*Swears violently.*
I had a long, glorious post typed in, and Firefox lost it. GRRRRRR.
Okay. Take two:
I use 25 point buy. At each level, characters gain 1 stat point, but they must purchase additional stats at standard point-buy rates; thus, it takes 3 levels to raise a 17 to an 18, or you could raise an 8 to an 11 in that same time. At 20th level, this obviously comes out to 44-point characters.
The elite array (25 point buy), with +1 point per four levels in the 15, is worth 41 points at 20th level. If you use 25 point buy and the highest starting stat is a 16, +1 per four levels, the build is worth 44 points, same as mine. If it starts at a 17, the build is worth 46 points; and if it starts at an 18, the build is worth 49 points.
Now, for those curious about my method, let's see what a character who dumps every possible point into one stat looks like, bearing in mind that you have to spend points on level 1 before you spend additional ones.
Fighter 1 (25 points)
Strength 18 (13 points)
Dexterity 14 (6 points = 19 points total)
Constitution 12 (4 points = 23 points total)
Intelligence 10 (2 points = 25 points total)
Wisdom 8
Charisma 8
Fighter 20 (44 points, focused)
Strength 22 (13 points + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5 = 31 points)
Dexterity 14 (6 points = 37 points total)
Constitution 12 (4 points = 41 points total)
Intelligence 10 (2 points = 43 points total)
Wisdom 9 (0 points + 1 = 44 points total)
Charisma 8
This build would require 5 attribute points to get to the same place, which is exactly what a +1 stat per four levels would give you, only you could have ended with a 23 Strength/8 Wisdom instead of 22 Strength/9 Wisdom.
Now we'll see what a more stat-balanced fighter looks like, following the same initial stat block.
Fighter 20 (44 points, generalized)
Strength 18 (13 points)
Dexterity 16 (10 points = 23 points total)
Constitution 14 (6 points = 29 points total)
Intelligence 14 (6 points = 35 points total)
Wisdom 11 (3 points = 38 points total)
Charisma 14 (6 points = 44 points total)
This build would require 16 +1 advancements, yet it is the same point-buy value. It's not exactly overpowering, either.
Also, if displaying the point values is against something, I'll happily remove 'em.
Thoughts? Corrections to my way of thinking?
The reason the standard pointbuy promotes dumping (In my experience at least, perhaps others have other experiences with it) is because to get a stat up to a good level you have to completely throw away everything else. There's no room to be ok at some things and great at others.
I can see that. Raising one stat reduces or stunts another. Plus, the player is doing so deliberately, shuffling off something weak into a stat he does not value.
Rolling stats, at least, differs from this in the mental process. The player may still shuffle something weak off into a stat he doesn't value, but he's doing so to make the most of a fixed set of numbers rather than taking from one to add to another.
|
I prefer the die roll.
That being said. I have never gotten a bad set of stats with die roll. Always played 4d6 kick lowest reroll 1's. Heck I even had a DM that said if you got 4 6's you got a 24, and that was in a 2nd ed game. I pulled 2 24's a 16, 2 12's and a 13. He made me reroll one of the 24's. Anyway. I feel that die rolling is a lot more organic. Otherwise everyone has a fighter with 18 strength, and 6 charisma. I have seen poepl beat the odds on many occasions. I have also seen people get screwed by the odds everytime. I happen to be one of the lucky ones who beats the odds sometimes. I have one character with 2 18's, a 17, 2 16's and a 12. Anyway. Some people beat the odds some lose to the odds, and others are the odds. It is why Vegas makes so much money. Unless your beating the odds your paying the house. In reference to the first post. I do believe that anything over 4d6 is overpowering. 4d6 is a good average when you were expected to only roll 3d6. I mean are we heroes, or are we slithgly improved townsfolk? Considering 10 is the average score. I would like to see heroes whos average is atleast 12. All those stats I mentioned above are what I think of when I hear about a hero.
Alright have fun all!
That's why I refuse to make higher stats cost more per point than lower stats. To me going from 13 to 14 is no different than going from 17 to 18, it's a +1 increase to an ability score, and in this case a +1 increase to a modifier. That's it.
On the other hand, this ignores the fact that a character who excels in one area and is "merely average" in others is inherently stronger than one who is slightly above-average in everything.
D&D rewards specialization, and to ignore that and say that, say, 18/12/12/12/12/12 is somehow equivalent in power to 13/13/13/13/13/13 as a stat array seems, to me, to be pretty odd.
