There is a way to get a fair spread and random at the same time.
Here is how you do it.
Take a pack of playing cards. Fetch cards 4 to 8 of spades and 4 to 8 of hearts.
Method 1: Totally random.
Shuffle the spades then lay them out face down in a row. Then shuffle the hearts and place them face down on the cards you just laid out.
Flip the pairs over and assign them to your ability scores in order.
Method 2: Random array, chosen assignment.
As method 1, but you may assign the pairs to your ability scores as you please.
Method 3: Half random.
Shuffle the spades then lay them out face down in a row. Then take the hearts and lay them face up in the order you wish, corresponding to the ability scores.
Flip the spades over and total each of the pairs for the ability scores in order.
---
All of the above grant possibilities from 8 to 18 and varying degrees of randomness. In all possible arrays produced by this method, the totals of all your ability scores will be 78.
Without a solid proof, I don't believe for a second that a 4d6, drop lowest equates to a 20pt buy in Pathfinder. I've certainly played in games where this method created players (in the same party/campaign) that had the equivalent of 15 point buy and 32 point buy.
The problem with the 4d6 method is that while there is generally a provision for re-rolling a suboptimal stat set (total modifiers less than +3), there is rarely a rule for re-rolling a set of stats that breaks the curve (say, total modifiers more than +8 or +9).
There is a way to get a fair spread and random at the same time.
Here is how you do it.
Take a pack of playing cards. Fetch cards 4 to 8 of spades and 4 to 8 of hearts.
I think you mean 4 to 9.
Very interesting, though. Tried it a few times and I like that system.
Oops. My bad. Yes, 4 to 9. Could a mod edit my post above, please, for others interested in the method?
As a player? 4d6 drop the lowest.
As a GM? Point buy.
4d6 drop the lowest is great. I've seen characters with 18 18 18 16 12 14 in games. I've seen characters with 10 12 14 10 10 16 in games. If the game isn't going to be a 15-20 session affair, I love rolling.
If the game is a long game, like an AP? I like point-buy. Keeps it all even for everyone, gives the GM a good way to scale monsters up or down.
I give my players the choice of either 20 point buy or 4d6 drop the lowest. It allows the few players I have that roll crappy normally a way to build something that did not feel gimped. It works out for me as a GM either way.
As both a player and GM I don't mind diversity in player stats. Sure, one guy may have a 35 point buy character and annother has an 18, but usually players are all within the same ballpark and you wont notice the difference. I have never really noticed a +1 or +2 affect the game that much, but going from a 14 to a 16 is 5 points, a significant allocation of your resources. I find point buy leads to more disjointed characters, with massive dump stats, maxed primary stats, and nothing in the average range. My players have shown me this to be true. If I force them to roll, they may have significantly higher points, but their characters are more well rounded and have lower peaks and higher valleys. I would rather have characters with 6 14s before race, a 30 point character, than someone with 18,7,7,7,16,14 for 20 ponts, which I have seen players try to do.
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
As a grognard who has been playing for 30+ years, I much prefer rolling stats to point buy. Heck, when I'm bored I break out the dice and roll up characters just to see what I get.
When I DM, my players prefer high powered, heroic characters, so we roll 5d6 and drop the 2 lowest. In addition, if the player doesn't roll an 18, he converts his lowest result to an 18. Yes, we have high powered PCs, but it makes my players happy and challenges me to be more creative in my encounter building to compensate for these scores - especially at lower levels (and I like the challenge).
I've tried point buy as a player, and don't care for it much. I refuse to dump stats, as it seems a bit like cheating to me, so I typically end up with a pretty average PC compared to others at the table who used dump stats. It's really no big deal, as it really doesn't make the game any more or less fun for me, but it's not my preferred way of character creation.
I've tried point buy as a player, and don't care for it much. I refuse to dump stats, as it seems a bit like cheating to me[..]
So when you're rolling up a wizard (say) and you roll an 8, you put it in Intelligence and not Strength or Charisma?
("Dump stats" have nothing to do with using a point buy system.)
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
I've tried point buy as a player, and don't care for it much. I refuse to dump stats, as it seems a bit like cheating to me[..]So when you're rolling up a wizard (say) and you roll an 8, you put it in Intelligence and not Strength or Charisma?
("Dump stats" have nothing to do with using a point buy system.)
Whoops! My statement was misinterpreted. My bad.
Maybe I should have phrased that differently: I refuse to lower a stat below 10 in order to gain more points to apply to another stat.
I hope that makes more sense...
