roll or points buy which is better


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 300 of 576 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

My new thing im on, rolling 1d8+10 or using the following array 16,15,14,13,12,11. Yep


My group usually does the following:

4D6, must keep 3 highest of each roll.
1 reroll of a single die while rolling (so say you got 6, 6, 1, 1, you'd typically reroll a 1, but if you got a 6, 5, 3, 1, do you spend your reroll on the 1, or gamble and wait and see if you get a 6, 6, x, x to reroll ?)

Also, depending on the powerlevel of the game, we also set a minimum total bonus for a character. Usually around +4 to +6, so if the total bonuses do not add up to the level set, they may reroll the entire row of stats.


christos gurd wrote:
My new thing im on, rolling 1d8+10 or using the following array 16,15,14,13,12,11. Yep

Not a bad idea.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am not a fan of single dice rolls to determine stats because you kill the average in favor of probability being on your side (which it isn't).

3d4 + 6 yields extremely average scores, 2d6+6 gives scores in the same ballpark, but has more room for variance overall.

My personal games I run are high powered, I let my players roll 3d6, then replace their lowest roll with a 6 and I have not seen too many issues with stats too low that a character is unplayable, nor have I seen a character so overpowered that everyone else at the table is pissed off about it.


Pointbuy, hands down.


Maerimydra wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Marthkus wrote:
MendedWall12 wrote:
Thread necromancy, I know, but this episode of the dungeon bastard sums up my exact feelings about point buy versus dice rolls for stats.
I too enjoyed the sarcastic slippery slope argument. Unless that wasn't sarcasm. Then I am concerned...

I agree with Dungeon Bastard. Point buy is for sissy storygamers. Maybe it's because of the way I was raised, but when I roll crappy stats, I do what any real man would do: kamikaze that loser! Hey, not everyone is cut out to be an adventurer.

;)

Yeah but for character creation to be truly random, one would have to roll his class too. :P

Sadly, there is no 18-sided dice.

That's what d100 tables are for! The first 50% of mine consists of the fighter, rogue, and monk. 51+ puts you in a good class. To be a full caster, you have to roll 91-99.

Rolling a 100 is the holy grail of chargen of course, being "Roll again twice."

Now that's hardcore gaming!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
At that point you might as well just roll everything. Stats, class, armor type, weapon. Maybe even your level one feat.

Real role players roll to determine whether they get a feat every level.

;)


Chief Cook and Bottlewasher wrote:
Belryan wrote:
Until you roll a bunch of 6s and 7s and nothing above and 11 and play with someone that rolled a bunch of 18s with nothing below a 14.

As a GM, if you rolled a bunch of 6's and 7's, I'd have you roll again.

Out of interest, how many GM's would make someone stick with all poor rolls? In all likelihood, the player will suicide the PC a.s.a.p. so what would be the point?

I once GMd for a bard with 8,8,8,10,10,14 in his stats, A fat clumsy bardic collage drop out it was great:)

But these days i prefer points, arrey or that folks just Pick the stats they want.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I generally find rolled stats to be something of an abomination. You're structuring the game ahead of time to be even more imbalanced and unstable than normal and you're creating the very high chance that at least one player is going to be sort of screwed.

It gets even worse with some of the utterly insane variants on rolled stats I've seen. Last week I was getting ready to join a game before the DM announced that it was rolled stats, in order, after you picked your class. Which meant left the group's barbarian with 11 strength, 8 con, 9 dex, 5 wisdom, 12 cha and 13 int and the group's sorcerer with 18 strength and 6 charisma. So I bailed on that s@&% in a hurry.

Generally I just don't see any real benefit to it. You're setting yourself up to potentially give a player an awful gain and... what exactly are we gaining out of it?


I find that all too often with rolled stats one player has great luck and gets amazing stats, another has bad luck and gets awful stats. Or in cetain cases just above the reroll threshold.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Luck is not a good enough reason to discard an entire system that facilitates a game that is also entirely based on luck.


swoosh wrote:


It gets even worse with some of the utterly insane variants on rolled stats I've seen. Last week I was getting ready to join a game before the DM announced that it was rolled stats, in order, after you picked your class. Which meant left the group's barbarian with 11 strength, 8 con, 9 dex, 5 wisdom, 12 cha and 13 int and the group's sorcerer with 18 strength and 6 charisma. So I bailed on that s+#~ in a hurry.

