|
I have found that dice rolling stats (we do 4d6, best 3 - place where you like) is really quite liked. The excitiment (or depression) of seeing what you get. We have a house rule (althought stated in 1e pHB) that two scores of 15+ and you have a winner - else re-roll. The huge problem I have with point buys is that the game becomes Paranoia. Character A dies, hmmmm, here comes Character's A clone with exactly the same stats... I know it speeds things up no end, but to me it causes a loss of some of the appeal of an RPG (my opinion).
S.
heres a problem i have with viable 15 point buy clerics, they are all clumsy ditzes who cannot even spell the word cat, and they cannot walk more than 5 feet of even ground without tripping over the laces of thier boots. and that is before they wear armor. how can they call themselves clerics? they know not even the most basic tenants of thier faiths as they are too dumb to even spell the word cat, and they cannot walk, let alone charge in thier gods name without tripping. and are too dumb to remember their need wear armor.
Heres an array for a minmaxed 15 point aasimaar melee cleric, i will call her Flonne.
** spoiler omitted **
as you can see in the block of attributes
Flonne doesn't know her religions basic tenants, heck, she can't even spell the word cat. she is too dumb to know about the usefulness of armor and cannot walk more than 5 feet on perfectly even ground without tripping over the lacing of her boots. she may as well be walking into battle wearing a dress.
I would point out that you are overstating how stupid she is. An INT of 7 is around a 70~80 intelligence, and people with those intelligence rates while slow can still spell cat, do know the usefulness of armor and Dex is the same way.
Consider -- until you get to Dex of 0 you can still control yourself. You might not be very coordinated but you can still take a move action to move your speed, you can still attack in melee, and you can still attempt to get out of the way of things.
This character has a score 6 points higher than that level. While not very good at archery and probably not a great tumbler they are still more than capable of tieing their shows and walking 5 feet on perfectly even ground.
**********************
Basically put unless a 13~14 INT is full on genius in your games then an INT of 7 is not full on retardation.
And you are doing a huge disservice to those with mental disabilities to say otherwise.
I'm sorry to say that I don't have the patience to slog through the whole thread, so if the topic of conversation has changed, forgive me:
As a player, I like bigger stats. They make me feel better about my character, and feel more capable/powerful/cool. I rarely play, though. And, as a DM, I can always increase the difficulty of the opposition, either through numbers (making combat seem just cooler in general) or through overall power. But it makes the players feel better about the characters and that leads to happier players and a better game.
Though I'm thinking of marrying point buy and a little bit of randomness in my upcoming games - a slightly lower PB like 20 (I used use 32 point buy in 3.5, for example), but they can either roll 1d6 and add it to any one stat, or 2d4 and add one d4 to each of two different stats, at their leisure. It allows a little randomness without letting one of my players and her ridiculous rolls leave the rest of the party drastically overpowered.
*ponders having every player rolling 4d6 once and having the group use the highest six rolls*
I've considered that, too.
And I saw a really cool idea once - each player rolls 4d6 drop lowest, and the stats go into a pool that each PC has to draw from. This makes the characters who profit from the high stats, like, say, a monk, sort of indebted to the other players, which hopefully reduces the general prickishness towards the less lucky rollers in the group.
So wait, point buying three 7's is minmaxing, but rolling three 7's isn't?
...Huh?
actually yes. In the point-buy example the player allocated those 7's intentionally to get the best possible score in the attributes deemed most mechanically important. That is he shorted one score to the extreme, to pump another to the extreme, or min/maxed.
In rolling example, the player left it up to god, which provides a convenient excuse as to whether the player wanted to have those low stats. And they were no garauntee of 3 exceptional scores in the other direction either. However if a DM saddled you with those rolls I would hope you got something for it.
The end result, though, is effectivly the same, a character who is some kind of idiot savant. If that is your character concept, more power to yah, but honestly at my table you are gonna need to sell it to me that your fighter is from the movie sling blade.
|
heres a problem i have with viable 15 point buy clerics, they are all clumsy ditzes who cannot even spell the word cat, and they cannot walk more than 5 feet of even ground without tripping over the laces of thier boots. and that is before they wear armor. how can they call themselves clerics? they know not even the most basic tenants of thier faiths as they are too dumb to even spell the word cat, and they cannot walk, let alone charge in thier gods name without tripping. and are too dumb to remember their need wear armor.