Incidentally, instead of 18/12/12/12/12/12, I would likely go 18/14/18/10/10/8
Or maybe 18/16/18/8/10/8.
The point is that your system encourages dump-statting in order to pump your mainstats, while the diminishing returns you get from doing that under core Pathfinder discourages it.
The reason the standard pointbuy promotes dumping (In my experience at least, perhaps others have other experiences with it) is because to get a stat up to a good level you have to completely throw away everything else. There's no room to be ok at some things and great at others.
If you want players to have multiple 18's and still have the rest of their stats be above average, just play with 60-something point-buy. You will find that it encourages balanced stats much moreso than your system does.
It may not make sense to you, but the reason why high stats cost more in point buy is so that moderate stats look more attractive by comparison. By removing that you've made it much, much easier to min-max.
The only reason you don't see dump-stating is because of how many points you've given them. You're basically just giving them their 18's without them having to sacrifice anything in turn. If that's what you want to do, then fine, but you could have done it more easily under standard point-buy.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I use 25 point buy. At each level, characters gain 1 stat point, but they must purchase additional stats at standard point-buy rates; thus, it takes 3 levels to raise a 17 to an 18, or you could raise an 8 to an 11 in that same time. At 20th level, this obviously comes out to 44-point characters.
Verrrry nice.
Question: do stat-increasing magic items in your campaign work the same way?
Starting with 25 point-buy, most 20th level campaigns feature 40-point characters anyway. In fact, if we theorize that bumping stats past 18 should cost proportionally more (i.e, 4 points to turn an 18 into a 19), it will probably work out to about the same.
What this houserule does is make it viable for a character to out-grow a weakness (rather than just improving a strength), which is why I like it. I would actually have a lot more fun dump-stating if I knew I would be able to overcome that weakness later in the game (or not, as character development dictated).
In all the point buy games I've ever seen, people ARE going to get the best stat they can where it counts, its just everything else that suffers because of it.
This may be the case.
However, saying "Go ahead and do that - here, I'll make it even easier for you and remove all the drawbacks of doing it" is probably not the right response.
In all the point buy games I've ever seen, people ARE going to get the best stat they can where it counts, its just everything else that suffers because of it.This may be the case.
However, saying "Go ahead and do that - here, I'll make it even easier for you and remove all the drawbacks of doing it" is probably not the right response.
Well, if your beef is less with the stats being cranked and more with the stats being dumped, that may work fine (for his game).
The problem is thinking that removing the exponential scale for point-buy will reduce min-maxing. I don't care what playstyle you prefer, that's statement is simply, numerically false.
(Side note: in my experience, few people in point-buy games actually go for the 18. It happens, but more often players will make do with a 17 or 16 so as not to completely compromise their other stats. This, to me, says that the point-buy curve is working. But I digress- subjective experiences and all that.)
I thought I did pretty well, as before racial modifiers I had 17 16 14 13 10 10. All things considered, it was a very playable block.
Yeah, that would cost 31 points in purchase, 6 beyond even epic.
The fighter of the group has two 18s and a 17, even. I did a little bit of math and found this to be statistically almost impossible, and asked him about it after the first session.
You know what is impossible? Rolling a 19.
Beyond that? Nothing is impossible. Rolling one set with 3d6 in order can net you 6 18s. Is it probable? Hell no. It's 1,0156 * 10^14 to 1 against (if my math is right - even if it is wrong, we're talking about some really huge odds). Damn near impossible.
But near only counts when you throw hoops or hand grenades.
Just as an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters will eventually produce the collected works of Shakespeare (and pretty much everything else), if you have enough people rolling attributes often enough, someone will get the Perfect Set. It might not happen on this planet before the sun blows up, mankind (and the universe) might be obliterated before someone actually manages it, but it's not impossible.
I presented him with the math and he was unmoved.
Well, that's because reality laughs in the face of statistics. Everything that has, in fact, happened, has a 100% chance of having been happened.
What would you do in a situation such as this, where the DM just seems to be either straight up lying and letting players use unrealistic stats, or doesn't understand how stat rolls work.
Well:
If I knew he was lying, I'd stop playing with that GM. Luckily, none of the GMs I am playing with would do this.
If I thought he doesn't understand how the rolling system works, I'd let him show me how he did it. If it turns out they did, say, roll 36 stats and let people pick the top 6, I'd ask for a reroll - either for me or for them - as not everyone had the same method after all.
But if I didn't think he was lying, and it turned out they were rolling correctly, then I'd, well, roll with it.
