| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...trying to figure out builds that can work at first level. I just saw a thread with ONE THOUSAND posts regarding the merits of monks and how one can successfully build them.
I always laugh at players who wring their hands with character builds, like they're trying to figure out a shell game or some equation.
FOLKS - there are no RPG police that will come into your homes, storm into your games and DEMAND you make first level characters with "stat caps"!! This isn't the NFL or NBA with a salary cap. It's YOUR game and my friends & I always wanted to play supremely gifted characters that could do amazing things. Real life is challenging enough.
Forgive me, but I'm not going to start a character with a 15, a few 12s, an 8, a few 10s...those are the stats of my buddy down the hall in college. I want to play gifted badasses - we always had a rule: 2 18s, 17, 16 , 15, 14. I don't want to play with mediocre scrub stats. Never screwed up game balance...and we STILL role played and enjoyed the "non stat" parts of the game.
Just blows me away that so many millions of players box themselves into low starting stats. I want to play with characters well above my own real word capabilities...not below them.
+1 Agreed!
my dm is very generous with rolls, (pretty sure he just hands out amazing stats) and our games are not unbalanced, he just uses more challenging encounters/situations/moralDilemas.
Well, the game assumes a range of stats array - se how diverse can be the point buy.
I indeed played the most enjoyable epic game wit high stats (and this helped a lot monks and fighters).
Nevertheless, overall i find PCs with big stats but flawed ones too more interesting - I admit that some class, like monks, are more restricted.
Forgive me, but I'm not going to start a character with a 15, a few 12s, an 8, a few 10s...those are the stats of my buddy down the hall in college. I want to play gifted badasses - we always had a rule: 2 18s, 17, 16 , 15, 14. I don't want to play with mediocre scrub stats. Never screwed up game balance...and we STILL role played and enjoyed the "non stat" parts of the game.
Paizo created the rules for their game. Within these rules, they decided that PFS was going to use 20 point buy. So in PFS, the Monk has 20 pt buy just like everyone else. The Monk is MAD. The more points the Monk gets, the less being MAD matters.
Of course having the stats you posted would help. But if you play PFS, or have a DM that says use 20 or 25 point buy. Then it's a problem because the Monk is the only MAD core class and it seems a bit messed up that they completely whiffed on it's mechanics.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...trying to figure out builds that can work at first level. I just saw a thread with ONE THOUSAND posts regarding the merits of monks and how one can successfully build them.
I always laugh at players who wring their hands with character builds, like they're trying to figure out a shell game or some equation.
FOLKS - there are no RPG police that will come into your homes, storm into your games and DEMAND you make first level characters with "stat caps"!! This isn't the NFL or NBA with a salary cap. It's YOUR game and my friends & I always wanted to play supremely gifted characters that could do amazing things. Real life is challenging enough.
Forgive me, but I'm not going to start a character with a 15, a few 12s, an 8, a few 10s...those are the stats of my buddy down the hall in college. I want to play gifted badasses - we always had a rule: 2 18s, 17, 16 , 15, 14. I don't want to play with mediocre scrub stats. Never screwed up game balance...and we STILL role played and enjoyed the "non stat" parts of the game.
Just blows me away that so many millions of players box themselves into low starting stats. I want to play with characters well above my own real word capabilities...not below them.
That is great that that works for you and your friends.I honestly would never play in a game were I was a superhero unless I actually had superpowers and was flying around with a "S" on my chest with my cape and blue underwear. Different games for different people, I like to feel challenged and weak as a character, it makes the victories that much sweeter. A 10 point or 15 point buy is fine by me. Heroes are not born they are made.
Here is the character creation for stats that the new Dungeon Crawl classics game uses and I think it is great.
"A character is defined in broad terms by six ability scores. For character creation, roll 3d6 for each ability score listed below, in the order of Strength, Agility, Stamina, Personality, Intelligence, and Luck.
