OK I have not seen this topic so I guess it would go here.Does anyone else think the point buy is well low?
It seems to me that it be better at something like
low-15
standard-20
high -25
epic-35
or something may be I just don't get it but I have always though it well dumb to make so called elite on 15 points. Why should you keep to the old flawed standard? Well I see it as flawed others do not .
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
I agree that the numbers in the books are way low. It's great for a Single Attribute Dependent character like a Wizard - you can buy an 18 int, a decent con, and the rest don't really matter. And, no one other than a SAD character is going to get an 18 where it matters.
If you have a Multiple Attribute Dependent character like a Monk or Paladin, you can't really make a good one. No chance to get an 18 STR or CHA without several really low scores going along with it.
Unless, of course, you get 45 or 50 points or something, but then you might as well reroll till you get scores you like.
The point buys are low because the corresponding point buys in 3.5e are low as well. I've never played in a game with less than a 25 point buy in 3.5 (usually 28, 32 or even 36 point buys), and yet the option is there.
25 point would be about 13 in pathfinder. I used 20 in my pbp for testing and thats 32 in 3.5 anything less then that seems well under standard to me. This is coming from never using point buy sept online. Also I normally use 4d6 or 3d6 and 20 points is close to the normal rolls.
edit: also I know why there low I just think standard should be moved up is all. I think putting standard so low was a mistake in 3.5 but thats just my opinion
It might be to reflect that anybody with an 18 in a stat is supposed to be very exceptional. A walking rarity. By the book 1st D&D dudes were only 3d6 each. So not everyone had an 18. You were supposed to be happy with a 16 (which was still only +2). So, low point buy may be just a nod to tradition.
The purchase points are virtually equal to the point buy points of the same category. In other words: 25 purchase is almost the same as 32 point buy.
It's always possible to grant them more points, just as you can use more favourable dice rolling methods.
|
in a game 2 players had the attributes already generated with point buy, another one had not attributes
the DM offered to roll... what i think is a very generous kind of roll ((4d6 - lowest) x 6, 3 times... you get the best full combination, meaning you don't mix dices from the (4d6 - lowest) x6 try)
1 was a bit better in the rolls so he keep them, even when one attribute went down by 2 (that was me), another one prefered point buy because it was slightly better.... the 3rd one got so bad dices that he used point buy by force (he hates it) but because hewantedto have a 18 in dex... he was very very mediocre attributes in most of the other ones...
still we are having fun right now
Edit: the point buy was 25 points from Pathfinder
I am in a pathfinder play by post game. The DM gave us 20 point buy. The scores were not phenomenal, but they weren't too bad.
Well I have used the 20 point in my pathfinder PBP and my point was isn't 15 a bit low to be called standard? As I would not call 20 high but isn't bad so ya know why isn't it the new standard?
Director of Game Design
|
15 Points in the Pathfinder system allows you to purchase the "elite array", the standard numbers that nearly all NPCs with PC class levels possess (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8, before racial, level, and magic adjustments). Note that this is the same as having 25 points in the old system.
Just a thought...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
yeah I am glad you guys changes starting from 8 to 10 but never felt elite array was well elite anything. I do think your point buy is much much better then the 3.5 one however
Compared to monster 10/10/10/11/11/11 or NPC 8/9/10/11/12/13, elite 8/10/12/13/14/15 is elite.
I've learned to think in terms of bonuses, not scores, so a 12 Str (+1/+1) to me is very good -- equivalent to the old (1st ed.) 17. Once you think in those terms, the point buys seem almost shamelessly excessive.
For modifiers, it's monsters +0, NPCs +0 (-1/-1/0/0/+1/+1) and elite +5 (-1/0/+1/+1/+2/+2). Either way, elite scores are elite.
Well to me it's not elite but I see your point
Eh I think folks are miss understanding. I know the PF buy is much better I just think the 3.5 was way too low and really never thought the elite were anywhere near elite is all
Personally, i think that it gives a more sensible looking set of stats. The way some people talk, they seem to expect and 18 to 20 in everything they might find useful in a class.