I've tried point buy as a player, and don't care for it much. I refuse to dump stats, as it seems a bit like cheating to me[..]So when you're rolling up a wizard (say) and you roll an 8, you put it in Intelligence and not Strength or Charisma?
("Dump stats" have nothing to do with using a point buy system.)
Whoops! My statement was misinterpreted. My bad.
Maybe I should have phrased that differently: I refuse to lower a stat below 10 in order to gain more points to apply to another stat.
I hope that makes more sense...
I think my point still stands -- if you legitimately roll a stat that's less than 10, do you have any qualms putting it in the "dump stat" slot?
In these discussions, "I like rolling stats" sometimes seems synonymous with "I don't like low stats". If you don't want PCs with stats below 10, it's trivial to create a point buy where 10 is the minimum for all stats, of course.
Since all people are not creattd equally I assume the same for PC's WE never use point buy it is far more unrealistic (lol) than the reality of life, some people ARE stronger, faster and smarter than others.
True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
I've tried point buy as a player, and don't care for it much. I refuse to dump stats, as it seems a bit like cheating to me[..]So when you're rolling up a wizard (say) and you roll an 8, you put it in Intelligence and not Strength or Charisma?
("Dump stats" have nothing to do with using a point buy system.)
Whoops! My statement was misinterpreted. My bad.
Maybe I should have phrased that differently: I refuse to lower a stat below 10 in order to gain more points to apply to another stat.
I hope that makes more sense...
I think my point still stands -- if you legitimately roll a stat that's less than 10, do you have any qualms putting it in the "dump stat" slot?
In these discussions, "I like rolling stats" sometimes seems synonymous with "I don't like low stats". If you don't want PCs with stats below 10, it's trivial to create a point buy where 10 is the minimum for all stats, of course.
No qualms at all. I rolled it, I play it. But I'm going to do my best to put it in a slot that has the least impact on my character (i.e., if I'm playing a Wizard, it's not going into INT. More than likely, it'll end up in STR).
To me, rolling a low stat is much different than assigning a lower stat just so I can boost something else.
Since all people are not creattd equally I assume the same for PC's WE never use point buy it is far more unrealistic (lol) than the reality of life, some people ARE stronger, faster and smarter than others.True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
This doesn't really work to me. Pretty much every game I have ever run or played in, the players do not get to pick their companions. Sure, you can up and leave, but you can't really replace person A with person B just because person B is better at Y. There is a reason person A is there, and his companions can't just up and leave him.
|
True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
That's what I like to call "natural selection" when someone can't compete they tend to die off. Usually it's because the player isn't happy with their character. I've also seen perfectly acceptable characters die because their player suddenly went off the deep end momentarily.
I prefer the point buy system, but I also use my players "Origin Run" as an opportunity to add an additional point or two to their stats. It helps to creat "buy in" for low level PCs, and creats some investment in their new characters.
Well, let's face it- the world is neither a fair nor equitable place, and forcing a concept of equality upon it results in something that really doesn't fit in to the world around it. It's why in my experience point buy characters either dominate or are horribly torn asunder en masse unless all the other characters in that world(NPCs) are point buy as well with similar totals. Even then, fights/skill based competition turn into roll offs because everyone has more or less the same stats. To some people, that's fairness. To me, it's a flatline.Please take no offense at this, but you are kidding, right? I mean really, who cares how unfair the world is? We are talking about playing a game here. I play this game to get away from the realities of life. Most people do not like that the world is unfair, but the clichéd statement of ‘that is life’ rears its ugly head. Basically, you can’t do anything about it.
But with this, you can be on even footing when starting out. Are you saying the classes should not balanced or the DM should play favorites towards someone because that is ‘how life is?’
Although, I can see your argument on everyone (or at least the same starting classes) might have the same stats. My answer on that is sometimes people will have a character concept where they might have a Sorceror with a high Constitution, or a Fighter with a good Intelligence. Sure, if everyone builds their characters for optimization, a lot of times you will find stats in the same areas for the same classes.
But even then, sometimes players will decide to take their character in a different direction than the other Wizard in the group, or they might be decide to purchase an extra book of learning, or they could permanently lose a stat during the campaign. That’s what’s fun about the whole thing, just because two classes “might” start out the same at 1st level with point buy, doesn’t mean at all they will follow the exact same path.
Actually, with point buy, I can almost guarantee you they will. Point buy encourages forethought on a massive scale; most people already know what they want their character to look like at level 20, should they survive to it. The only thing that keeps two characters from being truly identical is if their players decide they want to multi-class- without that option, a pair of level 1 melee-based single-weapon fighters(for example) will look almost exactly the same at level 20.
