I see that their is a wide varity of opinions on which point buy should be used.
For those who use a high point buy, 20 or 25, do you "up" the CR of encounters to reflect the strength of the PC's? Do you "up" the requirements of feats that have attributes as prereq's... such as the two weapon fighting feat tree.
For those who use a lesser point buy, 10 or 15, do you do the opposite?
I run high point buy games. I find that it allows me to throw greater and/or more plentiful challenges at the PCs. NPCs tend to have similar point buy stats, as well.
Overall, I find that it makes the opposition feel more impressive without making it unduly hard. But it is a balancing act that necessitates paying attention lest the PCs steamroll the campaign.
|
I used to do ~20 point buy (or equivalent if using other methods) and without upping CR the game runs only slightly easy (or not at all, if people actual create concept-based characters). This is with 5 players.
Now I've decided to switch to 15 point buy, but up the stat increases to every other level (with a limit that you cannot apply it to the same stat twice in a row). I'm doing this in hopes that it generates more of a "rise to awesomeness" feel...
If I use 25 point or higher I add 1 to the APL after they reach 3rd level. That seem to work pretty good. Tried it at first and it end up being too many TPK. So I just let them breeze through first a second level with high stats then things start getting tough.
Just to note, 20 isn't high, it's the default (I know, it calls it "high fantasy", but it's what the PFS stuff runs on, and its what's used for the iconics).
Just to note, 20 isn't high, it's the default (I know, it calls it "high fantasy", but it's what the PFS stuff runs on, and its what's used for the iconics).
Actually, 15 is standard as noted in the core rule book. It has been mentioned that this is the default assumed (with 4 players) for their published adventures and adventure paths. If you do check the iconics' stats, you'll see they're based on this amount as well - all using the 15/14/13/12/10/8 array before racial modifiers.
Actually, 15 is standard as noted in the core rule book. It has been mentioned that this is the default assumed (with 4 players) for their published adventures and adventure paths. If you do check the iconics' stats, you'll see they're based on this amount as well - all using the 15/14/13/12/10/8 array before racial modifiers.
Huh...so they do. I coulda sworn they were on 20. Well, PFS is at 20, definitely, and honestly there's not a huge power jump for slightly higher stats - not enough (at least at 20) to be worrying about changing CR balance, provided you're still using a 4 character party.
God, 15 just seems so...terribly bad... *shudders at the thought of playing with only 15*
My group regularly runs 25 point buy. We don't as a rule do anything to the CR of anything. That being said, there's definitely room from time to time to amp up a bad guy here or there.
25 hasn't been a Win Button by any means but my group is pretty mature. We don't see characters with two huge scores and a bunch of dump stats. The 25 points lets us have a Fighter who still ends up with Int 14 after a great Strength, a decent Dex and a little bit of Con. Meanwhile Wis and Cha are at least 10. We basically never have sub-10 scores, which is kind of nice. We don't have true dump stats.
I run high point buy games. I find that it allows me to throw greater and/or more plentiful challenges at the PCs. NPCs tend to have similar point buy stats, as well.
Overall, I find that it makes the opposition feel more impressive without making it unduly hard. But it is a balancing act that necessitates paying attention lest the PCs steamroll the campaign.
Bouncing off this post, but it is aimed at the OP.
I do the same thing, but I think how much of a point buy you give should depend on how hard you plan to run the game, the skill of the pc's, and how hard the group wants it to be. I try to help my players out except for boss fights unless it looks like a TPK.
|
Hasn't someone run the numbers on rolling 4d6 drop the lowest and determined that it comes to at least a 25 point buy? I swear I saw that somewhere.
Right now, because we only have two PC's in our group, we're running gestalt with a 30 point buy. It's still not enough to make our encounters extremely dangerous for us. Of course, a lot of that has to do with action economy but I don't think a high point buy does too much more than allow for more well rounded PCs. The highest score you can buy is still 18. You just get to have that 18 without having to do too much in the way of dumping stats.
