A long time ago, in a campaign far, far away, I was part of a group that had a . . . well, let's just say quirky . . . DM. Now, he had a strong theme that he wanted to explore: that the player characters were heroes. Not that far out there, but heroes that were above average across the board . . . without being over the top.

This was back in 3.0, but I thought back on that campaign and wondered just how it would have worked in Pathfinder. Everyone could pick their class and race as normal, but their ability scores were already set in stone; well, almost.

Every ability score was a 12, from Strength to Charisma. Each player had the option of raising one score to 16, or three scores to 14, pre-racial. Giving the players the options of having 16, 12, 12, 12, 12, and 12; or 14, 14, 14, 12, 12, 12.

The players were allowed to arrange the scores as they wanted, and then apply the racial mods for their chosen race (this was 3rd edition, so humans and half-elfs had no.t modifiers, remember).

It was fun, and being above average in every single ability score was different. But the campaign didn't last that long before it died out (people moving away and all).

How would something like this go over in today's Pathfinder? Would you play in a game that had pre-selected your ability scores? Or you refuse to play? And why?

Master Arminas

I'm a fan of low powered, low fantasy. I'd have a ball.

My current character isn't much above those stats at 8th level and he's fun as heck. he's just barely above mediocre but he became the default party leader and now (Kingmaker) he's the Duke.

Super stats don't make a more fun game, they just make a more mega Character.

I'm not against pre-selected scores at all, favoring the elite array as far as Pathfinder character creation goes... though a 15 point buy has about as much use at my table.

That said, I would certainly play a character built with a lot of 12s and 14s before racial modifiers - probably a fighter or a wizard, just like I always do.

As for how well it works out - I've got a player playing a human conjurer built with nothing higher than 14 or lower than 12, and she seems to do just fine.

I prefer customizable ability scores, but getting the perfect array as opposed to "just" a good one won't make a big difference once the game starts. Give it a whirl. It might be fun.

I would love to play in that kind of game.

Especially if the NPCs weren't say level 15 every time I turned around.

Mind if I steal the idea?

Sounds like fun.

Means nobody is "that guy with the social skills of a rotten potato" or "the guy who needs help dressing himself in the morning", while also being "the guy who can benchpress a freight train".

Everybody is just "that guy who's pretty good at everything, but DAMN good at that other thing". I like it.

In a campaign with 25 point buy, I designed a cleric with 5 14s (pre-racial). I was happy playing that character up to level 16, when the campaign ended.

I would love to play in that kind of game.

Especially if the NPCs weren't say level 15 every time I turned around.

Mind if I steal the idea?

Knock yourself out. Have fun storming the castle!

MA

Azaelas Fayth wrote:

I would love to play in that kind of game.

Especially if the NPCs weren't say level 15 every time I turned around.

Mind if I steal the idea?

Knock yourself out. Have fun storming the castle!

MA

Shush don't give me anymore ideas!

On a more serious note this is a good campaign set-up for campaigns based on things like Beowulf & Gilgamesh.

I love the idea and would definitely try it out.

16, 12, 12, 12, 12, 12
14, 14, 14, 12, 12, 12

I do like stat arrays, but I prefer a very different approach. Instead of making all characters have very similar attributes, I prefer my tough-guys to be tougher than the rest of the party, my smart-guys to be smarter than the rest, and everyone to have weaknesses. I've been using [18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8] for years with much success.

I honestly prefer Odd numbers for starting stats...