I read a very interesting post on the 4th ed wizards board that talked up the advantage of secondary stats, basically saying that a 16 in a primary was better than an 18 because of the points saved being spent on other things. Making a character with more realistic, well rounded bonuses is a sensible strategy in and of itself.
As to monks, well, i`d be interested in knowing what makes a "good monk". Just how high do all those stats need to be? Are people simply looking at what should be a reasonably spread set of class abilities, a generalist, and presuming that it should be exceptional everywhere?
15 Points in the Pathfinder system allows you to purchase the "elite array", the standard numbers that nearly all NPCs with PC class levels possess (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8, before racial, level, and magic adjustments). Note that this is the same as having 25 points in the old system.
Just a thought...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
True, and certainly the Pathfinder 15 points is more generous than the D&D 15 points. On that, there's simply no comparison. :P
On the other hand, there has been a lot of mention of how the Pathfinder 25 points is equivalent to the D&D 3.5 32 points. They're close, but no system which changes the costs can ever be the *same*.
Here are some examples:
I'm not necessarily saying I like one more than the other -- personally, I like rolling for the enjoyment of my shiny dice but see the value in having stats balanced between party members (especially for large groups such as the PFS) -- just that a single example does not an equivalency make.
Fair enough?
On the other hand, there has been a lot of mention of how the Pathfinder 25 points is equivalent to the D&D 3.5 32 points. They're close, but no system which changes the costs can ever be the *same*.
True, they're not the same, but they're close enough I think. The differences only show up in more extreme examples, like the one you provided.
I like purchase more than point buy for two reasons:
|
|
I enjoyed point buy better then rolling for one simple reason. Point buy allows me to make a character I want, instead of waiting to see what I rolled. For example if I want to play a monk what good does is it for me if I roll 12, 11 10, 18, and 12?
Point buy allows people to make characters they want to play or create a background for their character prior to the session.
Personally, i think that it gives a more sensible looking set of stats. The way some people talk, they seem to expect and 18 to 20 in everything they might find useful in a class.
If it helps any, I personally look for a 14+ in the primary attributes for my class/concept, and (hopefully) a 16+ in the one important stat.
Depending on what I am looking for, that could be as many as 4 - 14+'s, and a 16+. (Ever try to make a Ranger that is the secondary healer and also the "face" of the group? Yeesh...)
But that is what I look for.
I think this stems from a desire to not have any negative attribute mods. If you aren't playing a skill monkey, you need every point you can scape together for the unfortunate times you need to make skill rolls.
YMMV.
I use a slightly different point buy system, point costs are different.
SCORE/ POINTS
7/ -4
8/ -2
9/ -1
10/ 0
11/ 1
12/ 2
13/ 3
14/ 5
15/ 6
16/ 9
17/ 10
18/ 14
Low Power 15 points
Standard 20 points
Heroic 25 Points
Epic 30 points
As you can see the main difference is 15 and 17 costs only 1 point more, since unless it's Str(which will only allow you to carry more anyways)they don't really do nothing. But it does make an 18 more achievable so decide how many points you prefer.
|
20-point Pathfinder buy seems entirely adequate to me. Some classes with horrible MAD may indeed need more points to make an acceptable character, but that's a problem with the class, I think, because you'd have to give more across the board and that would mean that classes without MAD were still better. You can't fix MAD with more points in your pointbuy.
For too many years have too many people cheated on stat rolls,changing the rules on how to get the stats you desire until, such a point as you might as well just write down the stats you want.
This has caused slews of characters with super heroic stats. And it has wiped away the whole fact that a 12 is above average and a 15 is elite.
Fighters HAVE to have an 18 str, wizards MUST have an 18 int and so on.
This is why everything issoout of schew in so many games and everyone is talking about unbalance (the wizard's dc's are too high for example)
Well when you have an 18 int at 1st level and 25 int later on, you have tons of skill points to put toward skillcraft and huge bonuses to int, you are a super intellect destinted to be an arch mage. Not every wizard is supposed to be "legendary"
Too focused on stats and not enough on role playing.
If you are planning on being mysitc theurge, you dont need those high int or wis to qualify for the highest level spellsin those two classes, because at 20th level you wont be able to cast them,so you dont need two 18s.