Heres an array for a minmaxed 15 point aasimaar melee cleric, i will call her Flonne.
** spoiler omitted **
as you can see in the block of attributes
Flonne doesn't know her religions basic tenants, heck, she can't even spell the word cat. she is too dumb to know about the usefulness of armor and cannot walk more than 5 feet on perfectly even ground without tripping over the lacing of her boots. she may as well be walking into battle wearing a dress.
Umm...WTF?!? If your making a melee oriented cleric, you don´t need your cha that high...nor your wisdom. You actually want SOME dex as pure armor isn´t gonna make up for that 7 dex very easily.
str 14, dex 12, con 14, int 8, wisdom 14, cha 10. Apply racial stats of +2 to strength and be one your merry way. The 16 wisdom and cha and strength is the whole I wanna do it all. Oh and you can change cha and int if you want more skill points...and/or be human. One of the fellow players made a dwarf cleric with 15 str, dex 8 con 16, int 13, wis 15, cha 8. Spent a feat for heavy armor and is enjoying melee up front. At level up he put one into str and one for wisdom. Quite the powerful melee cleric...and a viable one...if you don´t get stuck on need high charisma for channeling for a melee cleric.
I love bigger stats. bigger stats mean i don't have to dump as many attributes and can actually built a flavored fun contributing heroic character and not the clumsy ditz shuriken described.
Well then, welcome to the wonderful world of compromise. You want a melee cleric...well your wisdom is gonna have to be lower. Just like fighty oriented fighter/mage and their int...only with a lot less hoop jumping. I made a 15 point EK, you can damn well make a 15 point cleric.
Sometimes I wonder why people attack me on forums. I guess it's because they've been (fill in the blank) and think they need to (fill in the blank) someone in return to make up for their (fill in the blank). An EK is 2 classes plus a Prestige Class, a Cleric is it's own thing not 2 classes and a Prestige Class, just like a Monk. The only reason people seem to look at Clerics differently is because they can cast spells which yes gives them some great powers and stuff but it doesn't make up for them only being able to cast Cure X Wounds 8 times per day.
|
|
Sometimes I wonder why people attack me on forums. I guess it's because they've been (fill in the blank) and think they need to (fill in the blank) someone in return to make up for their (fill in the blank). An EK is 2 classes plus a Prestige Class, a Cleric is it's own thing not 2 classes and a Prestige Class, just like a Monk. The only reason people seem to look at Clerics differently is because they can cast spells which yes gives them some great powers and stuff but it doesn't make up for them only being able to cast Cure X Wounds 8 times per day.
Well then, welcome to the wonderful world of compromise. You want a melee cleric...well your wisdom is gonna have to be lower. Just like fighty oriented fighter/mage and their int...only with a lot less hoop jumping. I made a 15 point EK, you can damn well make a 15 point cleric.
Yes your right, the EK isn´t like the cleric in their stat needs...they are OH SO MUCH WORSE. A cleric can spend a feat and wear heavy armor...an EK can pretty much NEVER do that without tanking their already gimped CL even more with still spell.
And yes of course the cleric only has cure x spell...how could I possible have forgotten that hundreds of other cleric spells that show up in the core book doesn´t actually exist...so the cleric must obvious have really high stats in everything. *sarcasm*
And yes of course the cleric only has cure x spell...how could I possible have forgotten that hundreds of other cleric spells that show up in the core book doesn´t actually exist...so the cleric must obvious have really high stats in everything. *sarcasm*
Yes the Cleric has more than Cure X Wounds but honestly how many times does a Cleric get to cast what he wants before he's sidelined into using Channel Energy or Cure X Wounds? You EK can use heavy armor at the cost of a few feats (Arcane Armor Training?).
Yes your right, the EK isn´t like the cleric in their stat needs...they are OH SO MUCH WORSE. A cleric can spend a feat and wear heavy armor...an EK can pretty much NEVER do that without tanking their already gimped CL even more with still spell.
Slight issue (small one really) the Caster Level doesn't suffer from still spell -- the Spell level does. You still have the caster level you would have used normally.
Yes the Cleric has more than Cure X Wounds but honestly how many times does a Cleric get to cast what he wants before he's sidelined into using Channel Energy or Cure X Wounds?