I run at 50 point buy and I do tend to make some adjustments on the fly, although that has more to do with the fact that there are 8 players than their stats. I haven't had any real problem challenging the players.
|
|
I run at 50 point buy and I do tend to make some adjustments on the fly, although that has more to do with the fact that there are 8 players than their stats. I haven't had any real problem challenging the players.
You are a champ. I think at this point I would croak if I had to handle that much at once.. Might just be an experience thing.
Hasn't someone run the numbers on rolling 4d6 drop the lowest and determined that it comes to at least a 25 point buy?
In 3.5, yes. Which is the same as 15 points in PF.
I use 20 point buy with the limitation that racial adjustments and the leveling up ability increases cannot raise a stat above 20. There are 5 players in my campaign. I find myself adding monsters or using the advanced template in about 50% of Adventure Path combats.
Huh...so they do. I coulda sworn they were on 20. Well, PFS is at 20, definitely, and honestly there's not a huge power jump for slightly higher stats - not enough (at least at 20) to be worrying about changing CR balance, provided you're still using a 4 character party.God, 15 just seems so...terribly bad... *shudders at the thought of playing with only 15*
I agree with this- In all the games I've played, I've never noticed a massive difference in CR balance for higher stats. (Although I never run with the standard point-buy system, I have played under it) It's extra characters that make the biggest difference.
I agree with this- In all the games I've played, I've never noticed a massive difference in CR balance for higher stats. (Although I never run with the standard point-buy system, I have played under it) It's extra characters that make the biggest difference.
Huh...so they do. I coulda sworn they were on 20. Well, PFS is at 20, definitely, and honestly there's not a huge power jump for slightly higher stats - not enough (at least at 20) to be worrying about changing CR balance, provided you're still using a 4 character party.God, 15 just seems so...terribly bad... *shudders at the thought of playing with only 15*
+1 As a GM I can tell you this is definately true. Particularly if those extra characters know how to work togather and fight tactically.
One thing that is important in allowing 25-point buy is that not only the group is more powerful, but also that the individual PCs have the potential to be much more powerful, but don't necessarily life up to that potential.
In other words, you can have very strong characters and quite average ones in the same group.
For instance with 25 Points buy and average magic, a 5th Barbarian could have 26 str while raging or a Wizard could have 22 Int buffed up to 26. On the other hand you could have a Rogue and a Paladin who have all stats at 16...
The difference in perceived power, especially during combat, between these characters is staggering and is much more a problem than simply up the EL by one after level 3 (by giving all opponents +10% HPs and +2 to attack against a group of six 25-buy PCs).
I've been running at 15 points since Beta for my weekly games, have gone to 25 for some one offs. I prefer 15 because it keeps the characters vulnerable longer, which makes my job easier. JOb, Wife, kids, etc, I just don't have the 3-5 hours of time to prep like I did in college :)
In my latest game (and I think from here on out), I give the choice.
Basically, each player rolls a set of stats, and then any player can choose from any stat (people can pick the same on if they want). No more "one person rolled great vs others rolling horrible".
And then I allow a point buy option that's close to the "value" of the rolled stats, but always lower.
Since this results, typically, in the fairly high/epic fantasy end of things, and because I also usually tack on an extra feat or traits (and use full HD on a couple levels), I treat the party as APL +1 for purposes of CRs and encounter difficulty.
It's greatly improved lower level survival, and allows for less healing dependency (the only healing right now is a cohort 2 levels lower than the group level). Which is great for a 3 player group.
I find the point of having a higher set of stats is to allow for a greater selection of possible builds. So no, I don't up the requirements on anything. MAD classes are much more welcome in this kind of game, too.
One thing I notice with higher point buy is how MAD classes get more powerful. It's not a huge difference but it is there. Like fighter works fine with 15 point build but Paladin or Monk work so much better with 25.
It depends on how you build your characters. My Fighters do so much better (rather, can do so much more) in a 25 point buy game, simply because he now has more options open to him (can afford a higher Int for Combat Expertise stuff, or higher wis/cha for non-fightery things).
Versatility goes up for those that were only capable before in a 15pb game.
It depends on how you build your characters. My Fighters do so much better (rather, can do so much more) in a 25 point buy game, simply because he now has more options open to him (can afford a higher Int for Combat Expertise stuff, or higher wis/cha for non-fightery things).