That's pretty crazy. A 6 Charisma for a Sorcerer means they cannot cast spells. I'm curious as to how your Dungeon Master handled that. Was the sorcerer just not allowed to cast spells?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think good, old fashioned Player Ability Score envy plays heavily into criticism of rolling scores and less the issue of balance.


Lakesidefantasy wrote:
I tend to think that when disparity between character ability score arrays happens it is less of a problem mechanically than proponents of point-buy make it out to be.

When ever some GM says we are going to use a single roll of stats, the group always seems to:

Have 1 person with much higher stats than the others. The others can feel like they are just along to make him look good.
or
Have 1 person with much lower stats than the others. He is now struggling to survive let alone accomplish much of anything.
or
Occasionally both.

Last fall out of 6 players one had stellar high stats. The equivalent of a 42 point buy to get the same numbers. I had the equivalent of a 9 point buy to get the same numbers.

In that particular group it actually worked out ok because the 42pb player was by far the least experienced (almost complete noob) at the PF system. I had the most experience and GM let me play a fairly powerful race (fetchling) and class (summoner) to make up for it a bit. So it was actually a playable situation.

But what if it had ended up the other way. Do you think the noob playing a 9 point buy equivalent vanilla ranger would have had fun? What if I as the most experienced player had the 42 point buy and made something like an inquisitor? I would have certainly dominated the table. To challenge me it probably would have wiped the others. To challenge the others, I would have been bored.


Dice Roll is jsut bad...

It create rediculous levels of disparity and can make a lot of people feel sort of cheated (guy wanted to make a Gish type character (who are prone to being MAD) but ended up with 12s across the board or the guy who is dominating because he defied stats and got all 18s). Additionally, you get awkward problems like "hey! We don't have BSF... we need a BSF. Hey! Since you haven't made a character yet you get to be BSF *rolls stats* 12...14...12...8..10...9... well then... "

Additionally, Dice Roll just makes the GM's job even harder. With PB you know roughly how powerful (attribute wise) everyone is. With dice rolls you know have to find a way to challenge the guy who got really good rolls while not just straight out slaughtering the guy who can't roll for the life of him...


I run into the problem of the people who always "roll high at home" for their stats and end up with a "fair" array of "18 16 17 14 15 11" then you have people who are "14 9 13 7 6 7" (which I just rolled that for fun)


Lakesidefantasy wrote:
I think good, old fashioned Player Ability Score envy plays heavily into criticism of rolling scores and less the issue of balance.

Sadly, you are one million percent right. That some people don't understand how important stat-rolling is just goes to show how much they're roll players rather than role players.

Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:
With my live group I played through three campaigns with. This one girl never rolled below a 14, and had one character with nothing below a 16. She was often times eclipsing everyone else at their own jobs. For instance, one game she was a wizard, and had more Hps than anyone, and we had a barbarian in the party (we rolled hps, but she had 2 18s and one was in con and she pretty much rolled a 6 every time) Everyone else at the table was pretty normal on each character, but she just always rolled awesome for stats, and I watched it happen. One game the gm made us roll races randomly too, everyone gets a human, halfling, kobolod, warforged...and 1% chance of getting a drow noble, which she got. I wouldn't believe someone.could be that lucky if I didn't see it happen time and time again. I can't tell you how many.times everyone at the table felt worthless because she maxed characters in three games with multiple pcs.

Jealousy strikes again!

Mature players would have thanked the dice gods that one of their number rolled great stats. Savvy players would have used her great stats to the group's advantage. Real role players would have constructed a golden palanquin to carry her hither and thither upon, because a character with such high stats is clearly divine!

I mean, grow up, people. This isn't a game we're playing. Life isn't fair.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
tony gent wrote:

Hi all i know the norm now is to points buy your stats but i still feel rolling stats is best

Why you ask !
Well for one it prevents players useing a dump stat as you can't lower stats to raise others it also gives you something random in character gen you basicly get to pick everything else so its kind of like " this is what nature gave you make the best of it "
It also reduces the ability of players to min max for the same reason
But mainly because it makes you adapt when you can't control every part of the character as sometimes you just dont get what you want
Your thoughts please and keep it friendly

The real thing that bugs me about debates like this is when the inherent trust that should exist between a GM and his players doesn't exist.

