|
Something that I think I kind of ... unconsciously realized but never really consciously thought all that much about before sort of gelled in my mind recently while I was making my first RPGA/Living Greyhawk character ...
I was using the 28 point buy method to 'generate' my ability scores and, as I said, something really hit me - I'm wondering if there might me something pretty important that I'm missing or if this is just one of those "well, duh!" things that everyone else knew but I just now figured out.
According to the table in the Players Handbook, one gets better ability bonuses at each even score (12, 14, 16, 18 etc). In other words, an ability score of 14-15 gives a +2, a 16 -17 gives a +3 etc). So, other than in a few specific instances, one is almost foolish to 'waste' the points to 'buy' odd ability scores. Are the vast majority of point buy created characters running around with all even ability scores - that's certainly what would seem logical, at least from a metagame perspective.
Sure, having an odd ability score means you are poised to jump right up to the next modifier once you hit whatever level it is that allows you to increase an ability score by one (4th?) and yes, a spellcaster's number of bonus spells changes with each increase (a 15 INT yields one more arcane bonus spell than a 14 for example) instead of just with the even number increase.
But, in the larger scope of overall game mechanics, am I thinking correctly here?
Thanks!
The game mechanics are set up so an even stat gives you a bonus to Damage (str) AC (dex) HP (con) etc.
An odd ability score is often required before you can take certain feats. Some examples are...
Two Weapon Fighting (TWF) DEX 15
Improved TWF DEX 17
Greater TWF DEX 19
Combat Expertise INT 13
....Whirlwind Attack Dex 13
Improved Unarmed Strike
....ImprovedGrapple Dex 13
....Deflect Arrows Dex 13
....Snach Arrows Dex 15
....Stunning Fist Dex 13 AND Wis 13
Natural Spell Wis 13
The list isn't all inclusive but it's a start.
|
Yes you are correct in your assumption.
That is another reason that point buy sucks, it promotes metagame thinking, min-maxing, and is way too cookie cutter.
ROLL THE DICE!! All the ridiculousness goes away. Some will whine because they don't get "optimum" abilities but as long as there are some rules in place to remove unplayable rolls (such as a minimum total ability modifier of +5 or more if you want) and you allow players to either assign the stats as they wish or switch a couple, then there really isn't any real reason for complaints.
There is a reason that almost every set of dice comes with 4 d6s.
FH
Yes you are correct in your assumption.
That is another reason that point buy sucks, it promotes metagame thinking, min-maxing, and is way too cookie cutter.
ROLL THE DICE!! All the ridiculousness goes away. Some will whine because they don't get "optimum" abilities but as long as there are some rules in place to remove unplayable rolls (such as a minimum total ability modifier of +5 or more if you want) and you allow players to either assign the stats as they wish or switch a couple, then there really isn't any real reason for complaints.
There is a reason that almost every set of dice comes with 4 d6s.FH
Oh hells yeah. Point buy almost ruined the game I'm in currently. I was the only one to roll dice for everything- even alignment, race and class- and ended up with a very interesting character for it. The rest of the PCs were so enamoured of what happened that they looked at die rolling in a new light.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Yes yes and more yes. I agree with the above. Not a fan of point buy - far too formulaic and cookie cutter. I like the random aspect of rolling, and then being able to assign the scores you rolled as you wish. You then have a nice balance of chance and intent.
I like odd ability scores - yes, I know that mechanically they don't matter, but I like them. I also like unexpected scores - a fighter with a high wisdom score? Awesome. A really strong mage? Great. etc.
It just makes for more interesting characters.
|
|
Thanks everyone. I hadn't thought about feats tending to require odd ability scores.
I agree that rolling is more ... organic ... and makes for more interesting characters. In most games I play in (as a player OR DM) we roll and then arrange as we want. I'm using the point buy method because you have to when creating an official RPGA/Living Greyhawk character. As you can imagine, all six stats for him (my first cleric, by the way) are even and arranged in the more or less correct stats (highest in Wis etc)
|
|
I've been tempted repeatedly to go to a "zero-average" stat system for D&D. Basically instead of having a 14 be a +2, you would just have a +2 for the stat. Have to do some converting on feats, and other little things. And the biggest change would be every 4 levels you get a full point of stat increase instead of 1/2.
As for the great point buy vs roll debate. Rolling creates dynamic characters that can be awesome, where as point but creates characters balanced to eachother. Should Steve be penalized because John rolled better? I know rolling is "fair" but if player A has the equivalent of 32 points, and the rest are at 25, guess which character will outshine the others, mechanically...