The stats aren't unrealistic. Are they way off the norm? Yeah! But that's what you get when you use rolling methods: Stats will often be worlds apart, as someone has bad luck, and someone else has incredible luck.
That's why I don't ever use them. Stuff like that can happen, and it can ruin the game for some people, and it can play hell with expectations.
Either way, the result is a moderately good character adventuring with demi-gods who seem to think that they are average and I'm gimped.
Nothing to be done about it.
Let me take this opportunity to lobby for the glorious Purchase Method again. No nasty surprises like that.
Question: do stat-increasing magic items in your campaign work the same way?
Stat-boosters work as in core; the cost of increasing a stat is figured before adding racial and magical modifiers. But I'm glad you like it! :)
My game group is using a 35 point buy-in.
Back in the day, I was gaming with a guy new to D&D. He had borrowed some dice from his older brother, and had me roll a character using straight 3d6, put 'em where they fall.
Two things happened:
First, I rolled five 18's and one 17 (in Wisdom). Derek (the GM) was watching me the whole time, and both of us were gobsmacked!
Second, because I was starting at 1st level, and because Derek was new to DM'ing, I went into a dungeon alone. First encounter; a giant tick, which dropped onto my character's back, and basically sucked him dry, because he couldnt reach it.
So those awesome, god-like stats really availed me nothing.
Later, Derek found out that the dice he had borrowed from his brother were HEAVILY loaded! ;D
I prefer a mixed system for abilities.
First of all, I want chars to be able to fulfill their role as the players wants to.
Second, I don't like Point Buy systemas because there is NEVER the chance of a fighter getting 18 CHA (or just 12). It's all right that those chars are rare, but never?
I have been thinking on different approaches, but this one is fine:
First, you make an ordered set of rolls. This makes possible to have any score in any ability. I like the "3d6 in order, reroll ones", to have a little bump in stats. The scores are in the range 6-18, so we have not to worry about a 3 in Wisdom for a fighter. The average score is 12 (3*(2+6)/2), so no overpowered. Anyway, it is possible to use any random method (4d6 drop for ex.).
Second, you have to buy scores, spending a given number of points as you want, EXCEPT you can't buy any score below 12. As scores are higher than normal, I would let distribute 5 points less than normal.
As a variant, you can expend points paying the difference (cost of the new score - cost of the old score).
Example: we want to create a human fighter (preferred scores Str, Con, Dex; Wis min 10). We roll these scores:
Str 10, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 7, Cha 15
We now have 10 points to buy (standard 15-5 = 10):
Str 15 - 7 points
Wis 13 - 3 points
So the final scores (we put the +2 human bonus on dex) are:
Str 15, Dex 15, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 13, Cha 15
If we use the point buy variant (pay point difference, 15 points):
Str 15 - 7 points
Dex 14 - 2 points
Con 14 - 2 points
Wis 10 - 4 points
So the final scores (we put the +2 human bonus on Str) are:
Str 17, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 15
The difference between variants is:
1. If you have rolled very low on some scores, you have to pay more with the second variant.
2. If you rolled high, is cheaper to buy the difference than to buy the whole score (first variant).
That's why I would rather go with the first variant, as it let you have the minimum scores you need and it does not incentive very high scores.
A second method, similar to this, is buy first (minimum 12), roll second. Thus, you state the minimum scores you need, then roll to see if you get better. The number of points are the usual ones.
Let's work the same fighter as above. You buy:
Str 15 - 7 points
Dex 14 - 5 points
Con 13 - 3 points
As you rolled
Str 10, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 7, Cha 15
Your final scores (add 2 to Str):
Str 17, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 7, Cha 15
|
I prefer a mixed system for abilities.
First of all, I want chars to be able to fulfill their role as the players wants to.
Second, I don't like Point Buy systemas because there is NEVER the chance of a fighter getting 18 CHA (or just 12). It's all right that those chars are rare, but never?
There are fighters that get a 18 Cha in point-buy. They're called paladins.
Seriously, if you want the possibility of absurdly good values in dump-stats, you're either allowing for similarly bad values in important stats (hardcore rolling) or making overpowered stat arrays (point-buy)... why would you want that?
I guess if you like 18 Cha fighters, how about this: Let the characters point-buy their stats using a moderate system, such as 15 pt. Then let them roll a d6, which determines one of the 6 stats. This stat gets turned into an 18. Your character still looks the way you want him to be (point-buy), but the 18 makes you either slightly better at your job (main stat) or hugely improves a dump stat, giving you new options (Dazzling Display feats and a high intimidate rank for the fighter?).