If the reason I'd want to choose point rolling is that I couldn't trust my players to build characters I'd want to GM for.... Then I'd rather not GM for them at all.


Its odd that in all the years I've been gaming (which is 30+ ) I've only ever seen two characters with mega stats as we've always insisted that they are rolled in front of the DM .
Strange that


I do 6+2d6.


Personal preference:
- 4d6, drop lowest, placed into abilities in the order they come up.
- All rolled at the start of the campaign (or when needing a replacement character) in front of the other players and the GM.
- Roll before choosing class/race
- If anyone comes up with total bonuses +3 or less, or highest ability score 13 or less, re-roll all six abilities.

Yes, you get a variance in the overall 'power' of your characters, but you're all on the same side, you all get the same chances with the dice, and no set of scores prevent you being creative with your character and enjoying the role playing. And, if the campaigns are run well with genuine risks, if your character isn't good he won't survive long and you'll get to roll again :)


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I find the method of stat generation to be a lot less of an issue than expectations of what "reasonable" stats should be. I'm used to 3d6, so stats of 10 and 11 don't bother me, scores below 8 are common, and still I think of 12 as "above average" -- not only does it give you a bonus, but it's also the equivalent bonus of what a 15 or so in 1st edition would have given you! By that standard, a character with all 12s would be awesome!

Then I read about people using 25-point buys and roll 54d6 and drop the 36 lowest and so on, and they consider 18-17-16-15-14-11 to be "baseline" stats and anything less to be "unplayable."

Personally, if I wanted to be that superhuman at 1st level, I'd just play Amber Diceless, in which you "sell down" a stat to be Olympic Athlete or Einstein, and "dump into the ground" to be a normal human.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:

I find the method of stat generation to be a lot less of an issue than expectations of what "reasonable" stats should be. I'm used to 3d6, so stats of 10 and 11 don't bother me, scores below 8 are common, and still I think of 12 as "above average" -- not only does it give you a bonus, but it's also the equivalent bonus of what a 15 or so in 1st edition would have given you! By that standard, a character with all 12s would be awesome!

Then I read about people using 25-point buys and roll 54d6 and drop the 36 lowest and so on, and they consider 18-17-16-15-14-11 to be "baseline" stats and anything less to be "unplayable."

Personally, if I wanted to be that superhuman at 1st level, I'd just play Amber Diceless, in which you "sell down" a stat to be Olympic Athlete or Einstein, and "dump into the ground" to be a normal human.

But you'd also have to implicitly trust your GM, and that would be a deal-breaker for many on this venue. But I highly recommend the Amber RPG books, especially the core volumne, for what they can teach, even if you're not a Zelazny fan, or never intend to play the system.


I loved the character generation system. I especially liked the fact you could design your own artifacts & followers. I hated the way the game itself actually played.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I loved the character generation system. I especially liked the fact you could design your own artifacts & followers. I hated the way the game itself actually played.

It's a particularly rarefied style, and it's not for everyone, like I've made pains to point out. And that's okay. You can't make a flavor of ice cream that everyone will like. That said, the journals I've read from Amber players tend to be among the best of fan gaming fiction.

I still think that the core book has much to teach, no matter what RPG you play.


Perhaps the perfect Ability Score generating system is to simply choose your scores. This method gives you the precision and the resources to make exactly the character you want. But, this method requires the most trust; not just between the Dungeon master and the Player, but among the other Players as well.

I have read that this method actually works. The thinking is that when Players are given that much power they tend to use it responsibly.

Point-Buying methods have advantages. Specifically in the precision with which you can create the character you want, although this is limited by the amount of points you work with. You'll have to make frustrating choices given 20 points, which becomes more frustrating with the standard of 15 points. 25 points gives you more room to create but not much.

With points in this range you can easily create a standard character, and this is the disadvantage of Point Buy in my opinion. You can create characters that excel in some areas but then must be limited in other areas in order to compensate. Although not necessarily so, this tends to lead to cliche characters. Strong Fighters with low Intelligence are common. If you want to make an intelligent and charismatic fighter, you're going to have to cut into their other abilities or settle for no more than above average intelligence and charisma (and someone will probably suggest you just make a Swashbuckler instead).

Now, Rolling methods don't give you the same precision. (Indeed, what seems to be the standard method for arguments against rolling doesn't give you any choice at all.) But, rolling does allow for a wide range of different characters. Now creating a strong, intelligent Fighter who is highly charismatic and light on his feet--well, it could happen.