And yes of course the cleric only has cure x spell...how could I possible have forgotten that hundreds of other cleric spells that show up in the core book doesn´t actually exist...so the cleric must obvious have really high stats in everything. *sarcasm*
Honestly if you let yourself be used as a healing battery that's your fault. Better choices are and always have been available. The decision to be a healer doesn't start with playing a cleric, and it doesn't mean clerics have to be healers or spend their spells healing people.
Just to point out, I actually prefer rollings tats over point buy - if I point buy, I go with 20.
But I also really like rolling dice, so here's how we do character generation:
4d6 drop lowest six times.
Now do it again two more.
Now choose one of those three stat lines you rolled.
It gives players more choice and still has that fun element of chance. If someone wants to make a <type of> character, he's more likely to have rolled it. Anomalies are potentially more likely due to how many stat sets are rolled, but hell, that's half the fun.
That said. There is nothing about point buy or dice rolling that is more "munchkin" or "powergamer" then the other. The difference between high stats and low stats is lower in Pathfinder then it is in any other D&D system. The only stat that has a major effect on your character is intelligence because it controls your skill points.
|
|
Yes the Cleric has more than Cure X Wounds but honestly how many times does a Cleric get to cast what he wants before he's sidelined into using Channel Energy or Cure X Wounds? You EK can use heavy armor at the cost of a few feats (Arcane Armor Training?).
And yes of course the cleric only has cure x spell...how could I possible have forgotten that hundreds of other cleric spells that show up in the core book doesn´t actually exist...so the cleric must obvious have really high stats in everything. *sarcasm*
Oh really...what heavy armor has 10% ASF in core PF? 20% if you blow 2 feats. Yeah that´s what I though...EK are limited to light armor unless they use still spell on everything.
Lets see...the dwarf cleric has healed us in combat...twice...in 9 levels. I fail to see this sideline to heal you speak off.
>looks sadly at puddle of horse goo<
It's dead Jim.
|
|
Personally, I think DnD anymore is way to focused on what your stats are.As opposed to AD&D where there was a huge difference between an 18/00 Strength fighter and a 15 Strength fighter?
A huge difference, that gave you +3 to hit and +6 to damage. And you could bends bars and stuff. But, since there was no way you could buy an 18/00 (and, frankly, unless the DM saw it with his own eyes, he wasn't buying it - with a point buy it's all there in the math, makes cheating hard)
Realistically, the 15 strength fighter was competing with a 16 or a 17 strength fighter, and there wasn't a dramatic difference from the combat bonuses, just a +1. And, considering an ancient, huge red dragon had 88 h.p., and the party had all kinds of goodies by the time they met said dragon (that 15 STR probably has at least gauntlets of ogre strength by then), the stats really didn't mean much at all.
In 3.x/Pathfinder, stats are more significant, as they impact so many more combat-oriented areas than in previous editions.
There are vast differences in the significant paradigms between the two systems, as 1e was player oriented, and 3.x/Pathfinder is character oriented. It was far easier for a good player with an average character to contribute in 1e than it is in the WotC/Paizo editions.
kyrt-ryder:
I've played 1st edition and I understand about the player paranoid you are describing but you must understand it was built into the system by Gary at the time.
The magical item section was full of goodies... and baddies. If you found a magical item you didn't put it on because you were afraid it would kill you.
No save. No roll. Instant death. Even if you identified it you still had about a 50/50 chance that you misidentified it and it killed you anyways.
The haste spell aged you a year each time it was cast on you. Everything that was there was there to kill you. To survive you had to be paranoid and even then that wasn't enough usually.
Now of course a good GM could handle this without it being as bad as presented in the books -- but that was completely up to the GM.
Now I'm not saying 1st was a bad system -- it wasn't especially for its time -- but with an immature GM it could be (same as any other).
|
|
They were too interested in probing everything with a 10 foot pole and searching every door and window for any possible clue whatsoever, and becoming very involved in the story or the adventure.
My bolding, now I agree ;)
Still we can now dispense with "that" sort of gaming, "Stop discribing the room and just tell me the damn DC to find the secret stuff will ya already?! Sometimes I think that DM cat wants us to actually think, if I wanted to think I would have hardly maxed out [search/spot/find all the stuff] to +34 would I?!"
Casting a hemispherical wall of force,
S.
Just to point out, I actually prefer rollings tats over point buy - if I point buy, I go with 20.
But I also really like rolling dice, so here's how we do character generation:
4d6 drop lowest six times.