I go with a 20 point buy, and I still find it generous.
as said about the current 12 (+1mod) is the 17 of 20 years ago. All you need is the bonus modifiers, why does everything need a bonus +4?
I have fighters in my group with 12-14 str (one of them has a 17 but he used his +2 human stat and leveled up to 4th level an put the +1 into str)
I only allow 3d6, or 20 point buy, EVERYone went with 20 point buy.
Too focused on stats and not enough on role playing....
I go with a 20 point buy, and I still find it generous.
meh,
who wants to go adventuring as Joe 'not quite' Average?I wouldn't seriously start thinking about a character background for less than 20 points (or an equal result from 3d6), I'd roll-play half hearted till he gets killed and then hope for more.
my worst case template for 3d6 is worth about 15 points, anything less and I won't be able to qualify for the feats I'm looking for, might as well stay in town and open a pub.
* my emphasis
|
|
I only allow 3d6, or 20 point buy, EVERYone went with 20 point buy.
Assuming that's a PFRPG 20-point buy, no surprise, as it's way better than 3d6. 20-point buy, with the +2 that every race gets, easily makes for an 18 in one stat. Compared to 3d6, it's miles ahead. I would think it's significantly better than 4d6 drop lowest, too.
meh,
who wants to go adventuring as Joe 'not quite' Average?I wouldn't seriously start thinking about a character background for less than 20 points (or an equal result from 3d6), I'd roll-play half hearted till he gets killed and then hope for more.
my worst case template for 3d6 is worth about 15 points, anything less and I won't be able to qualify for the feats I'm looking for, might as well stay in town and open a pub.
20-point PFRPG is miles ahead of Joe not-quite-average.
The main issue is being good enough to compete in published adventures, it seems to me. Your enjoyment in general doesn't require fantastic stats, so far as I can see.
I only allow 3d6, or 20 point buy, EVERYone went with 20 point buy.Assuming that's a PFRPG 20-point buy, no surprise, as it's way better than 3d6. 20-point buy, with the +2 that every race gets, easily makes for an 18 in one stat. Compared to 3d6, it's miles ahead. I would think it's significantly better than 4d6 drop lowest, too.
meh,
who wants to go adventuring as Joe 'not quite' Average?I wouldn't seriously start thinking about a character background for less than 20 points (or an equal result from 3d6), I'd roll-play half hearted till he gets killed and then hope for more.
my worst case template for 3d6 is worth about 15 points, anything less and I won't be able to qualify for the feats I'm looking for, might as well stay in town and open a pub.
20-point PFRPG is miles ahead of Joe not-quite-average.
The main issue is being good enough to compete in published adventures, it seems to me. Your enjoyment in general doesn't require fantastic stats, so far as I can see.
my group is going through published adventures, started with D0, D1 going to do D1.5 basically characters are in falcons hollow but have wandered off to riddleport to get involved in second darkness adventure path.
They all have pathfinder 20 point buy.
Fighter started with a 14 str, added human +2, just got to 4th level and now his str is 17. (fighter started with a really high wisdom, being as we are trying to see if we can build a fighter that wont succumb to every mind control spell out there at higher levels, as per something bagpuss posted earilier in another thread)
The rogue at 6th level has a 21 wisdom (found a book of +5 wisdom and dint realize she could have sold it for a small country so she read it)
and the sorceress has a 23 char at 4th level (cloak of charisma +4 and kobold king skully thing)
I'm really not seeing the underpowered stats, as everyone seems to have more than what they need to do whatever they want.
The cleric is probably in the worst shape because he needs charisma and wisdom.
Hes str 14 dex 11 con 10 int 12 wis 15 chr 16 (used his human plus 2 on str because he has the overhand chop feat and uses a scimitar)
but hes only 2nd level dex and con are weak and admittedly it'd be really nice if he had more int for skills as hes a cleric of calistria, but with all the gnarly other gobs of stuff clerics get in beta, he rocks! He actually forgot to use like 3/4 of his stuff (never looked on the second page of the character sheet) during his first level. Now that he has been using the cleric domain powers and extra spells he gets at 2nd level, combined with the extra turning feat (which he forgot he had) his low dex and con aren't really comming into play at all (yet)
Although a cleric with the knowledge domain should really have more int. Only complaint with that one I think.
