I see a lot of discussion about min/maxing and peaking class abilities to get the best modifiers for a given class. This makes some sense as the characters who make the best model of their class will be more likely to head out and adventure because they are good at what they do.
Does anyone play a more mid level ability to give the max amount of bonuses across all the abilities? More of a Jack of all Trades type approach?
I like the idea of this kind of character but before I put the work into building it I thought I would get some input if this is a good way to play, a frustrating way to play? and why.
Thanks.
Focusing on something abstract like balancing your stats is going to be less likely to produce a jack of trades character than one designed with an eye toward that end.
If focusing on keeping all the stats equal is your goal, then I have to say there's little support for that type of character. It's going to be expensive to make any one stat high enough to meaningfully impact any sort of save or check.
I do think that there should be a class that benefits from having no real weaknesses, but right now the game is designed to focus on specific strengths.
If you want a jack of trades type, I highly recommend a investigator:empiricist/sleuth with a high intelligence. You can do most anything you want to do with a pretty high check and can move on to whatever class supports your play style from there.
One thing you could do which might be interesting would be to go paladin (iroran paladin)/(unchained) monk/student of war to get all three of your mental stats to ac (student of war lets you replace your dex with int at 2nd level, monk adds wisdom, and iroran paladin lets you add 1 point of Cha/paladin level).
It's a variant of one of my favorite theorycrafting build (the "single stat for everything" build).
I guess the way I am seeing it is that while you may not have a +3-4 in one ability you also wont have a +0 or -1 in several others. So in theory it should allow you to make more saving throws by having more +1/+2 bonuses in all or nearly all of your checks not just in your class specific ones.
I am second guessing this because obvious as Erich mentions there are not many people doing this, and there may be a reason for that. Or maybe it's just that I like the idea of a more well rounded character over a stat-monkey class specific one, more then other people.
With racial modifiers making slight alterations you can spread your 20 point buy out and have 3 +1's, and 3 +2's, making it a pretty good all around player, depending on how you spread the abilities they could make a formidable fighter or spell caster just maybe not an "elite" one.
So, few problems there.
Saving throws are Con, Dex, and Wis only. Cha, Str, and Int don't do anything for them unless you get something special that lets you use it (usually Cha). In which case, a single point of that stat becomes worth one each of Dex, Con, and Wis. You might be thinking of 5e.
Skills at least have a much broader selection, but it's still loaded. Str has 2, Dex has 7, Con has none, Int has 14, Wis has 5, Cha has 7. Then there's the measure of usefulness. Str is just Climb and Swim. Dex is pretty much just the thief skills (and a couple very situational ones). Int is basically metagame skills (knowledge, appraise, spellcraft). Wis is by far the most important (perception) but also covers sense motive. Cha is the social skills... and Handle Animal and Use Magic Device, for some reason. And then skill points come up. At level 1 you can try to be "skilled" with just the raw stats. You'll still lose to anyone who put a skill point in (usually by at least +4 because of the class skill bonus, probably more like +6 or +7 because they have higher stats). Once you hit level 5 or so and can spread skill points out some... well, you still lose to anyone who has bothered to focus on the skill because they'll be at +8+stat versus your +4 (assuming a class skill)+lower stat. Same minimum +4, more like +6-7. And if it's not a class skill you're at +1+lower stat, or almost 10 points behind. At that point you're not going to contribute against anything level-appropriate that scales. The not-scaling stuff tends to be between 15 and 25 so you would probably be able to reliably hit the 15 with take 10 but wouldn't be able to do the 25 at all without a super lucky roll.
Then combat. Combat has the same problems as skills. Thankfully "skill points" are automatic (BAB) but unfortunately it's always a scaling DC (AC). You're only losing +2 or +3 on the attack roll but in most cases you're also losing that on the damage. This one is less of a problem as you level up but the issue that will come up is not getting the "combat" stat bonus from a magic item as fast as normal because a +2 all is worth +4 single stat and +4 all is worth more than +6 single stat. This is basically the same for magic as well, just with DCs instead of attack bonus. It's a little more painful there though, since it's usually a 15% higher chance of your spell not affecting them at all.