Now do it again two more.
Now choose one of those three stat lines you rolled.
It gives players more choice and still has that fun element of chance. If someone wants to make a <type of> character, he's more likely to have rolled it. Anomalies are potentially more likely due to how many stat sets are rolled, but hell, that's half the fun.
That said. There is nothing about point buy or dice rolling that is more "munchkin" or "powergamer" then the other. The difference between high stats and low stats is lower in Pathfinder then it is in any other D&D system. The only stat that has a major effect on your character is intelligence because it controls your skill points.
This is the standard my group uses too. I find it usually ends up near 25 point buy, but sometimes as high as 45.
|
|
The current game mechanics as written don't promote the ideal balance either. It takes a skilled GM to intermix them both.They were too interested in probing everything with a 10 foot pole and searching every door and window for any possible clue whatsoever, and becoming very involved in the story or the adventure.My bolding, now I agree ;)
Still we can now dispense with "that" sort of gaming, "Stop discribing the room and just tell me the damn DC to find the secret stuff will ya already?! Sometimes I think that DM cat wants us to actually think, if I wanted to think I would have hardly maxed out [search/spot/find all the stuff] to +34 would I?!"
Casting a hemispherical wall of force,
S.
Now their are some words of wisdom. It all comes down to the type of game the players want to play and type of game the DM wants to run. Give everyone a point buy of 50 or get them to roll d4+2 for stats, doesn't matter as long as the end result is everyone is laughing, spilling Coke (or the less refined of us Pepsi) on expensive books, and eating food that will result in a heart attack at age 27.
S.
|
Forgive coming late to the thread....
I really dislike point buy, regardless of the number of points, for several reasons. The short version of a long rant is that it leads to too "perfect" characters. They lack uniqueness.
Make a 15 point monk. Now make another one. How much difference is there between the two? The 15 point monk is certainly the extreme case, but 25 point Wizards tend to all look the same too.
The various rolling options that allow you to assign at will result in an only slightly better situation. Sure 13s will get placed where a 12 could do, and someone might settle for 15 where they wanted a 16, but deviation will still be pretty slight.
Instead, I really prefer organic characters. I like seeing the Pally that's dumb as a brick because that's the way of the dice rolled. Or the Wizards, that like TV's Bones or House can't relate to people at all. Such stats make for more interesting characters, at least in my opinion.
My preferred stat roll method... 2d6+6 rolled 36 times, in a 6x6 grid, pick one of the 14 lines (6 vertical, 6 horizontal, 2 diagonal) and play as laid. Sure, it's a ton of dice to roll, but players seem to get a real kick out of it, and generally find a row that works for what they want to do but still has a little flavor.
(Edit: fixing various spelling/grammar issues)
The huge problem I have with point buys is that the game becomes Paranoia. Character A dies, hmmmm, here comes Character's A clone with exactly the same stats... I know it speeds things up no end, but to me it causes a loss of some of the appeal of an RPG (my opinion)
That's not a problem with the point buy system - it's a problem with unimaginative players. The advantage of the point buy is that it can give you the character you want, and it's also fair to all players. The disadvantage is that if you have unimaginative players, you can produce cookie-cutter characters.
Basically put unless a 13~14 INT is full on genius in your games then an INT of 7 is not full on retardation.
No, it's not, 7 is a bit dim but not overly so. Now combine that with 7 wisdom, which makes a character somewhat unobservant, foolish and easily led. Now combine that with a charisma of 7, which makes a character unappealing and has difficulty communicating anything complex. When you put them all together, you have someone slow, foolish and who talks in monosyllables that no-one really likes. Not much fun to RP IMHO.
Sometimes I wonder why people attack me on forums. I guess it's because they've been (fill in the blank) and think they need to (fill in the blank) someone in return to make up for their (fill in the blank).
Or possibly it's because you are wrong. A cleric needs one good score to function as a cleric, wisdom. Other good scores are a bonus. A cleric needs only average strength, dexterity and constitution to be able to function as a second-rank fighter. Just because with good scores he can act as a front-rank fighter does not make it essential to do so, nor is it his role. With good charisma he can get more out of his channelling, but it is not essential - average charisma is enough to function. With good intelligence he can be an authority on all things theological, but again it is not essential. A cleric with average scores in his stats and a good wisdom can pull his weight in a party. He can fight from the second rank, enhance the party and harass the enemy with spells, and use his channelling for healing and for damaging undead. If he wants to/has to fight in the front rank he has an array of buffs that can make him effective with just average scores. Just because a cleric can do more than this with good scores in other abilities does not mean they are essential.