I suggest methods that combine Point-Buy and Rolling, giving you precision and diversity. The Standard method in the Core Rulebook is one such method. It's perhaps not the best but it's also not the only method to do so.

Anyway, Point-Buy has advantages but it also has disadvantages. In particular, it forces you to make certain kinds of characters.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

The correct answer is whatever allows the group to have the most fun. If the group prefers rolling, prefers point buy, prefers picking and choosing, the array (my least favorite btw), or some mix of the others, it doesn't really matter so long as the people at the table enjoy it.


Kirth Gersen wrote:

I find the method of stat generation to be a lot less of an issue than expectations of what "reasonable" stats should be. I'm used to 3d6, so stats of 10 and 11 don't bother me, scores below 8 are common, and still I think of 12 as "above average" -- not only does it give you a bonus, but it's also the equivalent bonus of what a 15 or so in 1st edition would have given you! By that standard, a character with all 12s would be awesome!

Then I read about people using 25-point buys and roll 54d6 and drop the 36 lowest and so on, and they consider 18-17-16-15-14-11 to be "baseline" stats and anything less to be "unplayable."

Personally, if I wanted to be that superhuman at 1st level, I'd just play Amber Diceless, in which you "sell down" a stat to be Olympic Athlete or Einstein, and "dump into the ground" to be a normal human.

Do you hand-wave the stat-based prereqs away? If 12 is a high number in your system then there are some pretty important feats that characters will get locked out of because it isn't their primary stat (IE Power Attack for dex-based fighters or Combat Expertise for anyone who wants to use combat maneuvers).

If you do that's fine, nothing wrong with low stats if it's the case for everyone and CR is adjust accordingly. For me the only issue with rolling stats is the potential disparity, with a secondary issue of people coming in with suspiciously high rolls without witnesses (though that's far more a problem with the player than the system).

If you use a point buy or an array, you know going into the game that everyone has roughly the same stat bonuses as you, just distributed differently. It also prevents the hassle of having to pester the GM about a roll being too high or too low.

Thinking about it more I think I prefer arrays just because I really hate the feeling of dumping my charisma into oblivion just to put myself where I need to be stat-wise with any martial. I really hope the Swashbuckler is good.


K177Y C47 wrote:

Dice Roll is jsut bad...

It create rediculous levels of disparity and can make a lot of people feel sort of cheated (guy wanted to make a Gish type character (who are prone to being MAD) but ended up with 12s across the board or the guy who is dominating because he defied stats and got all 18s). Additionally, you get awkward problems like "hey! We don't have BSF... we need a BSF. Hey! Since you haven't made a character yet you get to be BSF *rolls stats* 12...14...12...8..10...9... well then... "

Additionally, Dice Roll just makes the GM's job even harder. With PB you know roughly how powerful (attribute wise) everyone is. With dice rolls you know have to find a way to challenge the guy who got really good rolls while not just straight out slaughtering the guy who can't roll for the life of him...

Disparity is abundant regardless of the stat generation method.

If you don't like stat rolling fine, but point buy is just as bad if not worse for the game by creating the need to facilitate the game around its constructs.

If they have to let classes skip stat prerequisites for feats because they can't afford to buy in stats high enough to take them because of the stats they need just to play their class, then there is an obvious problem with the system, and not one that is unfixable without having to change the rules of the game to facilitate the sacred cow of point buy.

It is a false institution of balance, and praising it on the grounds of game balance alone has been disproven several times over.

Praising it on the grounds of strawmen who have ridiculous stat disparities in a game run by human beings with the mental capabilities of "if these stats are too high, reroll, if they are too low, reroll" as if all stat rolls must be set in stone. They don't, that's kinda the point in playing a table top game where you can make such decisions rather than a video game restricting all your options.

If someone wants to tell me they enjoy the gamists metagame in balancing and creating characters for optimal efficiency under certain parameters, that's fine.
If someone wants to say they prefer point buy because they like having control over their stats so they can play a powerful spellcaster without having to hold or the caveat of rolling over a 16 on the dice, that's fine too.

But if you are telling me that point buy is superior because rolling is balanced, you have been proven mathematically to be incorrect, and the game system itself has to compensate for just how not balanced point buy is with its ongoing growth and introduction of new classes.


master_marshmallow wrote:

I am not a fan of single dice rolls to determine stats because you kill the average in favor of probability being on your side (which it isn't).

