ways to go about stories and ultimately had a great time.

Had I indulged them in their desire to get "uber" fast they would have been happy in the short term, but longer in it would have been harder and harder to come up with stories that challenged them. So if the story grows naturally it is easier to GM and more fun to play.

Evil, commence your chopping. I am already out the door and you have a habit of ruining a thread.

Evil, commence your chopping.

In other words, when someone asks for advice, give them advice that helps achieve their goal or explain why "LOL eat it RAW 'cause it are bettererest" is a good answer.

If the player wasn't going to use it to min-max, but instead had a good story, I wouldn't have a problem with giving back XP for lowered characteristics. I might suggest they could only use that XP for skills or talents, but it really would depend on what the player came up with.

If they wanted to drop characteristics so they could max one and be a one-trick pony, I'd be far less interested in letting them. That becomes a detriment to the kind of game I'm interested in running.

This has been a discussion since the very, very early days of the EotE Beta. If you're going to allow decreasing stats, it's better IMO to give "half XP" back for them.

In other words, original Characteristic value * 5. Decreasing a 2 to a 1 would give 10 XP. Decreasing a 3 to a 2 would grant 15 XP. 1 is the lowest you can go, period.

The issue came up because a player wanted to play a "kid" (i.e. Short-Round from Temple of Doom).

I like the idea of giving half the cost of the characteristic back, but I'm also aware that this is not encouraging players to think outside the box for their characters.

The issue came up because a player wanted to play a "kid" (i.e. Short-Round from Temple of Doom).

I like the idea of giving half the cost of the characteristic back, but I'm also aware that this is not encouraging players to think outside the box for their characters.

In a way, this is thinking outside the box "the box" being RAW. I think allowing some mechanical tweaking in order to play a quirky, fun character is a good thing.

In a way, this is thinking outside the box "the box" being RAW. I think allowing some mechanical tweaking in order to play a quirky, fun character is a good thing.

Exactly! I was just seeking other people's opinions AND if there was any RAW on it as I don't like re-inventing the wheel, and I couldn't find it in the rules. So thanks

The issue came up because a player wanted to play a "kid" (i.e. Short-Round from Temple of Doom).

I like the idea of giving half the cost of the characteristic back, but I'm also aware that this is not encouraging players to think outside the box for their characters.

This is the precisely the sort of situation where I see no reason to punish the player for an unconventional character by saying something like, "I'll let you lower your Brawn and Presence if you want to because you're a kid; but I'm only going to give you half the credit back."

As you noted, giving something like "half credit" is basically making it a "false" option. Yes, the player can technically lower his Characteristics for credit, but the return is so awful that no one would ever choose to do it; so the option might as well not exist.

If you're going to offer the option, offer it for real. If you aren't comfortable with players having this option, then just don't give it to them. But don't do it in a wishy-washy, half-hearted way.

For "children" PCs, I was thinking that this may be the only reason to lower a character's stats and as they were a child, they perhaps would have less experience (due to reduced life experience - mathematically speaking). However the same thing could be said in reverse with being old in that the character would be MORE experienced. I also take into consideration that some kids have seen more action than some adults, so my point above is kind of pointless

I think its clear to say that there is no hard and fast rule on this topic, and as a result, I'll just work with the players to help them make their characters what they envision them being, rather than worrying too much about RAW.

Thanks for the useful tips guys.

Actually, voluntarily lowering characteristics is ideal for min-maxers. Generally the goal of min-maxing is to get really, really good at one thing, not at everything. So, for example, someone who wanted to make a Marauder might take a Wookiee and drop Intellect and Cunning down to 1 (or 0, as you suggest) so as to free up XP for more Brawn.

In the RAW, Wookiees can get to the maximum of 5 Brawn without reducing any other stats.

Now, I could see reducing one of the other low stats so that you could raise the Agility of the Wookiee by more than is possible in the RAW, or maybe to get Willpower up to rank 2, but that’s a different issue.

If you're going to offer the option, offer it for real. If you aren't comfortable with players having this option, then just don't give it to them. But don't do it in a wishy-washy, half-hearted way.

It's not wishy-washy. I, and others, have put a great deal of time and thought to this and I have stood firm on this option from the beginning. If and when my players desire to lower certain characteristics for whatever reason, this has been, and will be, the ruling.

This has been a discussion since the very, very early days of the EotE Beta. If you're going to allow decreasing stats, it's better IMO to give "half XP" back for them.

In other words, original Characteristic value * 5. Decreasing a 2 to a 1 would give 10 XP. Decreasing a 3 to a 2 would grant 15 XP. 1 is the lowest you can go, period.

A side question to the guy whose player wants to play a Kid:

How long do you think the campaign will run? If it'll go long enough for the kid to grow up, just let him lower it without getting points and raise it for free when he gets older.

Personally, I would only allow BRAWN and AGILITY to be reduced, and only with good reason. An old man with a limp for instance might have reduced agility. In that case I would "give back" the full experience.

I might allow a reduction in willpower if someone wanted to play a Reek like character but they wouldn't get experience back.

For me it comes down to this; if my player can tell me a great story explaning why, I'll allow the change.

A side question to the guy whose player wants to play a Kid:

How long do you think the campaign will run? If it'll go long enough for the kid to grow up, just let him lower it without getting points and raise it for free when he gets older.

It probably wouldn't go for that long. But good point though.