Still not a big fan of point buy, but trying to find a way to make the characters balanced...
You're absolutely right. In fact, I don't even think in terms of ability scores anymore; I think in terms of ability modifiers. But whether you think in terms of scores or modifiers, you're accomplishing the same purposes:
--Both scores and bonuses are rough estimations of a character's raw ability/talent/force.
--Both scores and bonuses are used to modify die rolls and qualify for certain feats/spells. (feats could just as easily require certain bonuses than certain odd integer scores)
Personally, I think the 2-1 paradigm for scores and stats is archaic and outdated. It makes stats a little more difficult for learners and the math-impaired and fuels petty debates about "how many IQ points separate 14 Int from 15 Int?" As if ability scores are meant to be exact definitions of a character's natural capacities. In my Fantasia game, character ability scores range from 6 to 14, with 6 = -4 and 14 = +4.
That's my 2 cp.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I've been tempted repeatedly to go to a "zero-average" stat system for D&D. Basically instead of having a 14 be a +2, you would just have a +2 for the stat. Have to do some converting on feats, and other little things. And the biggest change would be every 4 levels you get a full point of stat increase instead of 1/2.
As for the great point buy vs roll debate. Rolling creates dynamic characters that can be awesome, where as point but creates characters balanced to eachother. Should Steve be penalized because John rolled better? I know rolling is "fair" but if player A has the equivalent of 32 points, and the rest are at 25, guess which character will outshine the others, mechanically...
Still not a big fan of point buy, but trying to find a way to make the characters balanced...
All good points. But - random is random. This time out, Player A might have the better character, but next time Player B might. Player A still can't do it all by himself - so if he's a real jerk the others might leave him high and dry during a crucial moment.
It's ok to have one character be *a little* better than the others. It just can't be game breakingly so - in my group, if one character is obscenely well rolled, we treat that the same as an incredibly poorly rolled character. The player either voluntarily reduces some stats or re-rolls altogether.
From a team standpoint, it might not be bad to have a good character who can take a little more punishment, do a little more damage, etc. As long as everyone is ok with it.
|
|
... it promotes metagame thinking, min-maxing,...
I really like the point buy system. I won't get into it here though -- it has been done enough in the past.
For a mathematically inclined person, you can really capitalize on the min-maxing aspect by taking a few "odd" stats. Getting to a 14 costs 6 points, getting to a 15 costs 8 points and getting to a 16 costs 10 points. Why spend 2 extra points to get to a 16 if you will get an increase in a stat at 4th level anyway? You can use those other two points to greater effect in other areas. Basically, increasing a stat to an even number at every 4th level often times makes a bigger impact than increasing it to an odd number.
|
|
The issue came up recently when I wanted a +1 Dex boosting item (at 1,000 gp).
As I understand it, the D&D online game has odd numbered stat boosting items. It can be rather helpful under the right circumstances and calculating the costs is really easy under RAW. There could be a little bit of min-maxing as a belt of strength +3 is less expensive than a belt of strength +4 and can potentially have nearly the same effect, but I feel that the amount of min-maxing done in this case is pretty minor.
... and yes, a spellcaster's number of bonus spells changes with each increase (a 15 INT yields one more arcane bonus spell than a 14 for example) instead of just with the even number increase.
I'm going to ditto a lot of what's been said, in that there are many things that go off the odd numbered ability score.
However, bonus spells aren't among them. Bonus spells are actually tied to the ability modifier (if you look at the chart, you get a bonus 1st level spell with a +1 modifier, a 2nd level with a +2, and so on).
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
However, bonus spells aren't among them. Bonus spells are actually tied to the ability modifier (if you look at the chart, you get a bonus 1st level spell with a +1 modifier, a 2nd level with a +2, and so on).
You are correct. However, while bonus spells are not altered by odd ability scores, a spellcasters maximum capability is. The minimum ability score to cast a spell is 10 + spell level. Therefore, a wizard with 14 INT could cast up to 4th level spells while a wizard with 15 INT could cast up to 5th level ones.
You are correct. However, while bonus spells are not altered by odd ability scores, a spellcasters maximum capability is. The minimum ability score to cast a spell is 10 + spell level. Therefore, a wizard with 14 INT could cast up to 4th level spells while a wizard with 15 INT could cast up to 5th level ones.