Versatility goes up for those that were only capable before in a 15pb game.
I agree a fighter does better but it seem the Paladin does so much better. Like having higher Int is great but the bonus a higher Chr give the Paladin is much better. Not that I'm saying it's a problem. Just I find with 15 point buys you don't see as many MAD classes and people tend to stick to the single attribute classes.
Oh definitely! I guess I just state it a bit differently (Low pb hurts MAD, vs saying high pb makes SAD less chosen). Six up, half a dozen down...
|
I tend to treat 5 PC's ona 20 point buy as 6 PC's on a 15 point buy, which has worked nicely for Kingmaker. One group is 6 players with 15 point buy and one is 5 with 20 and they've had an almost identical difficulty so far.
I am of the opinion that the point buy you use does matter and you should take it into account when determining appropiate CR challenges. I swear 90% of the 'CR is broken' threads have the OP having given his players 25+ point buy and other perks and then wondering why CR doesn't seem to function very well...
|
|
Oh definitely! I guess I just state it a bit differently (Low pb hurts MAD, vs saying high pb makes SAD less chosen). Six up, half a dozen down...
I don't know about that. Obviously, the former is true but the SAD classes just get to be a bit more well rounded with Int sufficient for Combat Expertise, etc.
I use higher PBs than the default quite often. When I do, I also give monsters/NPCs better stats. Regular monsters/NPCs get the elite array for free, while BBEG-types get the same point buy as the PCs. That seems to work pretty well :)
Stats are only half the character. A good player in a strong group can really carry a low stat well. Good tactics and a strong team can be awesome inspite of low stats.
4d6, drop the low, comes out to about a 19.5 point buy in PF.
I have run everything from 40 point buy to 5 point buy games, and never adjust any rules as a result. the whole point for me of doing high or low point buys is for the players to know their characters are epic or average, as the case may be.
right now I have a 27 point buy and a 10 point buy game. Both on the same world, in two different campaigns. The 27 point buy characters are legendary, and their exploits are told everywhere. the 10 point buy characters are a level higher, and can;t take on nearly as dangerous an encounter.
My GM style means I dont really need to adjust bad guys. Foes tend to come in ranks in my games, and the PCs need to decide what they can ahndle. The WestWoods are fairly safe, but a long way around. The Darktimber is a shorter route, but riddled with winter elf slavers and their goblin/hobgoblin/bugbear minions. You may be able to skirt through the outside, though its much faster to cut through the center where the slave citadels sit.
What route do you choose? The higher point-buy characters almost always *pick* the bigger risk, so the game stays balanced easily on my part.
I have 6 PCs in my game (just dinged level 3) and they were made with 25-point buys. I give them an APL +1 for the number of PCs, and many (but not all) of my monsters are Advanced versions to somewhat offset the higher stat buy of the PCs. My important NPCs (that are built with character levels) are based on either 15- or 20-point buys, depending on how tough I want them to be. Major bbeg's (which they have not yet encountered) will be built using 25-point buys.
One thing that is important in allowing 25-point buy is that not only the group is more powerful, but also that the individual PCs have the potential to be much more powerful, but don't necessarily life up to that potential.
In other words, you can have very strong characters and quite average ones in the same group.
For instance with 25 Points buy and average magic, a 5th Barbarian could have 26 str while raging or a Wizard could have 22 Int buffed up to 26. On the other hand you could have a Rogue and a Paladin who have all stats at 16...
The difference in perceived power, especially during combat, between these characters is staggering and is much more a problem than simply up the EL by one after level 3 (by giving all opponents +10% HPs and +2 to attack against a group of six 25-buy PCs).
+1 I want to highlight this, as I think MicMan hit the nail on the head.
By giving the PCs a higher point-buy, you are making the "build" so much more important to relative power disparity. And in my opinion, relative power between PCs is infinately more important than their "absolute" power before the GM's monsters (as these can be so easily scaled up/down).
A low point-buy keeps everyone on the same power curve, while a higher point buy leads to a min-maxing arms-race between the PCs. This is the important "ripple effect" to watch out for.