3d4 + 6 yields extremely average scores, 2d6+6 gives scores in the same ballpark, but has more room for variance overall.

My personal games I run are high powered, I let my players roll 3d6, then replace their lowest roll with a 6 and I have not seen too many issues with stats too low that a character is unplayable, nor have I seen a character so overpowered that everyone else at the table is pissed off about it.

yeah i actually had 2d4 at first, but my players thought that didn't get quite enough variation in builds. Any rolls too terrible could be replaced by the stat array.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:
K177Y C47 wrote:

Dice Roll is jsut bad...

It create rediculous levels of disparity and can make a lot of people feel sort of cheated (guy wanted to make a Gish type character (who are prone to being MAD) but ended up with 12s across the board or the guy who is dominating because he defied stats and got all 18s). Additionally, you get awkward problems like "hey! We don't have BSF... we need a BSF. Hey! Since you haven't made a character yet you get to be BSF *rolls stats* 12...14...12...8..10...9... well then... "

Additionally, Dice Roll just makes the GM's job even harder. With PB you know roughly how powerful (attribute wise) everyone is. With dice rolls you know have to find a way to challenge the guy who got really good rolls while not just straight out slaughtering the guy who can't roll for the life of him...

Disparity is abundant regardless of the stat generation method.

Yeah, everyone knows that PF is crazy broken. And if it can't be perfectly balanced, why strive for balance at all?

It's like I keep telling my senator, my reps, my police department, and my neighborhood watch: Look guys, utopia's never going to happen. It's an impossible ideal. So why strive for it? Why waste time on laws that can't guarantee freedom everywhere all the time? Why waste money on police departments that can't protect everyone everywhere all the time? So screw law and order! Let's have some fun, cause some mayhem, and live in blissful anarchy!

If you can't have utopia, go for chaos; and if you can't have perfect balance, throw all equity to the wind!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
tony gent wrote:

Its odd that in all the years I've been gaming (which is 30+ ) I've only ever seen two characters with mega stats as we've always insisted that they are rolled in front of the DM .

Strange that

I know, right?

All these whiny point buy lovers remind me of all those one-time house guests who complain about my homemade candies. So what if I don't watch how much sugar I toss into the pot? It's all about the thrill of the first taste: will this toffee be like eating mildly sweet lard, or will it be like eating a chunk of dehydrated non-diet soda?

And hey, in 30+ years, I've only sent one dinner guest into a diabetic coma. :)


master_marshmallow wrote:
K177Y C47 wrote:

Dice Roll is jsut bad...

It create rediculous levels of disparity and can make a lot of people feel sort of cheated (guy wanted to make a Gish type character (who are prone to being MAD) but ended up with 12s across the board or the guy who is dominating because he defied stats and got all 18s). Additionally, you get awkward problems like "hey! We don't have BSF... we need a BSF. Hey! Since you haven't made a character yet you get to be BSF *rolls stats* 12...14...12...8..10...9... well then... "

Additionally, Dice Roll just makes the GM's job even harder. With PB you know roughly how powerful (attribute wise) everyone is. With dice rolls you know have to find a way to challenge the guy who got really good rolls while not just straight out slaughtering the guy who can't roll for the life of him...

Disparity is abundant regardless of the stat generation method.

If you don't like stat rolling fine, but point buy is just as bad if not worse for the game by creating the need to facilitate the game around its constructs.

If they have to let classes skip stat prerequisites for feats because they can't afford to buy in stats high enough to take them because of the stats they need just to play their class, then there is an obvious problem with the system, and not one that is unfixable without having to change the rules of the game to facilitate the sacred cow of point buy.

It is a false institution of balance, and praising it on the grounds of game balance alone has been disproven several times over.

Praising it on the grounds of strawmen who have ridiculous stat disparities in a game run by human beings with the mental capabilities of "if these stats are too high, reroll, if they are too low, reroll" as if all stat rolls must be set in stone. They don't, that's kinda the point in playing a table top game where you can make such decisions rather than a video game restricting all your options.

If someone wants to tell me they enjoy the gamists metagame in balancing and...