Yup. Thanks FS. :)
Some points:
1. A 15 Int/Wis/Cha gives no more bonus spells per day than a 14. (EDIT: Woops- cross posting covered this already)
2. When using point buy, I will typically put my "high" score to an odd number for the boost at 4th level. For example, if playing a paladin, I may put Str or Cha at 15 to begin with so I can get it to 16 at 4th level. As was previously mentioned, it frees up 2 points that can be used elsewhere for a more rounded character. For a sorcerer, wizard, or other character who only really needs one stat, that typically goes to 17, so it becomes 18 at 4th level. Actually "buying" and 18 is almost never worth it.
3. Rolling is fine for some. However, I prefer point buy. I don't want to set off a war or something here, but my personal philosophy goes like this: Steve rolls high this time, Jim rolls low. Now, next time, Steve may roll low and Jim may roll high. But why should either of them have to play a low-powered character (read: not as fun- I know there are exceptions, but overall and for my groups, this is the truth), and why should they have to play with the knowledge that the other guy's character is inherently better than their's?
In another thread, it became evident that there is somewhat of a generational gap here. It seems more likely that older gamers are in favor of the randomness and not always getting to play what you want, while younger gamers (me) tend to make a concpet for a character first and then expect their stats to match. Again, there's no right way. However, my thoughts are that there's no reason the person who wants stats to conform to his character shouldn't get his desire. Thus, point buy. It also helps make sure that the whole team is equally capable of contributing to the game; thus, everyone has (a better chance of) the same amount of fun.
My personal experience with rolling is terrible. I'll typically roll around 6 (yes, six) sets with a score no higher than a 13 (or one high score with quite a number of 6's and 4's bringing it down) before I finally roll one that my DM says is high enough. Then, there are two other guys at the table who have the extraordinary (or perhaps supernatural) ability to roll high sets all the time. They don't cheat, it just happens. The lowest they get is typically in the 8-12 range (and a score less than 10 is exceedingly rare).
We've rolled countless characters, and it hasn't averaged out yet. So, I jump at the chance to use 32 point buy (which is what I allow and my DM allows), since it just saves me so much time and dissappointment, and I can make the stats just the way I want for the character I want.
Well, I went on about that for far too long. Different strokes for differnt folks, and all that. Give me point buy any day.
My personal experience with rolling is terrible. I'll typically roll around 6 (yes, six) sets with a score no higher than a 13 (or one high score with quite a number of 6's and 4's...
My wife and I have the exact same experience. If we convert the stats that I typically roll into the equivalent point buy value, I typically roll something in the 40’s. If we calculate the point buy value of my wife’s rolls, she is lucky to break 28. What we finally decided to do was slap a +1 level adjustment on characters with stats significantly higher than the others.
My personal experience with rolling is terrible. I'll typically roll around 6 (yes, six) sets with a score no higher than a 13 (or one high score with quite a number of 6's and 4's...My wife and I have the exact same experience. If we convert the stats that I typically roll into the equivalent point buy value, I typically roll something in the 40’s. If we calculate the point buy value of my wife’s rolls, she is lucky to break 28. What we finally decided to do was slap a +1 level adjustment on characters with stats significantly higher than the others.
That's... that's actually really good. Consider the idea swindled! I think I'd allow the player to also place the stats as they saw fit and then shave points off until they were in the proper range, so they could avoid the LA if they wanted.
And, I do miss the variety of rolling stats. Perhaps I'll try out the method by which everyone rolls one set, and whoever's set is the highest is used by everyone. That way, you get party balance and randomness.
This thread seems as good a place as any to point out, for those that don't know, that there is a very quick formula for figuring out the positive bonus value of any ability score, no matter what it is:
Whatever the ability score is, subtract 10 (or 11, if it's an odd number) and divide the remainder in half. That will be the correct bonus for that ability score.
You're on your own for negative ability scores, but there only 5 possibilities, so that mean that even if you just count backwards, working it out on paper, it won't take that long.
|
|
Another idea is to limit the variability of rolling. Try this method:
2d6+5. The results are 7-17 with an average of 12. This isn't much different than 4d6 drop the lowest actually. the average for 1d6 is 3.5, so a 3d6 will yield 3-18 with an average of 10.5. Being able to roll an extra dice and replace a lower means that you can consider 2 "random" rolls of 3.5 each with a average of 5 on the 3rd dice (rolling 1-3 and 4-6 on 2 dice, and choosing the 4-6 dice, average 5). 4d6 gives a range of 3-18 with an average of 12.
Now 2d6+5 for every stat might seem a bit boring, the extremes are lost, especially at the low end (but who really keeps a character with a stat of 6?