4d6, drop the low, comes out to about a 19.5 point buy in PF.
I think it's slightly higher if you throw away "unplayable" sets of stats, a la 3.5.
The groups I play in exclusively use 25-point buy. Nevertheless, we suffer a character death roughly 1 in 3 games through no fault of our own.
4d6, drop the low, comes out to about a 19.5 point buy in PF.
...okay, rather than continue to take other peoples' words for it, I did the damn math. ;)
First: you need to decide how the chart continues for values from 3 to 6. Given that 7 is -4 points on the official chart, it looks like an equivalent progression to the positive side (increase the step each time you hit a modifier change), so 6 = -6, 5 = -9, 4 = -12, 3 = -16. This is Method 1 below.
However, I know that there are folks who don't like the way this further encourages dumping; so I'll also do the math for a straight 1-for-1 negative stepping: 7 = -3, 6 = -4, ... 3 = -7. This is Method 2.
For fun, I'll also do sets using the 3.5 point buy. Method 3 and Method 4 are the WotC equivalents to Method 1 and Method 2 above; a 3 is worth -9 and -5, respectively.
To my great relief, someone else did the hard part: a 4d6-drop frequency chart. From there, the method is to multiply the frequency of each value by its point-buy value, add those numbers up and divide the final value by 216. (1296 possible outcomes per roll, 6 attributes rolled: 6/1296 = 216.)
Average point buy of 4d6-drop results:
Method 1 = 18.83
Method 2 = 19.48 (this looks like AdAstra's value)
Method 3 = 28.37 (Living Greyhawk standardized on 28 point buy)
Method 4 = 28.53 (yeah, close enough)
Now, a simple frequency analysis shows that the average single die roll is 12.24. Six of these comes to roughly a 25.5-point buy on the WotC chart, which is probably how 25 points became "standard." It's only 13.5 with the Pathfinder point buy! I'm definitely coming around to the idea that this isn't the best set of numbers. Unfortunately it's the basis of the Standard Elite Array, which give me concerns about shifting away from it for my personal games; but I definitely see why you might want to bump up to 20.
I used 25 point-buy AND 3.5 sources in my Kingmaker campain, and half the party is so optimized its almost laughable. At lv10 now, and the combatants have closer to 40 than 30 in AC, most random encounters end before monsters act, and only buffed scripted encounters last any time at all.
"Wise from injury" as we say here, I am never doing that again. It's a huge headache to "level up" the AP so that there is a reason the wizard and rogue doesn't take on everything, and leave the rest of the party at home tending the castle. On the flip side, the cavalier player think it is really hard, since he did not optimize nearly as bad as the wizard, fighter and rogue. But really, that is probably just because he is feeling the burn more than others, due to his proximity with the fray. There has only been 1, maybe 2, brushes with any real danger of TPK.
Made a farewell with 3.5 when the APG came out (mostly), and now it seems things might go better. Never EVER running a game with a higher point-buy than 20 in an official APG again, and as long as the players accept it, I prefer 15.
i prefer 30 point buy, for many reasons
it gives players the high stats they want with a lot less dumping
it encourages multiple attribute dependancy and helps the issues of it
it makes player characters feel truly epic which i like. i like my characters to be the stock of which epic stories are told of, of which anime are written about, of whom great poems and songs of tribute are sung.
it gives some chances for pcs to play something besides yet another generic cookie cutter mook template stolen from the internet.
i will settle for 20-25 point buy if i must but i will never settle for 15 or less.
i prefer 30 point buy, for many reasons
it gives players the high stats they want with a lot less dumping
it encourages multiple attribute dependancy and helps the issues of it
it makes player characters feel truly epic which i like. i like my characters to be the stock of which epic stories are told of, of which anime are written about, of whom great poems and songs of tribute are sung.
it gives some chances for pcs to play something besides yet another generic cookie cutter mook template stolen from the internet.
i will settle for 20-25 point buy if i must but i will never settle for 15 or less.
Agreed. I want characters to be heroes, not random people off the street.