You always roll 3d6, and you always roll and apply the scores in that same order. You do not roll more dice and drop the lowest die, you do not use a point-based buy system, and you do not assign ability scores in any order other than that defined above."
"All characters start at 0 level. Most will die in a dungeon, alone and unknown. The few who survive eventually choose a class in which to advance.
All 0-level characters start with the following:
• 1d4 hit points, modified by Stamina
• 5d12 copper pieces
• -100 XP
• One randomly determined piece of equipment (see table 3-4)
• One randomly determined occupation
• Based on the occupation:
• Possession of and training in one weapon
• Possession of some trade goods
• A +0 modifier to attack rolls and all saving throws
As the character earns experience points, his XP total advances to 1. When his XP total reaches 1, he may choose a class."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...trying to figure out builds that can work at first level. I just saw a thread with ONE THOUSAND posts regarding the merits of monks and how one can successfully build them.
I always laugh at players who wring their hands with character builds, like they're trying to figure out a shell game or some equation.
FOLKS - there are no RPG police that will come into your homes, storm into your games and DEMAND you make first level characters with "stat caps"!! This isn't the NFL or NBA with a salary cap. It's YOUR game and my friends & I always wanted to play supremely gifted characters that could do amazing things. Real life is challenging enough.
Forgive me, but I'm not going to start a character with a 15, a few 12s, an 8, a few 10s...those are the stats of my buddy down the hall in college. I want to play gifted badasses - we always had a rule: 2 18s, 17, 16 , 15, 14. I don't want to play with mediocre scrub stats. Never screwed up game balance...and we STILL role played and enjoyed the "non stat" parts of the game.
Just blows me away that so many millions of players box themselves into low starting stats. I want to play with characters well above my own real word capabilities...not below them.
That is great that that works for you and your friends.I honestly would never play in a game were I was a superhero unless I actually had superpowers and was flying around with a "S" on my chest with my cape and blue underwear. Different games for different people, I like to feel challenged and weak as a character, it makes the victories that much sweeter. A 10 point or 15 point buy is fine by me. Heroes are not born they are made.
Here is the character creation for stats that the new Dungeon Crawl classics game uses and I think it is great.
"A character is defined in broad terms by six ability scores. For character creation, roll 3d6 for each ability score listed below, in the order of Strength, Agility, Stamina, Personality, Intelligence, and Luck.
You always...
This just looks awesome. I have always said that a character is SO much more than his optimized self, and that a guy with straight 10s, a hoe and a backpack can be as big of a hero as some other rolled up demon. Hell, 99% of the time I'd rather game with a bunch of farmers anyhow.
|
|
Then it's a problem because the Monk is the only MAD core class and it seems a bit messed up that they completely whiffed on its mechanics.
I disagree with your statement. The monk is not the only MAD core class. The paladin depends on STR, WIS and CHA. The ranger depends on STR and WIS. The bard depends on INT and CHA. The barbarian depends on STR, CON and DEX (remember, no heavy armor and AC penalty while raging). I would argue that even the cleric depends somewhat on CHA (selective channel and number of channels). The cleric and bard also need STR if they plan to participate in melee.
I disagree with your statement. The monk is not the only MAD core class. The paladin depends on STR, WIS and CHA. The ranger depends on STR and WIS. The bard depends on INT and CHA. The barbarian depends on STR, CON and DEX (remember, no heavy armor and AC penalty while raging). I would argue that even the cleric depends somewhat on CHA (selective channel and number of channels). The cleric and bard also need STR if they plan to participate in melee.
Then it's a problem because the Monk is the only MAD core class and it seems a bit messed up that they completely whiffed on its mechanics.
And the Monk needs Str, Dex, Con and Wis
MAD = Multiple Ability score dependent.
SAD = Single Ability score dependent.