The reason the standard pointbuy promotes dumping (In my experience at least, perhaps others have other experiences with it) is because to get a stat up to a good level you have to completely throw away everything else. There's no room to be ok at some things and great at others.
...
If you feel an 18 at the start for any stat is too high, then feel free to put a cap of how high a stat can be raised lower than 18. (Honestly in my games I like for my PC's to have upwards of two 18's, and do what I can to facilitate such even in random die roll games.)
Hey Kyrt - I don't think your annoyance is with the point-buy system, I think it's with the point *amounts*. The system works rather well when a 14-16 prime stat is acceptable to the players. Myself I've made some *very* averaged characters with the new point-buy (I kinda accidentally made one that was almost all 13's), and some that are more extreme with two 7's, etc.
But if you want players to have upwards of two 18's, just account for it. Really high powered games need to make more than just a 5-point adjustment to the point totals. For your games, I'd suggest 44 points - that's enough for two 18's, two 14's, and two 10's. It's also enough for 4 16's and 2 12's. Or more extreme, 3 18's, 11, and 2 7's.
There are fighters that get a 18 Cha in point-buy. They're called paladins.
Seriously, if you want the possibility of absurdly good values in dump-stats, you're either allowing for similarly bad values in important stats (hardcore rolling) or making overpowered stat arrays (point-buy)... why would you want that?
Why have I to choose?
Let's try a very simple method: order your abilities by importance; roll 3d6 six times in that order; you can substitute your first ability with a 15, the second with a 14, the third with a 13. There is no more chances to get 16+ in your primary ability that in a 3d6 straight. You also have a chance of having a good roll in any of your abilities, including your dump ones. And it is no way overpowered.I guess if you like 18 Cha fighters, how about this: Let the characters point-buy their stats using a moderate system, such as 15 pt. Then let them roll a d6, which determines one of the 6 stats. This stat gets turned into an 18. Your character still looks the way you want him to be (point-buy), but the 18 makes you either slightly better at your job (main stat) or hugely improves a dump stat, giving you new options (Dazzling Display feats and a high intimidate rank for the fighter?).
Why should I do that? I don't want dump stats to be 18, I want them to have a chance of being 18, just as anyone in the rest of the world. The point-buy does not incentive me to do that. I'm a bit tired of seing 6-8 Cha in fighters, or Str in Wizards, etc.
Why should I do that? I don't want dump stats to be 18, I want them to have a chance of being 18, just as anyone in the rest of the world. The point-buy does not incentive me to do that. I'm a bit tired of seing 6-8 Cha in fighters, or Str in Wizards, etc.
Amen to that. I think for "competitive"/"organized" games like various society's have it's one thing to talk about a need to make sure everyone has the same starting balance that a point buy system brings. But for home games, were actual role play will be more then just short term the stats mean so much less and the game so much more. It shouldn't matter if the fighter has a strength of 15 and the wizard a strength of 18. Long term those characters will not be so defined by their stats as their personalities.
If all you care about is stats, in the end all you will have is stats. If the personalities you create mean more, well I think you wont care near as much that you have the lowest stats in the group and will be just fine. I can understand if your character is crippled, but those stats the OP listed are far from gimped, they are very playable and can make for a great character.
Roll the dice, play what you roll and enjoy.
|
To all who have posted that this is why they prefer point buy, I wholeheartedly agree. When I start a new campaign I explain two systems of dice rolls and let them vote for which they will all use: basic point buy, or 4d6-drop arranged how they like. We roll them all together and go.
We played again today, and the DM had asked the other three players to reroll one of their 18s each to make their characters slightly more realistic. Apparently he wasn't as certain that he had witnessed all of their rolls after I asked him about it.
I plan on sticking with the group and seeing how it goes, but I was disappointed to see that at least one of the players was periodically lying about his attack rolls, bumping no fewer than 3 rolls up by adding 10 to his originally low roll.
Personally I don't understand the point of the game if you ignore the rules; the risk of failure is what makes it interesting. Oh well....
Also, to whoever asked what we were playing, the group ended up being a Gnome Wizard (myself, going to multiclass rogue and take the Arcane Trickster PrC), Human Fighter, Human Cleric, and Half-Elf Bard.
That's when you bring out a meat cleaver and tell the Dice Cheater next time he Rolls the dice and Takes 10 on an Attack or Save he loses a pinkie finger Yakuza style...