I really dislike point buy, regardless of the number of points, for several reasons. The short version of a long rant is that it leads to too "perfect" characters. They lack uniqueness.
Again, this is a matter of the player, not the system. You can make organic characters with point-buy if you want to (I often do!). You don't have to make two characters of the same class the same way if you don't want to. How unique they are is limited by your imagination, not the point-buy system.
I've just read several threads where people are dealing with players with astronomical Ability scores.
I've been trying to use a 15 point buy in all my new games, and I still get push back from the players.
I just don't get it. All high scores accomplish is more paperwork for the GM and/or ruining the experience for all involved.
So to all you players out there, I beg you, take the 15 points. Your GM can then build encounters super-easily, and you'll get to play more! Anyone can make a "powerful" character by writing down big numbers rather than small ones, but you cannot make an awesome character in this way.
*steps down from soapbox*
In one game I dm. We did 36 point buy. I know. Insanely high and all that.
The past three sessions? I've ripped apart the 6 group party with only one thing. I used the monsters as is in the Beastiary.
I use tactics. I have discovered that the party can have all 18s, and it isn't going to do a lick of good, if they don't understand the tactics of intelligent creatures.
The ogre mage alone made them break pencils and send me death glares. Alter selfed itself as one of their captured companions, and upon camp time.. Yeah.
So I think stats aren't so much the issue, as what players can do with them.
Forgive coming late to the thread....
I really dislike point buy, regardless of the number of points, for several reasons. The short version of a long rant is that it leads to too "perfect" characters. They lack uniqueness.
Make a 15 point monk. Now make another one. How much difference is there between the two? The 15 point monk is certainly the extreme case, but 25 point Wizards tend to all look the same too.
The various rolling options that allow you to assign at will result in an only slightly better situation. Sure 13s will get placed where a 12 could do, and someone might settle for 15 where they wanted a 16, but deviation will still be pretty slight.
Instead, I really prefer organic characters. I like seeing the Pally that's dumb as a brick because that's the way of the dice rolled. Or the Wizards, that like TV's Bones or House can't relate to people at all. Such stats make for more interesting characters, at least in my opinion.
My preferred stat roll method... 2d6+6 rolled 36 times, in a 6x6 grid, pick one of the 14 lines (6 vertical, 6 horizontal, 2 diagonal) and play as laid. Sure, it's a ton of dice to roll, but players seem to get a real kick out of it, and generally find a row that works for what they want to do but still has a little flavor.
(Edit: fixing various spelling/grammar issues)
Interesting idea... I have a ton of 1d12s I got when a local gaming store closed. They could use more love... I was thinking of having the players roll the 36d12 in a 6x6 set and to each die add 6 (5 if you don't like players possibly starting with a 20 in any individual stat). The scores would range from 7-18 and they would have to drop them into place in order. They could choose any horizontal or vertical line.
If the player didn't want this they could still use our PB of 25 -1 per player. In the end I would need to add all the bonus totals together to find an average, note whose above and below, and base the CRs on that. I'm personally a point buy guy, but I think this makes for a fun option for a non-adventure path game.
funny how all of the discussion has been around increments of 5. I did 17 points as I wanted to go halfway in-between standard and high fantasy. Worked well, but I see the point on character design, some of the players did have a tough time allocating and I can easy adjust encounters either way
|
|
funny how all of the discussion has been around increments of 5. I did 17 points as I wanted to go halfway in-between standard and high fantasy. Worked well, but I see the point on character design, some of the players did have a tough time allocating and I can easy adjust encounters either way
That is because that is the increments that the core book uses...although you as a GM may use whatever number you wish. You can even do 0 point buy if you...in fact I have. Now THAT one caused quite a bit of moaning...despite the fact that I said well in advance this was gonna happen. It actually worked out pretty well...but it was a short mystery adventure that started at level 2 and ended at level 4.
|
|
I find it funny that people think dice rolling discourages min/maxing.As a dice roller, I agree with you.
I'm curious for those of us who roll stats, how close do you watch your players? What rules do you put in place?