Now, if it was a straight point buy, without the weighting, then 15 would be ok, I guess...still would much prefer 20 though.
I have played, recently, in a 15-point buy relatively low magic game. Immensely fun! Loved my character. As a human I eked out an 18, a 14 12x2 and 8x2. Still rather playable.
I think I personally like 20 point BUT a stat point every even level.
Point buy has decreasing gains as it advances.
The most powerful classes are almost always the ones that require the fewest attributes. The wizard needs only intelligence, after all.
It's the rogue, the barbarian, the monk, the ranger - the classes generally who aren't as world-shattering as the others - that require more attributes.
A wizard with 20 point buy and a wizard with 25 point buy is still going to have his 18 intelligence - almost everything after that is window dressing Certainly he'll have some more constitution for +1 hit points every level, but comparatively that isn't that big of a gain when you look at how much his sky-high int gives him. The ranger, on the other hand, can now have good wisdom, strength, and dexterity to fully do his job.
|
I've played 15 point buy in my last two campaigns, and it works, even though I'm currently playing a paladin. Turns out starting with a 16 Str and 14 Cha is enough if you don't measure yourself against the more generously statted characters you've played before... it's all about relative power level, not absolute. It's the DM's job to make the game balanced for whatever point buy he gives you.
That said, I do think that 20 point buy is a far superior choice, since it allows for a larger range of playable character concepts. Slap some Intelligence onto that fighter, don't dump Charisma in favor of combat prowess on that rogue, make your monk at least halfways viable... ;) Or in other words: 15 point buy removes a lot of choice from your character building because you have to put your points where they count. You can afford not to optimize a 20 point buy.
Although this is not strictly point-buy related, I also think that using action points goes a long way to making a party survivable and hardening it against random instant death. If you feel your campaigns are being too rough on your players, adding action points is a better way to go than throwing another 5-10 stat points after them.
I tend to agree with ProfessorCirno to a degree. Classes with MAD (or MAD builds on a regular class like a twf fighter)generally benefit a bunch from 25 point buys because they can purchase 2 or more stats into a respectable level.
Battle Clerics and Pounce Druids also benefit from a higher point buy mainly because they can still keep a decent Wis while boosting physical attributes.
Sorcerors and Wizards probably benefit least from a high point buy because so much of their power is tied to their casting stat. Yes a good dex and con helps smooth out some of the weaknesses but fundamentally as along as the wizard has a int of 17-18 after racial modifiers he's going to be kicking ass.
IMHO, 20-points is probably the sweet spot, characters still have strengths and weaknesses and more options are open to players. 25-point buy+ should probably come with a increase in EL (much like extra PCs) to reflect the increased strength of the party vis-a-vis the opposition.
...A wizard with 20 point buy and a wizard with 25 point buy is still going to have his 18 intelligence - almost everything after that is window dressing...
I disagree here. A Wizard with 18 Int and 11 Con and 10 Dex and a Wizard with 18 Int and 14 Con, 12 Dex is a vast difference when the Levels start to accumulate.
The first is a glass cannon, he actually has disadvantages to the more balanced party members. The second, not so much.
I also do not follow the argumentation that the Paladin is much better with a 25-point buy compared to the Wizard for this very reason. It's only that because it's not advisable for the Paladin to start 18, 11, 10 he isn't relatively stronger with 18, 14, 12 than the Wizard is.
|
|
...A wizard with 20 point buy and a wizard with 25 point buy is still going to have his 18 intelligence - almost everything after that is window dressing...I disagree here. A Wizard with 18 Int and 11 Con and 10 Dex and a Wizard with 18 Int and 14 Con, 12 Dex is a vast difference when the Levels start to accumulate.
The first is a glass cannon, he actually has disadvantages to the more balanced party members. The second, not so much.
I also do not follow the argumentation that the Paladin is much better with a 25-point buy compared to the Wizard for this very reason. It's only that because it's not advisable for the Paladin to start 18, 11, 10 he isn't relatively stronger with 18, 14, 12 than the Wizard is.
+1, especially at low levels.