--On the Chopping Vrock!!
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Let's try a very simple method: order your abilities by importance; roll 3d6 six times in that order; you can substitute your first ability with a 15, the second with a 14, the third with a 13. There is no more chances to get 16+ in your primary ability that in a 3d6 straight. You also have a chance of having a good roll in any of your abilities, including your dump ones. And it is no way overpowered.
That's very elegant. (I would amend that to 4d6-drop-low, because having a Strength or Constitution of "3" or "4" is very difficult to play.)
I can understand if your character is crippled, but those stats the OP listed are far from gimped, they are very playable and can make for a great character.
Roll the dice, play what you roll and enjoy.
I think that's the point. The stats were perfectly fine and he was fine with them, until they were put up next to the rest of the party, in context he was 'crippled'. When every character at the table has multiple 18s except yours, who has none, you are playing way behind the curve and simply will not be able to measure up to the expectations of the group.
That's very elegant. (I would amend that to 4d6-drop-low, because having a Strength or Constitution of "3" or "4" is very difficult to play.)
Let's try a very simple method: order your abilities by importance; roll 3d6 six times in that order; you can substitute your first ability with a 15, the second with a 14, the third with a 13. There is no more chances to get 16+ in your primary ability that in a 3d6 straight. You also have a chance of having a good roll in any of your abilities, including your dump ones. And it is no way overpowered.
Perhaps, but done properly, you can have incredible and unforgettable characters like Raistlin Majere, who had a 3 or 4 Con score.
That's very elegant. (I would amend that to 4d6-drop-low, because having a Strength or Constitution of "3" or "4" is very difficult to play.)
Let's try a very simple method: order your abilities by importance; roll 3d6 six times in that order; you can substitute your first ability with a 15, the second with a 14, the third with a 13. There is no more chances to get 16+ in your primary ability that in a 3d6 straight. You also have a chance of having a good roll in any of your abilities, including your dump ones. And it is no way overpowered.
Thanks.
In my more complex method above, I use (3d6, reroll 1), because the minimum score is 6 (with 4d6 drop you have about 1.25% of rolling lower than 6), and the average score is 12 vs 12.25 or so. The chance of getting 16+ is about 8% vs 13%. I don't want the stats to be too much high, just to be high enough.
I think that's the point. The stats were perfectly fine and he was fine with them, until they were put up next to the rest of the party, in context he was 'crippled'. When every character at the table has multiple 18s except yours, who has none, you are playing way behind the curve and simply will not be able to measure up to the expectations of the group.I can understand if your character is crippled, but those stats the OP listed are far from gimped, they are very playable and can make for a great character.
Roll the dice, play what you roll and enjoy.
He's not crippled. He's just less awesome. There is a rather big difference. Scotty Pippen was hardly crippled just because MJ was the greatest ever, he was simply less awesome in comparisions. Pippen will no doubt though someday soon walk through the hall of fame just as MJ did.
Just thought I'd share - current point-buy's I'm considering for an upcoming Council of Thieves game. DM is allowing an extra "+2" for non-tieflings to any non-increased stat (no +4's), per the suggestion to account for Tiefling strength.
Stats:
human fighter
15,13,13,13,12,12 -> 17/15/13/13/12/12
halfling Bard --> Paladin
13,14,13,12,10,15 -> 13,16,13,12,10,17
dwarven monk
15,12,12,12,15,10 -> 17,12,14,12,17,8
half-orc ranger
16,14,13,8,12,12 -> 18,14,15,8,12,12 OR 19,14,13,8,12,12
cleric - channeler
14,12,14,10,13,14 -> 16,12,14,10,13,16
P.S. Glad you liked the idea Kyrt :) - point buy totals are really a tiny range of possible values. My first 3rd edition character would actually have had a *negative* point-buy under Pathfinder. :)
He's not crippled. He's just less awesome. There is a rather big difference. Scotty Pippen was hardly crippled just because MJ was the greatest ever, he was simply less awesome in comparisions. Pippen will no doubt though someday soon walk through the hall of fame just as MJ did.I think that's the point. The stats were perfectly fine and he was fine with them, until they were put up next to the rest of the party, in context he was 'crippled'. When every character at the table has multiple 18s except yours, who has none, you are playing way behind the curve and simply will not be able to measure up to the expectations of the group.I can understand if your character is crippled, but those stats the OP listed are far from gimped, they are very playable and can make for a great character.
Roll the dice, play what you roll and enjoy.