On fairness, no, I wasn't trying to point out how terrible a place the world was. Just that it's NOT a fair place, and should you try to shoehorn that concept in somewhere, things will seem off after a while. I can't think of any better concept for this idea than in poker- eventually the house will make their money back. This isn't to say that you shouldn't play, just that you should be prepared for the inevitability of the house's victory and plan accordingly. Like I said, point buy characters in a world where noone else is will reign supreme- until they run into someone whose chance-based stats they mathematically can't match.
|
@Freehold DM
Poker is not the right analogy. Casinos that offer poker games take a "rake" out of every pot. They essentially win every hand they deal. Players compete against one another and accept the rake as the price of a safe environment and a professional dealer. To win long term at poker you have to play better than the other players to the extent that you beat them for enough to beat the rake as well, which is possible.
Now, every other game in the casino will grind you down mathematically in the long run no matter how well you play. The exception possibly being Blackjack, where if you can count a one or two-deck game and get away with it, you might give yourself a slight edge.
Actually, with point buy, I can almost guarantee you they will. Point buy encourages forethought on a massive scale; most people already know what they want their character to look like at level 20, should they survive to it. The only thing that keeps two characters from being truly identical is if their players decide they want to multi-class- without that option, a pair of level 1 melee-based single-weapon fighters(for example) will look almost exactly the same at level 20.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree, then. We have played point buy for awhile now (with 3.0/3.5) and just because someone may start out with the same stats at first level for the same class (and this isn’t even always the case), they have had radically different characters at later levels. Which as you said, usually with different choices in PRc or multi-classing. Nevermind different choices in stat allocation every four levels.
On fairness, no, I wasn't trying to point out how terrible a place the world was. Just that it's NOT a fair place, and should you try to shoehorn that concept in somewhere, things will seem off after a while. I can't think of any better concept for this idea than in poker- eventually the house will make their money back. This isn't to say that you shouldn't play, just that you should be prepared for the inevitability of the house's victory and plan accordingly.
Like I said, point buy characters in a world where noone else is will reign supreme- until they run into someone whose chance-based stats they mathematically can't match.
I see what you are saying, because real life isn’t fair, you shouldn’t try to make the game fair because you feel it will ‘feel off’ and is going to balance itself out eventually. I really can’t see any tangible evidence that is going to happen in game. The game will become what everyone puts into it, not some unknown force of reality that is going to balance things out in the long run.
What I am getting at is since you do have the option to start things fairly in the game, I feel you should. Pretty much every game is that way. In Magic, both players start with 7 cards. In Monopoly, everyone starts with the same amount of money. With Settlers of Cataan (if you have played it) everyone lays down two houses and two roads.
Just about every game I have played, you start out evenly. Why? Because if you don’t, it gives an unfair advantage to others. I don’t see why this should be any different.
Edit: I do want to add point buy isn't always fair for everyone, as someone had said earlier, some classes are just a lot more demanding in regards to their starting stats. Where others may only need 1, maybe 2, strong stats and they are fine.
However, rolling does not make that any easier, either. You could only roll one good stat and be worse off than if you actually adjusted your stats.
What I am getting at is since you do have the option to start things fairly in the game, I feel you should. Pretty much every game is that way. In Magic, both players start with 7 cards. In Monopoly, everyone starts with the same amount of money. With Settlers of Cataan (if you have played it) everyone lays down two houses and two roads.
Just about every game I have played, you start out evenly. Why? Because if you don’t, it gives an unfair advantage to others. I don’t see why this should be any different.
I would say the main difference, that has been pointed out several times, is that all the games you mention are competitive while, presumably, Pathfinder games are cooperative. There is no score. There is no win or lose. There is no one player "beating" the other. One character being better statistically than the other takes nothing away from either in terms of the goal of the game.
I like to think of a game as a story, not a game. The mechanics are nothing more than a way to further that story. Just how a character in that story contributes to it is not necessarily a function of its stats. Play the story as it is given and what resources you have and see how the story plays out. Your fighter may not be the epic, greataxe swinging monster that cuts through a dozen orcs in one swipe but rather his friend that covers his back and makes the witty comments. Both contribute to the story. A good dm will put situations where all players can contribute to the story in a signigicant way. Nothing about a story has to be "fair" or "balanced" between the players. It just has to be fun.
Point buy makes for generic heroes that are all the same. Two fighters, same strength, same constitution, same charisma makes for a boring story for me.