Starting with all 13s and 14s won't cripple you. You will notice a disadvantage against anyone who's focused on something. As you hit higher levels you'll notice yourself falling behind even more (especially if you spread out your skill points). The saves will come down to class saves more than the raw stats (6 point difference at level 20). And, well, most skills only need one person who can do it (knowledge, diplomacy) and the others need everyone to do it (stealth, perception). And some are personal (ride, fly). Basically, being a jack-of-all-trades is only good if someone else is a specialist. And then only for the first few levels, after which you can't even be a backup <whatever> because you're 10 points behind.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
I think that building a well rounded character tends to be better suited by figuring out how to become as SAD as possible. I played a dwarf Infiltrator Inquisitor/Zen Archer that had WIS go to:
-Attack rolls
-Social Skills-- most twice thanks to his Inquisition choice
-AC
In addition to everything normally gained from WIS. He wound up with crazy good saves,insanely high skill checks, solid damage when he could nova with Bane... Good times.
Thanks, I appreciate the input. I guess this system doesn't really favor well rounded characters as much as it does highly specialized ones. Which seems odd because out in the "real world" a highly specialized character would have a really rough time doing anything other then what they are built for.
I suppose it works since this is a heavily group oriented game. Most of my past RPing experience is in very small groups or one on one where my characters had to sort of live and die by their own abilities.
It really depends on what you consider a well-rounded character. Some classes by their very nature are specialized. Wizards for example tend to be very specialized and their stats are also usually weighted. This is true both in the game and in real life. How many scientists do you know that are also professional athletes?
Some classes like Bards, Inquisitors, and Rangers are actually very well rounded. All of them have decent combat ability, skills and access to magic. They all also have at least two good saves and decent AC. They all also have numerous class abilities to boost their usefulness even higher. If you want a well-rounded character able to perform well in a multiple rolls play one of these classes.
Stats are more important early in the game, but after about 6th level begin to become less important than the class.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Yeah, "well rounded" and "completely even across all 6 stats" don't mean the same thing in this game. True jack of all trades class like the ones mentioned above. That doesn't mean they don't want some stats higher than others.
Adagna wrote: Thanks, I appreciate the input. I guess this system doesn't really favor well rounded characters as much as it does highly specialized ones. Which seems odd because out in the "real world" a highly specialized character would have a really rough time doing anything other then what they are built for.
I suppose it works since this is a heavily group oriented game. Most of my past RPing experience is in very small groups or one on one where my characters had to sort of live and die by their own abilities.
Pathfinder is a group game and a group of varied specialists will almost always beat out a group of individuals who try to do it all by themselves. This does mimic the real world. That is why each of us does not grow our own food, fix our own plumbing, make our own nuclear power plants, perform our own brain surgery, etc. Instead, we all specialize and rely upon each other to fill in the gaps. It makes a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.
You can certainly play Pathfinder in a more "survival" mode, with each character having to do it all. You'll have to lower all of the challenges (skill DCs, monster CR, ability DCs, etc.) because Pathfinder is expecting a party of 4 specialists - Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard (or something along those lines).
Adagna wrote: Thanks, I appreciate the input. I guess this system doesn't really favor well rounded characters as much as it does highly specialized ones. Which seems odd because out in the "real world" a highly specialized character would have a really rough time doing anything other then what they are built for.
I suppose it works since this is a heavily group oriented game.
Most tabletop RPGs do work off the assumption that you need a decent-sized group to cover all the skills you might need, since it encourage teamwork and all that.
From a realism PoV, it is pretty rare for someone to have a whole bunch of specialized skills. How often do you see a brain surgeon who's also a rocket scientist, professional football player, a cardinal in the catholic church, a master assassin, and a pop star?
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