Try telling the frail, weak, slow 15 point buy wizard with few spells at level 1 that his power's roughly the same as the 25 point buy wizard who can take a hit, win initiative regularily and has better than the base save bonus for a will save...
I do semi-random character generation these days.
First, all attributes must sum to 75. Not 75 points, but adding up all six stats will come to 75. Spread evenly, this is 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13. (Elite array would be a sum of 72)
Second, you assign 10s to 5 attributes, and a 13 to your 6th attribute. This spends 63 points.
Third, I have a die that has STR/DEX/CON/INT/WIS/CHA on the 6 sides. You roll the die 12 times, and each time it comes up with an attribute, you add 1 to that attribute. If you get an attribute up to 18, re-roll the die when it hits that attribute again.
Fourth, you may move points from one stat (only). You may only move two points from that stat; if you move two points from that stat, each moved point must move to a different stat. You may not move points to the stat you put a 13 in before rolling.
Fifth, apply racial modifiers by the rules.
This results in all characters being equal in capability.
The problem I have with point buy is that it's trying to scale the costs of the attributes based on their frequency on a 3d6 bell curve, rather than scaling the costs based on their effectiveness in game. An 18 attribute is 4x as effective as a 12 attribute, but costs 8.5x as much.
The problem I have with stock random rolls (4d6 drop the low) is that it results in disparities between character power that rapidly turn into whining at the table.
The benefit of point buy is that all characters come out at roughly the same power.
The benefit of random roll is that characters don't all come out as point optimized cookie cutter stats.
My solution gets most of the benefits of both random and point buy, while avoiding the major sins of both.
...A wizard with 20 point buy and a wizard with 25 point buy is still going to have his 18 intelligence - almost everything after that is window dressing...I disagree here. A Wizard with 18 Int and 11 Con and 10 Dex and a Wizard with 18 Int and 14 Con, 12 Dex is a vast difference when the Levels start to accumulate.
The first is a glass cannon, he actually has disadvantages to the more balanced party members. The second, not so much.
I also do not follow the argumentation that the Paladin is much better with a 25-point buy compared to the Wizard for this very reason. It's only that because it's not advisable for the Paladin to start 18, 11, 10 he isn't relatively stronger with 18, 14, 12 than the Wizard is.
+1, especially at low levels.
Try telling the frail, weak, slow 15 point buy wizard with few spells at level 1 that his power's roughly the same as the 25 point buy wizard who can take a hit, win initiative regularily and has better than the base save bonus for a will save...
Both cast Sleep, both win the battle, neither is attacked :p
The "weakness" of wizards at early levels is strongly overrated on these forums.
And again, I'm sorry, but the increased dexterity and the increased constitution are pennies compared to the 18 intelligence that the wizard has either way.
I do semi-random character generation these days.
First, all attributes must sum to 75. Not 75 points, but adding up all six stats will come to 75. Spread evenly, this is 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13. (Elite array would be a sum of 72)
Second, you assign 10s to 5 attributes, and a 13 to your 6th attribute. This spends 63 points.
Third, I have a die that has STR/DEX/CON/INT/WIS/CHA on the 6 sides. You roll the die 12 times, and each time it comes up with an attribute, you add 1 to that attribute. If you get an attribute up to 18, re-roll the die when it hits that attribute again.
Fourth, you may move points from one stat (only). You may only move two points from that stat; if you move two points from that stat, each moved point must move to a different stat. You may not move points to the stat you put a 13 in before rolling.
Fifth, apply racial modifiers by the rules.
This results in all characters being equal in capability.
The problem I have with point buy is that it's trying to scale the costs of the attributes based on their frequency on a 3d6 bell curve, rather than scaling the costs based on their effectiveness in game. An 18 attribute is 4x as effective as a 12 attribute, but costs 8.5x as much.
The problem I have with stock random rolls (4d6 drop the low) is that it results in disparities between character power that rapidly turn into whining at the table.
The benefit of point buy is that all characters come out at roughly the same power.
The benefit of random roll is that characters don't all come out as point optimized cookie cutter stats.
My solution gets most of the benefits of both random and point buy, while avoiding the major sins of both.
Can Mr. Fishy ask you a question? How much free time do you have.