Yes, that is a good point in they are competitive, where getting a party together is cooperative. But I still do disagree just because you use point buy, ‘everyone’ who has the same class, will automatically have the same stats. Just hasn’t worked out that way in the campaigns I have played.
Besides even the aspect of fairness, I just prefer point buy more because as I said earlier, I have much more control over my character. I hate having my stats determined on the whim of a roll.
No offense, but I absolutely loathe the "you want realism? Ok, so throw out magic and monsters" argument. I see it way too often on these boards, especially when Huge Sized-Greatsword wielding Barbarians swinging their 15 foot long weapons in a 10 foot corridor with no penalties (or similar) discussions come up. Someone will invariably chime in with "just let it go. Pathfinder has dragons and Wizards, so realism has nothing to do with it". That argument makes me want to pull my hair out. Just because magic exists doesn't mean other -basic- facts such as physics should be thrown out the window. A DM should use common sense... I've said it before and I'll say it again. Just because the rules don't say you can't do something doesn't mean it should be possible.
That said, my beef isn't really with the argument at hand, just that particular aspect of the argument that was used.
None taken, and fair enough. I should have been (way) more clear. People use the word realism when they should use the term "internal consistency". We know that there are wizards and demons in D&D, but we still want a sword to behave like a sword. Fair enough. That being said...
The specific argument I was making is this: even though life (and the real word) aren't fair, and some people may be slower or less intelligent than others, this isn't required for the game to be internally consistent. It already is, in that the PCs are the heroes, and are already assumed to be the smarter/faster/stronger/better looking/wealthier people in the game world. This is easily modelled with a 15 point buy, or any higher point buy, obviously. Railing against point buy because of some perceived lack of basis in reality is not a valid argument. At all. A character created with a 15-point point buy is, in fact, better than the average by far. In a point buy system, you start with all 10s, as in, you begin at average and are not forced to go down from there. If you want, you can only go up. The standard PC array given, which is 15,14,13,12,10,8, is a 15 point buy, and assumes that you are slightly deficient in one area so that you can be one of the best in the world in another area (as you will presumably end up with a 17 in a stat if you so desire, and the most populous race is human with a +2 to any one stat, no penalties).You could just as easily go with 14,14,13,12,10,10, for the same bonuses with no penalty. Therefore, I find the argument that 4d6 is better because it is somehow more realistic that the statistically equal 15 point buy to be hokum.
The only thing that makes one better than the other is personal preference. Whichever you like, go for it. A 50 point buy is better that 4d6, in terms of sheer likelihood of higher scores, but again, this is only better if such things appeal to you. A 50 point buy does not appeal to me, so even though I prefer point buy as both player and DM, I would choose 4d6 over a 50 point buy because I have no interest in playing a character with 50 point buy at 1st level (at higher levels, a character should have more points, but 50? yeesh...). I do not argue that point buy is objectively better, because I do not see how it can be. I do argue that point buy is objectively more balanced, for obvious reasons not limited to PCs in the same campaign. I argue that is it more balanced for game design reasons, in that a character is portable from one game to another if the game design includes objectively comparable values to examine. This is why there are character wealth by level tables and similar such things, to set a benchmark. Design requires benchmarks. 4d6 drop the lowest is more variable than point buy, but statistically speaking it meets the benchmark while granting the possibility of exceeding (or coming in under) the benchmark. So while I prefer the point but, I can see the appeal of 4d6.
Arguments from tradition similarly hold no water. Is not 3d6 in order also traditional? Why not that? If you're a grognard be a grognard. Enjoy it. No harm, no foul. It is not, however, an argument in favor of or against a generation method, it is, as it should be a personal preference, which all are free to enjoy.
Actually, with point buy, I can almost guarantee you they will. Point buy encourages forethought on a massive scale; most people already know what they want their character to look like at level 20, should they survive to it. The only thing that keeps two characters from being truly identical is if their players decide they want to multi-class- without that option, a pair of level 1 melee-based single-weapon fighters(for example) will look almost exactly the same at level 20.I guess we will have to agree to disagree, then. We have played point buy for awhile now (with 3.0/3.5) and just because someone may start out with the same stats at first level for the same class (and this isn’t even always the case), they have had radically different characters at later levels. Which as you said, usually with different choices in PRc or multi-classing. Nevermind different choices in stat allocation every four levels.