But the reality of it is that ALL classes benefit from having a variety of good stats. While wizards and sorcerers can get by with only a good casting stat, they also really benefit from a decent Con score (as many classes do). There really is no such thing as a SAD class in a real campaign.
I think monks are really a Str/Wis class, and thanks to all good saves, and no ranged attacking for the most part don't need Dex or much Con. I think you just need a 13 Dex for the feats, and a 12 Con because Con is so nice.
Druids are another very MAD class. They 'need' STR, DEX, CON, WIS, and CHA to be able to perform all their basic duties.
:D
They must assign stats correctly to be good casters OR good meleers, and that's good because in 3.5 they were a party by their own.
This is not even remotely correctly connected with the inability of the monk to accomplish a SINGLE thing*.
*please note that mi criticism about the monk is mild, I just don't understand the lack of few features - but I wanted to point out that the problems are different, you put them together but they are not.
I was just mentioning in the other thread that I played a Paladin w/o powers (basically a commoner) for several years of real time and had a blast doing it. The character was a farmer fighting off an Orc invasion. I had a blast.
That's a really great idea. One of my favorite characters I ever played was in a low-power 3d6's campaign; I was a Ranger with sub-10s in all my mental stats and in my Constitution. I played him as Robin Hood. :)
|
Just blows me away that so many millions of players box themselves into low starting stats. I want to play with characters well above my own real word capabilities...not below them.
Well, I'm sorry not every DM is as generous as you and me. Some people on this forum are stuck playing 15 point buy characters because their DM doesn't let them have super stats. You may consider that other people have different playstyles than you, and then you'll be less blown away.
|
My group started with 25 point buys. Becous we hade a player that liked superpowerful characters. After DM this for a long time. We moved to a 15 point buy. And as a DM I can say this is much much less work. With a 25 point buy you just broke the CR rating for all the monsters. As they are set up on a 15 point buy. Along with that any time you do a high stats you make animal companions and any ability like it much much less effective. All the animal companions and alike are set up on 15 point buy. So any animal companion becomes usless becous you out passed it's ability to keap up with the abilitys of the party. So you just cut the Summoner, and Caviler with there companions being a big part of the class. And you just made Druid, Animal Domain for clerics, Oracle Nature, Ranger(animal companion), and Paladin(bond mount) all bad choices.
@ bigkilla - I respect how you enjoy your games. I enjoy mine differently. I'll respectfully agree to disagree. The stat build we used is not "super hero in a cape". And even with our builds, we still had to "make" our characters success all the way to epic levels...
@TriOmegaZero - you're absolutely right ... it's very important to maintain a broad, open-minded perspective and understand that there's so many ways to enjoy one's RPG experience.
Cheers everybody - thanks for the thoughtful replies!
I disagree with your statement. The monk is not the only MAD core class. The paladin depends on STR, WIS and CHA. The ranger depends on STR and WIS. The bard depends on INT and CHA. The barbarian depends on STR, CON and DEX (remember, no heavy armor and AC penalty while raging). I would argue that even the cleric depends somewhat on CHA (selective channel and number of channels). The cleric and bard also need STR if they plan to participate in melee.
In an optimized world, doesn't pretty much everybody need Constitution, Wisdom and Dexterity? In my experience, almost any class can be MAD if you want it to be. Monks take flak as a MAD class because (not to reiterate the miles of posts about it) they need a high-ish score in four skills to keep up with what some of the other classes get easily. (Armor, for instance.)
Paladins do not need Wisdom anymore, from an optimization perspective, as they are Charisma casters now. (Though it must be said, who wants their Paladin to be a dunce?) Don't all melee classes want high scores in all the physical abilities, plus whatever else that class needs? You just have to figure out if you want him to be senseless and stupid to get those high physical abilities.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really like threads like this, and I'll tell you why.
Usually, when you start playing a roleplaying game with your group of friends, fellow players, w/e, you learn to play the game in whatever way your group played. Eventually, this playstyle becomes ingrained as your "game", and without exposure to other playstyles, you begin to think that yours is the only one there is.