I ask because, I admit, I have cheated at rolling before. Not so drastic as writing down a higher number or anything. Just rolling each die one at a time, and when one comes up as 1 or 2, trying to hit that die with the next to turn it over into a better number. Doesn't always work, but it skews the rolls higher.
Has anyone had a problem with this, and made rules like 'all dice have to roll together' and the like?
Basically put unless a 13~14 INT is full on genius in your games then an INT of 7 is not full on retardation.No, it's not, 7 is a bit dim but not overly so. Now combine that with 7 wisdom, which makes a character somewhat unobservant, foolish and easily led. Now combine that with a charisma of 7, which makes a character unappealing and has difficulty communicating anything complex. When you put them all together, you have someone slow, foolish and who talks in monosyllables that no-one really likes. Not much fun to RP IMHO.
In other words, someone qualified for upper management in a large corporation?
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I'm curious for those of us who roll stats, how close do you watch your players? What rules do you put in place?
Has anyone had a problem with cheating, and made rules like 'all dice have to roll together' and the like?
We roll all the dice together, with everyone watching. (Or else we use a computer dice roller.) We've been around the block a few times and are alert for hooliganism.
Higher point buys allow more flexibility in concept. they don't stop minmaxing, they just reduce the desire. and encourage pcs to do bolder and bolder things. some of you think of 20 as your middleground, but 25 is my preference. the player characters are the protagonists of the story. something better make them special. nobody i know wants to be just plain old mook #24. higher point buys allow for builds that are less cookie cuttery. and they increase player morale too. but like a cleric, a higher point buy can become a crutch as well.
some groups just won't adapt to not having a cleric, mine is one of them. and half of my group members don't know much in the way of optimization, even though they were the half that played since first edition. they are also more of a hack and slash group who fights in featureless 20 by 20 rooms.
sometimes numbers CAN lie. or at least decieve you.
People Argue that fighters have no options besides "i full attack", i argue that there are many, you just have to think outside the box, and improvise with the available terrain features. turning tables over can provide cover, grappling can stop a spellcaster, readied actions have many uses, a well thrown pouch filled with dust can inflict blindness for a limited time, creating a temporary opening. false retreat can be used to set up advantageous points. moving to higher ground provides bonuses to hit. as does setting up flanks. focused fire takes out the big guy faster. barricading that door to maintain safety can give you a moments respite, spring attacking allows you to inflict damage as you run away. a lot of these options anyone can do, but prove that fighters have many more options than just "i full attack" you have to see more than just what is written on your character sheet. but most gamers don't apply the effort to see all that. i know my group really doesn't so i have to lower myself to thier level. and that takes effort too.
I haven't read the entire thread, so forgive me if I repeat something. That said, there are 2 ways of generating stats that I like best: #1, every player rolls a set of 4d6 drop lowest, rerolling 1's, and the entire group gets to pick which set they each want (generally everyone will take the highest set, but sometimes not), and #2, straight point buy, somewhere between 15 and 20 points.
What I mean by "straight point buy" is that it isn't weighted by stat - each point of stat costs 1 point, whether it's going from 10 to 11 or 17 to 18. I hate the weighted thing, because it means making someone who's really good at one stat is likely going to cause them to suck at everything else, and the characters are heroes, they're supposed to be really good at what they do.
Basically put unless a 13~14 INT is full on genius in your games then an INT of 7 is not full on retardation.No, it's not, 7 is a bit dim but not overly so. Now combine that with 7 wisdom, which makes a character somewhat unobservant, foolish and easily led. Now combine that with a charisma of 7, which makes a character unappealing and has difficulty communicating anything complex. When you put them all together, you have someone slow, foolish and who talks in monosyllables that no-one really likes. Not much fun to RP IMHO.
You must have missed where we were talking about a cleric with a high wisdom and decent charisma. We were specifically not talking about someone who dumped all their mental stats.
You must have missed where we were talking about a cleric with a high wisdom and decent charisma. We were specifically not talking about someone who dumped all their mental stats.
Sorry, I thought we were still on the three 7's mental stat fighter!
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
You must have missed where we were talking about a cleric with a high wisdom and decent charisma. We were specifically not talking about someone who dumped all their mental stats.