On fairness, no, I wasn't trying to point out how terrible a place the world was. Just that it's NOT a fair place, and should you try to shoehorn that concept in somewhere, things will seem off after a while. I can't think of any better concept for this idea than in poker- eventually the house will make their money back. This isn't to say that you shouldn't play, just that you should be prepared for the inevitability of the house's victory and plan accordingly.
Like I said, point buy characters in a world where noone else is will reign supreme- until they run into someone whose chance-based stats they mathematically can't match.
I see what you are saying, because real life isn’t fair, you shouldn’t try to make the game fair because you feel it will ‘feel off’ and is going to balance itself out eventually. I really can’t see any tangible evidence that is going to happen in game. The game will become what everyone puts into it, not some unknown force of reality that is going to balance things out in the long run.
What I am getting at is...
Oh hells yeah, I am a Catan man. We actually had to stop playing with my original gaming group twice because tempers were getting too heated(although there was evidence to support that alliances were being made before the game) and we actually had brought the monthly D&D game to a grinding halt because everyone and our girlfriends(!) wanted to play Catan instead.
|
|
Either and all. This is completely DM dependent and really nothing to do with some sort of "written in stone" requirement of PC's. Let's say the DM makes a game that has little to no combat or "skill" rolls and is almost entirely PC-NPC interactions. A PC with 6 18's or 6 low-average scores will fair just as well. It comes down to roleplaying the character based on what the stats mean in the "real" world rather than falling back on rollplaying the character based on bonuses. Conversely, and I hate this type game, the DM may have fight-fight-fight-fight game, in which case the stats become all important. So for me as a DM the method I allow for stat generation depends on the game I want to run.
S.
I had a dwarf with a 15 foot adamantite greatsword. Only got one attack in the 10 foot corridor. But it made the walls look not so nice after each attack. Due to the cleaving.. XD
We use point buy in our games.
After all we like it REALISTIC. Characters are going to ally themselves with colleagues of comparable power.
OK - that was a bit tongue in cheek.
I like point buy because I like to be able to make the character I would enjoy playing rather than keeping it to luck.
If I'm looking to avoid stat-dumping - elite array works OK too.
I had a dwarf with a 15 foot adamantite greatsword. Only got one attack in the 10 foot corridor. But it made the walls look not so nice after each attack. Due to the cleaving.. XD
Provided the character has a high enough Strength and takes a penalty to hit, I'd be all for that ruling myself. Then again I think there should be a Strength minimum to wield an oversized weapon to begin with. It just makes sense.
We use point buy in our games.
After all we like it REALISTIC. Characters are going to ally themselves with colleagues of comparable power.
Yet even with point buy you can have people of vastly different power depending on whether they've taken one or two "Dump Stats" (which I loathe, btw). As I said before, I'd be fine with point buy if it were one for one instead of punishing those who would like to have an 18 without a dump stat.
I had a dwarf with a 15 foot adamantite greatsword. Only got one attack in the 10 foot corridor. But it made the walls look not so nice after each attack. Due to the cleaving.. XDProvided the character has a high enough Strength and takes a penalty to hit, I'd be all for that ruling myself. Then again I think there should be a Strength minimum to wield an oversized weapon to begin with. It just makes sense.
Yet even with point buy you can have people of vastly different power depending on whether they've taken one or two "Dump Stats" (which I loathe, btw). As I said before, I'd be fine with point buy if it were one for one instead of punishing those who would like to have an 18 without a dump stat.We use point buy in our games.
After all we like it REALISTIC. Characters are going to ally themselves with colleagues of comparable power.
That game. Was over the top anyhow.. Old.. Old DM. Had been doing it for decades. He ran a Paragon game... So yeah. My dwarf was strong enough. That game didn't last long. It got so over the top. And the DM didn't understand how Tome of battle and paragons interacted. We were paragons. With two levels.
For my table, I much prefer point buy.
This allows the characters to be made ahead of time (via E-mail or online chat) without the need to supervise rolls.
Yet even with point buy you can have people of vastly different power depending on whether they've taken one or two "Dump Stats" (which I loathe, btw). As I said before, I'd be fine with point buy if it were one for one instead of punishing those who would like to have an 18 without a dump stat.
As I pointed out before, `dump stats` have nothing to do with point buy vs. rolling ability scores.
|
Actually they kind of do. With Point Buy you can opt to make a dump stat in order to get a higher other stat. You can still have a dump stat or 3 while rolling, but you really don't have any power or choice in the matter. You roll a low score, and it must go somewhere.
All point buy really does is favor classes that need fewer high abilities, (like Wizards and Sorcerers) and encourage a level of min/maxing (good or bad). It is all about preference, but it is not by any means fairer than rolling.