Scotty Pippen has around 6.5 billion people to compare himself to.
In a party, you really only have three or four to compare yourself to.
You can say that the world is full of commoners with 10 in every stat, but that's hardly important; it's also crawling with demons and angels and dragons who are always going to be smarter, stronger, and sexier than you. Since encounters are usually tailored to the group, all that really matters is the group you're with.
And in a group where every other stat was in the mid 20s, someone with all 18s would be a cripple.
Let's try a very simple method: order your abilities by importance; roll 3d6 six times in that order; you can substitute your first ability with a 15, the second with a 14, the third with a 13.
That is, indeed, very elegant, though I would propose that you extend this through the rest of the elite array-- 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. I love this idea, and were it not for my loathing of randomness in chargen, I would adopt it myself.
Let's try a very simple method: order your abilities by importance; roll 3d6 six times in that order; you can substitute your first ability with a 15, the second with a 14, the third with a 13.That is, indeed, very elegant, though I would propose that you extend this through the rest of the elite array-- 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. I love this idea, and were it not for my loathing of randomness in chargen, I would adopt it myself.
That's very similar to my second -complex- method:
"A second method, similar to this, is buy first (minimum 12), roll second. Thus, you state the minimum scores you need, then roll to see if you get better. The number of points are the usual ones.Let's work the same fighter as above. You buy:
Str 15 - 7 points
Dex 14 - 5 points
Con 13 - 3 points
As you rolled
Str 10, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 7, Cha 15
Your final scores (add 2 to Str):
Str 17, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 7, Cha 15"
The differences are:
- You'd use the elite array. I let players chose any point-buy combination.
- I don't let "sell" negative points
- If you don't assign any points to an score, you have to take the roll.
As you risk a lower score, you are incentived to not put all your points in your higher stats.
Zero points buy you a 10, though. You would have to start the point-buy at 8 or even 7 if you want those to be the minimum values.
- If you don't assign any points to an score, you have to take the roll.
As you risk a lower score, you are incentived to not put all your points in your higher stats.
Maybe I did not explain it right, my English is not quite good. I will repeat the generation rules:
- You cant buy negatives (sell) and minimum score to buy 12 (2 points)- If you don't assign points to an ability you have to take the rolled score. So 0 points is not 10, is what you roll.
- Minimum final score is 6 (you reroll 1's).
|
|
I can't take credit for this, I read it somewhere years back but it goes like this:
Make a tic-tac-toe grid and list STR, DEX, CON on one side and INT WIS CHA along the top. Roll 4d6 drop the lowest 9 times to fill in the grid. Then, you have to pick and choose the stats you want out of the rows and columns, each stat can only be used once. We also put a maximum total bonus and minimum total bonus, if you went outside that range you rolled again.
We used this system for years in my 3.5 games. It allows characters to not be as cookie cut as roll and choose or simply buying stats.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
That's very elegant. (I would amend that to 4d6-drop-low, because having a Strength or Constitution of "3" or "4" is very difficult to play.)
Perhaps, but done properly, you can have incredible and unforgettable characters like Raistlin Majere, who had a 3 or 4 CON score.
(grin) Well, every source that I see on line gives him a Constitution of 8, but whatever his attributes were, Raistlin also had the Pudgy Hand of Ghod watching over him. He could cough all he liked, but his 1-hp-per-level never put him in danger of falling dead to an apprentice's magic missile.
(grin) Well, every source that I see on line gives him a Constitution of 8, but whatever his attributes were, Raistlin also had the Pudgy Hand of Ghod watching over him. He could cough all he liked, but his 1-hp-per-level never put him in danger of falling dead to an apprentice's magic missile.
Pretty sure those were real characters in a real campaign before they got turned into plot-protected literary figures.
Also, one of my all time favorite personal characters was Himo Felyic, a Living Grayhawk grey elf wizard with a Con of 6. (When Vigor increases your hit points by 50%, you're a pimp!) He started with 8 spells, and I picked one from each school except Necromancy, explicitly minimizing my combat utility... I was playing him as the university prankster who finally had to leave school and hit the road. Best combat spell was probably Grease, but I usually filled slots with Hypnotism and Ventriloquism.
He not only survived to level 2 (and was sadly retired because Living Grayhawk ended); he was instrumental to completing several modules, with a "don't just stand there, do something!" attitude which sometimes bordered on suicidal (like when nobody else would walk into that suspiciously empty room; turned out to be a maze made of invisible acid walls, thank goodness for clerics because I was also the one who solved the maze using a previously-triggered sand-suffocation trap). Longbow proficiency led to a few "hey, the wizard killed something" moments, and eventually he picked up a scroll of Hail of Stone and learned the spell (but never memorized it, instead making several more scrolls).