Except the disparity from point buy comes from system knowledge and skill. If you suck at the game, get better. Don't hate the player. Where as with dice rolls, the disparity is from something you cannot control, and it can cause scenarioes where a person cannot play the thing they wanted. More than a few times, buddies of mine would want to play something like a Paladin, but end up with rolls that would only work for a SAD as crap class (usually it ends up being Scarred Witch Doctor) .


There's already more than enough randomness involved in playing the game. You roll for attack, you roll for damage, you roll for saves, you roll for a lot of stuff. It's part of the game and makes it fun. But I don't want randomness to be part of character creation too. That should be in the control of the player as much as possible. That's why I use pointbuy and give players full hp per HD.


Anarchy_Kanya wrote:
full hp per HD.

We offer rolls or what PFS does for health. IMHO: Full HD is a tad strong.


Maybe for you.


I don't enjoy standard rolling schemes. I prefer choice and consistency. Point buy is better but can have its downsides too, like excessive min-maxing or cookie cutter builds. I would personally still go with point buy despite those downsides, but I'm amenable to custom alternatives, like specific stat arrays or systems that incorporate a little rolling somehow.

If there is to be rolling, I prefer everyone do it together in full view. It eliminates all the one in a billion rolls that people get when nobody else is watching.

I prefer the average HD (rounded up) system.


Most intriguing stat gen method I have encountered to date was the following.
Every player rolls 18d6.
The resultant dice are then placed in a "pool."
The players then take turns drafting ability scores.
You may not draft the same number twice (IE: your 1st round draft is an 18 your second round draft cannot be an 18).
This is repeated until all dice have been drafted.
This is entertaining and faster than it sounds (for small groups anyway).


K177Y C47 wrote:
master_marshmallow wrote:
K177Y C47 wrote:

Dice Roll is jsut bad...

It create rediculous levels of disparity and can make a lot of people feel sort of cheated (guy wanted to make a Gish type character (who are prone to being MAD) but ended up with 12s across the board or the guy who is dominating because he defied stats and got all 18s). Additionally, you get awkward problems like "hey! We don't have BSF... we need a BSF. Hey! Since you haven't made a character yet you get to be BSF *rolls stats* 12...14...12...8..10...9... well then... "

Additionally, Dice Roll just makes the GM's job even harder. With PB you know roughly how powerful (attribute wise) everyone is. With dice rolls you know have to find a way to challenge the guy who got really good rolls while not just straight out slaughtering the guy who can't roll for the life of him...

Disparity is abundant regardless of the stat generation method.

If you don't like stat rolling fine, but point buy is just as bad if not worse for the game by creating the need to facilitate the game around its constructs.

If they have to let classes skip stat prerequisites for feats because they can't afford to buy in stats high enough to take them because of the stats they need just to play their class, then there is an obvious problem with the system, and not one that is unfixable without having to change the rules of the game to facilitate the sacred cow of point buy.

It is a false institution of balance, and praising it on the grounds of game balance alone has been disproven several times over.

Praising it on the grounds of strawmen who have ridiculous stat disparities in a game run by human beings with the mental capabilities of "if these stats are too high, reroll, if they are too low, reroll" as if all stat rolls must be set in stone. They don't, that's kinda the point in playing a table top game where you can make such decisions rather than a video game restricting all your options.

If someone wants to tell me they enjoy

...

False, the disparity from point buy comes from the game making the assumption that all classes are equal and when given equal opportunity they can all flourish and they can't.

You cannot deny the fact that MAD and SAD classes exist and that regardless of the points allowed, the point buy system favors one over the other.

If you enjoy point buy that's fine, but it does not require system mastery at all to be able to use it, that's the power gamer talking.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am surprised by the apparently prevalent practice of allowing Players to roll their scores without the Dungeon Master as witness. Smells like a strawman to me.

If your game cannot facilitate witnessed rolls then I would totally suggest using a Point-Buy method.


All things told the OP question comes down to: Are apples better than oranges?


Lakesidefantasy wrote:
I am surprised by the apparently prevalent practice of allowing Players to roll their scores without the Dungeon Master as witness. Smells like a strawman to me.

I've seen it plenty of times for various reasons. I don't view it as an intrinsic problem of rolling, since you can easily avoid it. But it does happen.