In our group we use 4d6 drop the lowest, but we reroll 1's (so our lowest is 6 not 3). If the highest stat is lower than 14 the entire array is rerolled (we take care of natural selection ahead of time). I enjoy the randomness.
Then again the power disparity is easily handled by the group when magical items are obtained. We give the items to those who would need it most. We pretty much look out for each other.
Actually they kind of do. With Point Buy you can opt to make a dump stat in order to get a higher other stat. You can still have a dump stat or 3 while rolling, but you really don't have any power or choice in the matter. You roll a low score, and it must go somewhere.
So in both methods, if you have a low score, it must go somewhere? Fascinating.
I personally like point buy best because it puts the players on an equal footing. Although if the players asked for it I would have no problems rolling, nor have I ever complained to a GM when he had us roll stats (unless the dice gave me a big "F YOU").
As for the 50 point buy versus 25 or 20...50 point buy characters are not remotely godly. Yes they do have a very nice edge over characters with lower points but it's not a huge one.
The starting stats of a character are not even close to the most important factors when determining power/survivability. The three most important things are Tactics, Teamwork and Roleplaying.
I could give the players 20s for all their stats and if they don't work together and play smart I'm still going to wipe the floor with them no problem.
If I gave then all 8s and they play smart and work together then they are going to probably wipe the floor with whatever I throw their way.
I've been running 50 point characters for a while and I have never had trouble challenging them. They certainly don't feel like their stats make the godly or unstoppable. They do however feel capable and bad@ss when they come through a hard fight and are the ones still standing at the end.
Actually they kind of do. With Point Buy you can opt to make a dump stat in order to get a higher other stat. You can still have a dump stat or 3 while rolling, but you really don't have any power or choice in the matter. You roll a low score, and it must go somewhere.So in both methods, if you have a low score, it must go somewhere? Fascinating.
A 10 or an 11 is not really a "dump stat" imo. A 7 is. Odds are while rolling 4d6 drop the lowest reroll ones roll three columns I'm not going to get below 10 in the column I end up taking and I just might roll a 17 or an 18 along with some other 14+ stats. That 10 or 12 I rolled may not give a bonus and sure, I'll put it somewhere that doesn't have to be high for my concept but it's not a true dump stat in my opinion. With point buy, if you want stats that include an 18 with anything else even remotely decent you -have- to take one or two really low dump stats. I had to make a character like that last night and to get my 18 and two 14s I had to have two 7s.
That's the point.
A 10 or an 11 is not really a "dump stat" imo. A 7 is. Odds are while rolling 4d6 drop the lowest reroll ones roll three columns I'm not going to get below 10 in the column I end up taking and I just might roll a 17 or an 18 along with some other 14+ stats. That 10 or 12 I rolled may not give a bonus and sure, I'll put it somewhere that doesn't have to be high for my concept but it's not a true dump stat in my opinion. With point buy, if you want stats that include an 18 with anything else even remotely decent you -have- to take one or two really low dump stats.Actually they kind of do. With Point Buy you can opt to make a dump stat in order to get a higher other stat. You can still have a dump stat or 3 while rolling, but you really don't have any power or choice in the matter. You roll a low score, and it must go somewhere.So in both methods, if you have a low score, it must go somewhere? Fascinating.
Except that although chances are you won't roll poor stats, in a table full of players, chances are that someone is going to roll crappy.
This is what the problem with random stats is.
I had to make a character like that last night and to get my 18 and two 14s I had to have two 7s.
That's the point.
That's your point?
I almost never get 18's when I roll - but someone else at the table will likely get 2, when my highest stat is a 14. Maybe it's the reverse, and then I just end up feeling guilty for rolling well.
If you don't like 7's - don't take them. My last character was a Bard who didn't have a stat below 10. His highest stat was a 16 (after racial modifications) and he was a pretty tough character.
If you don't want to dump stats don't. At least with point buy you have that option. A wizard with a 16 Int is hardly weaksauce.
The starting stats of a character are not even close to the most important factors when determining power/survivability. The three most important things are Tactics, Teamwork and Roleplaying.
I could give the players 20s for all their stats and if they don't work together and play smart I'm still going to wipe the floor with them no problem.
If I gave then all 8s and they play smart and work together then they are going to probably wipe the floor with whatever I throw their way.