Oh, and since all his knowledge of adventuring came from the library, he naturally figured he should document his own exploits for posterity. From the start, he always carried writing supplies, and I took extensive notes during play on the details he would be recording (something I don't normally do). This actually resulted in additional experience rewards for the whole party in a couple of modules, when part of the job was to make reports and I just passed my notepad to the DM.
The whole point of the character was really to show the young'uns how it's done, and I succeeded in impressing several local min/max players, so I chalk that character up as a complete success. :)
|
personally i prefer the higher point buys.
the only reason people roll for stats is so they can have thier 18s,
personally i like using the highest possible "reasonable" point buy arrays in the system. for 3.5 dnd, i can handle 32, but prefer 36-40ish
for pathfinder, i'd prefer the 20 or 25 point arrays (but a 30 pointer would be awesome) (but i'll settle for 25)
i used to do rolling back when it was the only thing i knew. everything died too quickly.
try being able to gish out a rogue/sorcerer/unseen seer/ arcane trickster as a viable melee combatant, regardless of those d4's just because you do not have one stat below 15, and have maxed out dex, con, int and cha. in the dm's face that character had before other mods, 18 dex, 18 con, 18 cha 18 and int, 16 str and 17 wis, using the roll 5d6, drop lowest 2, 3 times taking the best per stat method. and the character was rolled for a one shot game. it gets boring quick. a character who should be suffering from severe M.A.D. became the secondary tank, screw the d4's for hitdice (which were all 3's and 4's)
the reason i hate rolling random stats is because of stuff like this, something comprised of 95% d4's and 5% d6's for hitdice should not be a secondary tank.
i will admit those absurdly high stats felt like a crutch, and dice gen random stat campaigns are for those who don't feel they can walk without that crutch. the same one that despite what physics should say doesn't seem to screw people over as much as it should.
it's gotta be some kind of magic. some kind of dice affecting enchantment. everybody i've seen show up in a random stat camapign has had at least 2 or 3 18's and at least 1 other stat of 15 or better. maybe these lucky individuals are really wizards.
|
I've always given my Players the following numbers which they can arrange as they please:
18, 17, 15, 13, 11, 10
These are reasonable stats with 2 strong, 2 medium and 2 weak scores. If the PC wants to play a character with an 8 in a score then they just put their ten in their racial weakness. If they want to play a character with a 20 then they put the stat in their racial strength. All the players feel that they are contributing to the adventure and each character has a unique advantage over the others.
The reason for so many odd numbers is that PCs can improve the odd numbers every 4th level if they want to shore up a weakness, create a new strength or make themselves more versatile.
The reason why my group came up with this rule is we have one player who always manages to roll god-like stats in front of my eyes. Multiple 18s, 15+ and maybe one bad score of 9-10. Since he usually plays spell-casters he just dump-stats strength and casts away to his heart's content. One of my other players must karmically balance the first consistently rolling stats with a highlight of about 14, but usually hitting the 9-11 mark.
In the same game the character with great stats contributes and succeeds more, while the character with poor stats contributes and succeeds less. When it causes people are feeling more frustration than fun then the rule needs to change.
I ran a campaign which only allowed Elite Array.
Even with a max 15, plenty of cheese was found... but there was also a lot less time spent crunching numbers before play, which gave the players more mental bandwidth for fluff in their character concepts.
I've always given my Players the following numbers which they can arrange as they please:
18, 17, 15, 13, 11, 10
These are reasonable stats with 2 strong, 2 medium and 2 weak scores.
41 Pathfinder Point-buy, for the record.
Like Tejon, I had a campaign with all default (elite) array. Worked just fine, even for the Paladin. It really *is* all about what the rest of the group has, and how they interact regarding that. One person with all 16+, and another with all 14- *can* work out fine, but that becomes a group dynamic issue.
Extra statistics I just calculated:
4d6-drop lowest, *7* rolls-drop lowest:
Average: 12.9
Pathfinder Point-buy: 24.4 (counting scores below 7 as one more -1 each)
3.5 Point-buy: 33
I had thought that it was quite a bit better than that, glad to know my instincts were more spot on.
1) Roll 3d6 for all 6 stats, do not arrange. Roll 3 sets this way.