You could further adjust this by making 6 separate rolls:
Roll Avg Range
2d6+6 (13) 8-18
2d6+6 (13) 8-18
2d6+5 (12) 7-17
2d6+5 (12) 7-17
2d6+4 (11) 6-16
2d6+3 (10) 5-15
Of course, if thats too much variation, you could go even further:
1d6+12 (15.5) 12-18
1d6+10 (13.5) 11-16
1d6+9 (12.5) 10-15
1d6+8 (11.5) 9-14
1d6+7 (10.5) 8-13
1d6+6 (9.5) 7-12
notice that the average for each set is 12
Of course, this could be hooey, so play with it a little.
I think I heard somehwere that WotC were so taken with the fact that the point-buy system is incredibly well received that they are going to make 4th Ed. completely point buy. Even combat and saving throws will be point buy. Doesn't the mere idea just fill all you mathematical people with joy!?
Sorry. ;-)
I think I heard somehwere that WotC were so taken with the fact that the point-buy system is incredibly well received that they are going to make 4th Ed. completely point buy. Even combat and saving throws will be point buy. Doesn't the mere idea just fill all you mathematical people with joy!?
Sorry. ;-)
Actually there is a game with an all point buy system called Silver Age Sentinels published in 2002 by a company called the Guardians of Order.
Overall its fun but it gets complex at higher levels.
I think I heard somehwere that WotC were so taken with the fact that the point-buy system is incredibly well received that they are going to make 4th Ed. completely point buy. Even combat and saving throws will be point buy. Doesn't the mere idea just fill all you mathematical people with joy!?
Nope. If I want a completely point-buy RPG with complex math, I'll stick with HERO System. That way, I can really customize my characters without this "class" and "level" nonsense. Makes cross-genre transitions easy, too.
Sorry. ;-)
Don't be. ;-P
|
|
I think I heard somehwere that WotC were so taken with the fact that the point-buy system is incredibly well received that they are going to make 4th Ed. completely point buy. Even combat and saving throws will be point buy. Doesn't the mere idea just fill all you mathematical people with joy!?
Sorry. ;-)
No. I want the magic 8 ball!
That's... that's actually really good. Consider the idea swindled! I think I'd allow the player to also place the stats as they saw fit and then shave points off until they were in the proper range, so they could avoid the LA if they wanted.
Thanks! Swindle away! That’s exactly how we do it also – we allow players to remove ability points to avoid the level adjustment, or they can just take the level adjustment to balance out the really good rolls.
In an attempt to solve the problem of min-maxing via point buy & the statistically (often) radical divergent results from rolling 4d6, I made a probability table based on this guy's stuff:
http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/dnd/abilities.html
My table looks like this (sorry, I'm not putting in an html table - I hope this comes out ok) (To generate your Ability Scores, roll d100 six times and consult the following table):
Roll (d100) Ability Score / Result
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
1st - - - - - - - - 01-13 14-37 38-67 68-90 91-00
2nd - - - - - 01 02-07 08-23 24-53 54-80 81-94 95-99 00
3rd - - - - 01 02-08 09-28 29-58 59-83 84-95 96-99 00 -
4th - - - 01-03 04-14 15-35 36-63 64-85 86-96 97-99 00 - -
5th - 01 02-07 08-21 22-44 45-69 70-87 88-96 97-99 00 - - -
6th 01-02 03-10 11-30 31-56 57-76 77-89 90-96 97-99 00 - - - -
Urf . . . well . . . you can kinda make it out if you can spot where the wraps are occuring. Anyway . . .
The statistical model being used is based on the probabilities of choosing the best 3 of 4d6 six times and arranging the results as desired. The mean results looks very similar to the “Elite Array” method of generating ability scores in the DMG, or 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 8. Instead of all PCs having identical scores, the randomized statistical model allows stable, equitable, and playable ability score generation, but eliminates extreme min-maxing.
The sixth roll is skewed to produce more moderate results. If desired, you may instead choose the elite array score (see DMG) in leiu of rolling.
It still needs work, as I would like to narrow done the ranges a little more, but as it is it is *highly* unlikely that any character would have to be rerolled (for poor results) using this table.
My .02. ;^)
|
|
Not to dredge this up, but I hate work so I did it anyway...
If you treat everything below 8 as 0, the results of a statistically normal roll 4 dice and drop the lowest is equivalent to 29.13426 points.
If you treat everything below 8 as the negative equivalent value (-1 for 7, -2 for 6 etc) the average drops to 28.52778
Just thought some other math geeks would like to know