Aye-Aye, Admiral. Agree 100% with this part of your post. Now that whole 50 point buy thing? That's just nuts! :)
Actually they kind of do. With Point Buy you can opt to make a dump stat in order to get a higher other stat. You can still have a dump stat or 3 while rolling, but you really don't have any power or choice in the matter. You roll a low score, and it must go somewhere.So in both methods, if you have a low score, it must go somewhere? Fascinating.A 10 or an 11 is not really a "dump stat" imo. A 7 is. Odds are while rolling 4d6 drop the lowest reroll ones roll three columns I'm not going to get below 10 in the column I end up taking and I just might roll a 17 or an 18 along with some other 14+ stats. That 10 or 12 I rolled may not give a bonus and sure, I'll put it somewhere that doesn't have to be high for my concept but it's not a true dump stat in my opinion. With point buy, if you want stats that include an 18 with anything else even remotely decent you -have- to take one or two really low dump stats. I had to make a character like that last night and to get my 18 and two 14s I had to have two 7s.
That's the point.
... Not really. I've built characters with point buy. I think I ended up with... 14 12 14 10 8 18? 20 point buy. I chose to buy a dump stat to bump my Dex up to 12-- could've easily been 14 12 14 10 11 17. Or my most recent rogue, which is 14 17 14 13 10 10. No dump stat, and at level 8 I'll probably be rocking 14 20 14 16 10 10. Not bad. An 18 and two 14s is easy enough to get with 20 point buy that maybe you should be complaining about your DM giving you too low of a point buy instead.
Of course, for most of the people who are anti-point-buy, they see characters made with pointbuy as being like... 7 7 7 7 18 7.
Either way, I don't see why people see "18 in my main stat" as so mandatory. It's a +1 bonus. No feats gained at 1st level require an 18-- I can see the sense in making sure you qualify for Power Attack's Str 13 req, or Two-Weapon Fighting's Dex 15 req, but really, an 18 is just gratuitous at level 1. On top of that, because of advancement bonuses, a 17 is an 18 at level 4. And unless you're playing to level 20, it's not even like you're going to get enough advancement bonuses to even matter. And if you start with all even stats, you might end with an odd stat. :P
I'd personally rather have two odd stats that go up at 4 and 8 than an even stat that gets bumped to odd at 4 and even at 8. A natural +5 mod at level 8 is just gratuitous and doesn't really even matter as much, especially when you could have a natural +4 mod and have another stat at a 15 or 16 with the drop off from the 18.
I guess a lot of the people complaining about the ridiculous point-buy characters also don't take into account racial stat mods. That 18 14 14 7 7 7 character could easily be 18 14 14 10 10 10 on 20 point buy as a human. It's just basic number juggling.
This doesn't really work to me. Pretty much every game I have ever run or played in, the players do not get to pick their companions. Sure, you can up and leave, but you can't really replace person A with person B just because person B is better at Y. There is a reason person A is there, and his companions can't just up and leave him.Since all people are not creattd equally I assume the same for PC's WE never use point buy it is far more unrealistic (lol) than the reality of life, some people ARE stronger, faster and smarter than others.True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
You know in like, modern film or cinema, where the hero tells the serving girl or the princess or the comedic relief to hide when the bandits attack the inn, or whatever? If your PC sucks, I'm going to tell you to hide when the bandits attack, because I can't tell you from an NPC or a PC.
If your character can't pull his own weight, I'm going to leave you in the last town and recruit someone who can. If you're the guy with the destiny, congratulations; your new destiny is to carry our stuff.
I apologize if I'm being a bit rude, but it's my personal pet peeve when someone creates some awful character and expects the party to put up with them because they've been made by someone at the table.
This doesn't really work to me. Pretty much every game I have ever run or played in, the players do not get to pick their companions. Sure, you can up and leave, but you can't really replace person A with person B just because person B is better at Y. There is a reason person A is there, and his companions can't just up and leave him.Since all people are not creattd equally I assume the same for PC's WE never use point buy it is far more unrealistic (lol) than the reality of life, some people ARE stronger, faster and smarter than others.True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
You know in like, modern film or cinema, where the hero tells the serving girl or the princess or the comedic relief to hide when the bandits attack the inn, or whatever? If your PC sucks, I'm going to tell you to hide when the bandits attack, because I can't tell you from an NPC or a PC.
If your character can't pull his own weight, I'm going to leave you in the last town and recruit someone who can. If you're the guy with the destiny, congratulations; your new destiny is to carry our stuff.
I apologize if I'm being a bit rude, but it's my personal pet peeve when someone creates some awful character and expects the party to put up with them because they've been made by someone at the table.