2) Pick the set you like, but you can't re-arrange the stats. This represents your character's raw potential if the character had been grown in a vat somewhere.
3) Apply point buy (25 for my group) to the set you rolled. This represents the character's upbringing, events in their life, and personal training. You get 2 extra points to spend for every stat below 6 and 2 less for every stat above 16.
This rolling method will rarely produce poor characters. If a character has a poor stat in his key ability score, they can buy up to 16 or so and usually still have average stats everywhere else. A character with a good key ability score finds it easy to round out the other parts of their character. What's really interesting is when a stat that isn't necessarily considered important for most concepts/builds is very good and the player embraces it (such as a wizard with a high str or a Barbarian with a high cha). In this way, this method can encourage unique characters.
This also allows players to develop a storyline. A DM could, actually, come up with actual plot events and training that relate to certain bonuses instead of actual point buy. I don't have time for that, but it seems to work in other non-D&D systems.
My players seem to have liked this rolling method. They get the randomness they like, but can build the character the way they want to. Everybody seems to win.
Everybody, of course, except those who want complete control over their characters' stats, but I don't play with any of those people which is a good thing. :)
3) Apply point buy (25 for my group) to the set you rolled. This represents the character's upbringing, events in their life, and personal training. You get 2 extra points to spend for every stat below 6 and 2 less for every stat above 16.
How do yo make this point buy? Let's say I rolled 12 for Str and I want it to be 16. Have I to spend the whole 10 points or only 8 (the cost difference)?
using the roll 5d6, drop lowest 2, 3 times taking the best per stat method.
it's gotta be some kind of magic. some kind of dice affecting enchantment. everybody i've seen show up in a random stat camapign has had at least 2 or 3 18's and at least 1 other stat of 15 or better. maybe these lucky individuals are really wizards.
You talk a lot of junk about dice rolling methods but I think your issues really is the method you used.
Try 4d6 drop the lowest or better try 3d6 play them were you roll them. I bet if you do this honestly you wont get beat the rolls 25 points in pathfinder lets you buy. Sure once in a while, but most times less (3d6 keep in order will be far less).
Why should I do that? I don't want dump stats to be 18, I want them to have a chance of being 18, just as anyone in the rest of the world. The point-buy does not incentive me to do that. I'm a bit tired of seing 6-8 Cha in fighters, or Str in Wizards, etc.
Then go and put a better value into the "dump stats".
And talk to people how you love that stuff. Talk to them at great length.
Maybe you get them to choose to play such a character.
Of course, you can still force them to play something like that by restricting player choice. :P
Like when I don't like that so few people play races other than human and I force them to roll up their race with a d7. (Hint, I don't really. Just making a point. That's one of the big problems I have with rolling: Character choices are taken from you.)
Shazbot! I almost forgot to mention a pivotal part of my character creation method!
After rolling to create a character, roll 1d3+1 to create a pool of bonus points. These points can be split up among several stats.
How do yo make this point buy? Let's say I rolled 12 for Str and I want it to be 16. Have I to spend the whole 10 points or only 8 (the cost difference)?
Yeah, I re-worked the table for the number of points per increase.
3 -> 4 = 2 points
4 -> 5 = 2 points
5 -> 6 = 2 points
6 -> 7 = 1 point
7 -> 8 = 1 point
8 -> 9 = 1 point
9 -> 10 = 1 point
10 -> 11 = 1 point
11 -> 12 = 1 point
12 -> 13 = 1 point
13 -> 14 = 2 points
14 -> 15 = 2 points
15 -> 16 = 3 points
16 -> 17 = 3 points
17 -> 18 = 4 points
So to go from 12 to 18 it would cost 1+2+2+3+3+4=15 points.
About dump stats: Almost no stat is a dump stat these days. Everything has something important that it is based on. Some things are more important than others, but they affect an aspect of all characters even not considering skills.
Strength: melee attack (including touch), carrying capacity, maneuvers
Dexterity: AC, CMD, Initiative, Reflex save
Constitution: HP, Fort save
Intelligence: skill points
Wisdom: Will saves
The lone man out is Charisma. It does have good representation in skills, but that might not be enough to keep it from becoming a universal dump stat for many characters. In my campaign, I made character points (action points) based off Charisma.
Character Points = Character Level + Charisma modifier
This makes sense since in 3.X Charisma is no longer just a social attribute but also a measure of your soul or inner fire, even destiny. This has handily solved the issue in my campaign. There are no dump stats anymore.
Character Points = Character Level + Charisma modifier
What do Character Points do?