BTW: back in the days of 1e, when all you had was the 3d6 at first, I qualfied for a paladin that way( who had a 16 str to boot), so 3d6 CAN be better than 20 point buy, its just a gamble instead of a sure thing)
20-point PFRPG is miles ahead of Joe not-quite-average.
that's why I highlighted the "still generous" bit: 20 is ok, 15 IMO is minimum to even leave town.
The main issue is being good enough to compete in published adventures, it seems to me. Your enjoyment in general doesn't require fantastic stats, so far as I can see.
My enjoyment stops when I go below 0 HP every two or three sessions
or when the resurrections slow down the campaign*,or in case of a Rogue: when my chances of opening doors or finding/disarming a trap are frustratingly low due to crappy stats.
* At least PRPG put away with loosing a level.
|
|
The main issue is being good enough to compete in published adventures, it seems to me. Your enjoyment in general doesn't require fantastic stats, so far as I can see.My enjoyment stops when I go below 0 HP every two or three sessions
or when the resurrections slow down the campaign*,
or in case of a Rogue: when my chances of opening doors or finding/disarming a trap are frustratingly low due to crappy stats.* At least PRPG put away with loosing a level.
Those are pretty much all scenario-design issues, which is why I made the comment about published material. If you're rolling your own, you can set challenges appropriate to parties of low stats or high stats, etc, in which case player enjoyment and longevity aren't stat-dependent.
I should add that for much published material, I am pretty sure (from my own experiences, so anecdotal) that a lower point-buy would be sufficient to not die with the canonical party of four and also to have some fun. Trickier with Paizo stuff, though. Additionally, the lower point-buys cause, what, a difference of one point of bonus from prime stats and about the same from secondary stats (and maybe make your dump stat worse)? That's generally not going to be quite as important as it feels, I think, but again that'll depend on the scenario (in this case how brutal it is to fail, say, one more save, or to take one more hit before winning a particular combat).
If people can enjoy Warhammer playing an entirely less-than-fabulous character, I am pretty sure that D&D can allow for the same. Obviously it was easier in 1e, where stats mostly didn't matter much of the time (but players still obsessed over them*), but even now the difference in bonuses aren't huge.
If I was designing D&D or PFRPG, which I'm not, I'd prefer lower starting stats but quicker increases in stats than one every four levels or buying magical stat enhancement.
*Me included. But I was young and stupid.
I am thrilled to cheeses with the return of dumpy stats!
Look at the iconic characters in the modules, they all have at least one 8!
There's a REAL hero! Someone who is actually a little worse in ONE area than the normal person, But has heoric stats elsewhere to compensate.
Walking through town you are very unlikely to find anyone with a 14 str.
So even that 1st level fighter is going to be really strong in comparison.
I like the new stats and the way they work these days (3.5-pathfinder)
It actually makes the 18 score something special.
The fact that the rogue has a 21 wisdom (and not a 21 dex) I find interesting, but the item WAS rolled randomly, and the player didnt really know the game or what the magic item would do so she read it.
So it was great fun.
plus at high level when she gets slippery mind, shes going to be REALLY slippery!
Stats arent everything, again, I think video games have ruined the idea of roleplaying, as those types of games are CALLED roleplaying games, but there is no role to play!
I dont see how a first level fighter with a 12 strength is going to be so much worse than one with a 17. he will hit slightly more often, and do a little more damage, but it still comes down to dice rolls.
If you go to 0HP every other session, get a new DM, the worst monster in any campaign is always the killer DM.
I actually would volunteer to go through any of these printed modules with a fighter with a 15 point buy, and I guarantee I would have just as much fun and be just as useful as anyone else.
There is a point to the point buy system as well. IF you DM isgoing to be throwing will-o-wisps at you at first level, you are in a high fanatsy campaign and there for should have used the 25 point buy.
IF the DMis running a low fanatsy campaign and instrcuted you to use the 15 point buy, that means the players are going to be facing more humans and humanoids than anything else, and the lower stats are scaled to make the game fun and challenging.