This opens an ugly can of worms, however, as it implies that someone's worth of even being in your presence at the table in real life depends solely on the stats they came up with for their completely fictional character. Moreover, it opens a whole OTHER ugly can of worms because, well, where do you draw the line? Noone with a stat less than 14? 15? Are you a horrible person because you have a ten rolling around in your stats somewhere?
Not to be rude at you personally, but this entire perspective is why I hate point buy. I've had characters with pathetic stats end up saving the day and characters with awesome stats get cut down in the first round of combat.
This doesn't really work to me. Pretty much every game I have ever run or played in, the players do not get to pick their companions. Sure, you can up and leave, but you can't really replace person A with person B just because person B is better at Y. There is a reason person A is there, and his companions can't just up and leave him.Since all people are not creattd equally I assume the same for PC's WE never use point buy it is far more unrealistic (lol) than the reality of life, some people ARE stronger, faster and smarter than others.True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
You know in like, modern film or cinema, where the hero tells the serving girl or the princess or the comedic relief to hide when the bandits attack the inn, or whatever? If your PC sucks, I'm going to tell you to hide when the bandits attack, because I can't tell you from an NPC or a PC.
If your character can't pull his own weight, I'm going to leave you in the last town and recruit someone who can. If you're the guy with the destiny, congratulations; your new destiny is to carry our stuff.
I apologize if I'm being a bit rude, but it's my personal pet peeve when someone creates some awful character and expects the party to put up with them because they've been made by someone at the table.
I second that. Although without the sarcasm or pet peeve as it doesn't piss me off as much as it does you.
Just because you want to play that character it doesn't mean he fits the game. I've seen groups kick out characters or even kill them because they couldn't or wouldn't work with and be helpful to the party.
|
|
Rolling stats seems to me an affectation at this point, as if a randomly generated character is more authentic than a point-buy one.
It's a holdover from when the game was different and a spectacularly average or even gimped character might still be fun to play in an old school, DM's discretion, improvisational storytelling kind of game.
But, like it or not, Pathfinder is more mechanical than that, and what you are doing with 4d6 is ensuring that the players who got lucky at stat generation time will have a mechanical advantage throughout an entire campaign in a game system in which mechanics matter.
This said by the player who's GM (me) just had him roll 4d6 for stats ;).
This doesn't really work to me. Pretty much every game I have ever run or played in, the players do not get to pick their companions. Sure, you can up and leave, but you can't really replace person A with person B just because person B is better at Y. There is a reason person A is there, and his companions can't just up and leave him.Since all people are not creattd equally I assume the same for PC's WE never use point buy it is far more unrealistic (lol) than the reality of life, some people ARE stronger, faster and smarter than others.True but top athletes play with top athletes. Top scientists work with top scientists. You elite military team is elite. If a person lacks the ability they don't make the team.
So in game I look at the adventuring party as group of elites. They all must bring something to the group. A person with too low of stats would be ejected from the group as liability, they just aren't good enough for the team.
You know in like, modern film or cinema, where the hero tells the serving girl or the princess or the comedic relief to hide when the bandits attack the inn, or whatever? If your PC sucks, I'm going to tell you to hide when the bandits attack, because I can't tell you from an NPC or a PC.
If your character can't pull his own weight, I'm going to leave you in the last town and recruit someone who can. If you're the guy with the destiny, congratulations; your new destiny is to carry our stuff.
I apologize if I'm being a bit rude, but it's my personal pet peeve when someone creates some awful character and expects the party to put up with them because they've been made by someone at the table.
I second that. Although without the sarcasm or pet peeve as it doesn't piss me off as much as it does you.
Just because you want to play that character it doesn't mean he fits the game. I've seen groups kick out characters or even kill them because they...
Kicking out characters is one thing, and it dances on the edge of good taste at that. Killing someone's character in the name of eugenics is quite different, and a group I wouldn't want to play in.
|
|
This said by the player who's GM (me) just had him roll 4d6 for stats ;).Rolling stats seems to me an affectation at this point, as if a randomly generated character is more authentic than a point-buy one.
It's a holdover from when the game was different and a spectacularly average or even gimped character might still be fun to play in an old school, DM's discretion, improvisational storytelling kind of game.
But, like it or not, Pathfinder is more mechanical than that, and what you are doing with 4d6 is ensuring that the players who got lucky at stat generation time will have a mechanical advantage throughout an entire campaign in a game system in which mechanics matter.
Imagine if I had to play the first character I rolled. -1 point buy.
I'm happy with Mr. Above Average at Everything, though.