Which goes back to my earlier post. What is 'high'? A 15 wisdom/13 charisma cleric has 'higher' stats than the 11 wisdom/10 charisma commoner. So to me, he seems 'heroic' already. Heck, he has much better saves (except for reflex) at first level. (+2 +0 +2, not counting stat adjustments)
Even the much maligned monk, with his 'meager' strength of 13, has a better than average chance of 'one shotting' the commoner with a successful punch. (1d6+1 vs 1d6)
|
The issue isn't fighting commoners though. Yes, you are a but better built than random Joe on the street. Turn that commoner into a fast zombie, a tough low cr creature, but on his own something most 1st level pcs can take. Or even the average Orc grunt, not even CR 1. Your monk is at bad odds to beat this guy; hardly heroic to lose to the lowest common denomination of enemies, and unlike many characters you can't justify it with his usefulness in a party environment / outside of combat.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I'm specifically comparing him to 'random joe on the street' since the complaint I'm addressing is that the 15 point array is 'gimped' 'sucks at most things' and other comments mentioned.
Plus, this is first level My Bestiary puts 3 orcs as a CR 1 encounter. Vs 4 PCs. Assuming the monk is replacing the rogue his AC of 14-16 gives the orc a 40-50 chance of hitting him, and he has a 45% chance of hitting normally. Assuming the tactics allow a flank (quite possible with his speed) that goes up to a 55% chance Yeah, that falchion has a good chance of putting him down (figure our monk has 9-10 HP) if it hits, but the monk is also providing a flanking bonus for the fighter (+2 from 15 strength, +1 BAB, +1 weapon focus) giving him a chance to hit 70% of the time (as opposed to 60%) and even risk power attack. Are they going to get hurt? Likely. Killed? maybe. one might even guess they're going to burn 20% of their resources in healing and supplies. Heck, our monk, if being clever, can solo an orc by standing back and using a sling or crossbow. Orc can't catch him and he can bat the javalin out of the way, if it hits.
Heracles may have strangled serpents in his crib, but Jason, Perseus, and even the Batman, didn't. If someone wants to play a 20, 40, heck 100 point build, more power to them, but to say that a character who is average to better in every stat (or every stat except one, if you want that 15) is 'gimped' is a bit much.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Adding, because the post was long,
"...unlike many characters you can't justify it with his usefulness in a party environment / outside of combat."
My combat ready monk might be able to scare the orc into not fighting (intimidate as a class skill, even with an 8 cha it's still a +3 bonus vs the -1 for the orc's sense motive), sneak up on the orc (stealth as a class skill) hear the orcs coming (perception as a class skill) or even climb a tree to throw shiriken down on the orc's head (again, climb is a class skill). Outside combat, he might even be able to make money during the down time (perform, craft, profession).
And this is the 'weak sister' class...
|
|
Not one part of which the more optimized monk can't do. Or random Joe can't almost do (or do better if you say Random Joe picked up that intimidate). In short, the character feels slightly better than Joe Commoner, not heroic.
The lower-int wizard is smarter than Joe and can cast spells; but is forced to rely on DCless spells (buffs for the most part). So he's reduced to a sidekick.
I'm not saying your way of less powerful characters is wrong, and if you are in a group of non-optimizers it's probably better to not overshadow them. But from my perspective the 15-point arrayed character lacks as much "heroic" feel; I extensively prefer high-point, no dump stat or die-rolled guys personally.
Problem is, MM, that we are not just talking about combat. We've already established that if you min-max like crazy you can get effective combat characters out of 15 point buy, the problem is that this is all you get; if your monk has dumped Int to 7, for example, he's lost out on half of being a monk - the skills. If he's had to dump charisma, some of those skills are still useless, like Diplomacy.
I agree, 15 point buy is not 'gimped' because everybody has the same base, but it does allow some classes to be way more effective than others.
I find it funny that people think dice rolling discourages min/maxing.As a dice roller, I agree with you.I'm curious for those of us who roll stats, how close do you watch your players? What rules do you put in place?
I ask because, I admit, I have cheated at rolling before. Not so drastic as writing down a higher number or anything. Just rolling each die one at a time, and when one comes up as 1 or 2, trying to hit that die with the next to turn it over into a better number. Doesn't always work, but it skews the rolls higher.
Has anyone had a problem with this, and made rules like 'all dice have to roll together' and the like?
Yes, our house rule is that all dice must be rolled together and must be witnessed by other players or the DM. Only exception is the DM himself, who generally rolls behind the DM screen. Everyone knows this house rule and has no problem with it. I have an honest group of players, but the rule avoids tempting anyone to cheat.