In my current campaign, everyone started making their characters together in the first session and rolled. But I joined in the second session and had to create my character between sessions. So I was the one who rolled alone. I happened to roll slightly above average (all 12-16 with the 4d6 method), more than the rest of the party, but I felt a little cheated because nobody was there. In retrospect I should have let the DM email me stats to keep it on the up and up. I also felt a bit cheated because my class depended heavily on only one main stat and a couple of secondary ones. So those well balanced rolls that would have been awesome for a certain type of character were wasted on me, whereas a standard point buy would have worked great for my type of character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lakesidefantasy wrote:
I tend to think that when disparity between character ability score arrays happens it is less of a problem mechanically than proponents of point-buy make it out to be.

It can be a real problem and this is from the guy that normally rolls well. And I have a friend who always rolls poorly for them. It also does not help that my system mastery is a lot better than his. At least with point buy things would have been a lot closer. Just to be clear I am not saying it is always a problem, but when it is a problem, it tends to be very noticable when someone rolls very well, and someone is barely above commoner level. As a player and GM I don't find that it is worth the trouble. I mean I could fudge rolls behind the screen or do other things to even things out, OR I can just create less work for myself and use point buy or a stat array.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I would ever going to use rolls I would let everyone roll and then they would choose one set of rolls and would use it all.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Kirth Gersen wrote:

I find the method of stat generation to be a lot less of an issue than expectations of what "reasonable" stats should be. I'm used to 3d6, so stats of 10 and 11 don't bother me, scores below 8 are common, and still I think of 12 as "above average" -- not only does it give you a bonus, but it's also the equivalent bonus of what a 15 or so in 1st edition would have given you! By that standard, a character with all 12s would be awesome!

Then I read about people using 25-point buys and roll 54d6 and drop the 36 lowest and so on, and they consider 18-17-16-15-14-11 to be "baseline" stats and anything less to be "unplayable."

Personally, if I wanted to be that superhuman at 1st level, I'd just play Amber Diceless, in which you "sell down" a stat to be Olympic Athlete or Einstein, and "dump into the ground" to be a normal human.

Agreed. This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the post higher up about 3d4+6 giving "average" scores. 13-14 is average? In my mind 10-11 is average.

Arachnofiend, while some of us "old-school" people might consider 12 to be a high number, I don't think many of us consider a character with no score above 12 a "good" character. Having one or two scores in the 13-14 range is reasonable. Heck in the Carrion Crown game I'm currently in, we have a player who rolled 14 12 11 10 10 10 and he's doing fine with his paladin.

Honestly I have a slight personal preference towards point buy myself, but one of my groups really likes to roll so there you are. I prefer 15 points, but someday I'd like to give 10 a try for the challenge.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Re: Good rolls only occurring away from the DM: Who are you playing with -- 10-year-olds? Presumably you need to carefully audit the point-buy stats they come up with, too? I can't imagine playing with a group of people who are totally untrustworthy.

Re: Methodology, I personally allow player's choice: each player can roll stats, or use an equivalent point-buy, or use a set array, at their option. This would, I assume, tend to keep any whining and arguments to a minimum (in my case, I wouldn't expect anyone at the table to be whiny and argumentative to begin with, so it's probably moot).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Pretty much with Kirth said. If I was going to choose point buy for the only reason that I couldn't trust players to roll dice honestly.... Then I wouldn't waste my time GMing for the group at all.


Lakesidefantasy wrote:

I am surprised by the apparently prevalent practice of allowing Players to roll their scores without the Dungeon Master as witness. Smells like a strawman to me.

If your game cannot facilitate witnessed rolls then I would totally suggest using a Point-Buy method.

I trust my players but I still like to have them all together to roll up PCs. That way they can collectively cheer good stats, commiserate over bad scores, offer each other advice, egg each other on, and otherwise coordinate how they're building their characters. Makes for a good introductory session to the campaign.


Kirth Gersen wrote:


Re: Methodology, I personally allow player's choice: each player can roll stats, or use an equivalent point-buy, or use a set array, at their option.

Do you mean all players agree on one version or each player can use whatever he likes best? Because mixing sounds strange.

@Whining: I can only talk for my self but I would try to get every game to either use point buy or a set array and if that doesn't work leave without hard feelings. No whining from my side, I just don't play d20 games with rolled stats.


I have to say, we have all rolls in the group, so on the first session of a new adventure/campaign, we roll our characters up together.

251 to 300 of 576 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / roll or points buy which is better All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.