Now, I'm not bashing the OP at all. But the study of gamer behavior is really fascinating. Now, more often than not, someone on these boards will look at the guy and get one of 3 reactions:
1) OMG NO UR WRONG
2) Yeah, so?
or
3) Wait, your DM lets you do that?
Of course there are other reactions, but those are most of the ones you'll see.
Now, reactions 1 and 2 are relatively boring, and don't contribute much to the growth of community, though they may very well be pertinent or meaningful. However, it's that 3rd reaction that I love to see. It's that eye-opening experience that makes you realize that other people play differently than you do... and that's not necessarily a BAD thing.
That's why I like threads like these. Even if a bunch of people pass it up or offer nothing but praise/criticism, chances are that 1 person will find it and be inspired, bringing more people to the game.
If I could get past blade of grass number one with all 10 stats I would be a very surprised individual.
When I hear about how other peoples DM's run their monsters and then look at the players stats most often I don't believe it happened. In my games the monsters you run into want to succeed and live just as much as you do, and fight like you do, only they have supernatural powers and great stats. So if they are stronger, faster and smarter (I don't mean the INT stat I mean tactics wise), then you, how the hell are you beating them?
|
|
If I could get past blade of grass number one with all 10 stats I would be a very surprised individual.
When I hear about how other peoples DM's run their monsters and then look at the players stats most often I don't believe it happened. In my games the monsters you run into want to succeed and live just as much as you do, and fight like you do, only they have supernatural powers and great stats. So if they are stronger, faster and smarter (I don't mean the INT stat I mean tactics wise), then you, how the hell are you beating them?
And that is what I like about it.Being a normal guy facing incredibly powerful creatures/monsters. Players should die and become said monsters food. That's how heroes are actually made.There is a weeding out process of the weak and unskilled.For every 10 great heroes in the lands there had to be 1000's if not 10,000's to go before them and fail. I just prefer to start off as one of those weak and unskilled people who might possibly make it to be the hero. Making me the hero from the start is very boring to me, if I do not feel that my death and destruction is around every corner there is no fun in the game.
if I do not feel that my death and destruction is around every corner there is no fun in the game.
There are other ways to remedy that... say, up the encounter level and eliminate the 15 min work day (if that happens to be common)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The truth is that sometimes people get all caught up in the max build. Tell them what class and they will tell you the race, stats, feats, equipment, skills, etc. and sometimes get upset when you do something else. The first time I played a PFS game with my own character, I had three people tell me that I hadn't made my cleric right because I didn't have the stats right. All three suggested the same build. Now that is boring. Who wants to set down at a table were all the fighters have the same stats, feats, traits, etc. because it is the "best" build with the 20 points. I didn't change it because the build match my char's back story. Which for me is the fun part. Coming up the story then making the stats, feats, etc. match up. So, what that my gnome ranger has twelves in everything but dex and wis. He will never be a one shot killer but he does well in all the skill checks. Of course, I once wrote a three page back story on a horse to talk me DM into letting my char have it (without paying) to pull a blacksmith cart. Don't get me wrong I do adjust things to make the char as good as possible but I don't believe there is a best way. Besides if you are having fun does it really matter where you start.
Just another batch of reasons why we ROLL(4d6 Drop One Die Roll Seven Stats and Drop One Arrange as wanted)in our games and I've yet to build a PFS character even though I've got the card... With Rolled you might get the stats you need for your character concept. I have no objection to point build based games...I love GURPS...I consider it the best overall system but its also very intensive. It helps for everyone to be pretty familiar with the creation system.
We, meaning my group, has 8 Players spread over 2 evenings with two campaigns and several overlapping players, we stick with Point Buy character for Point Based games and roll stats for games that aren't based on a point system. Original D&D didn't have a point buy system that I recall. It offered several rolling options but like the OP we've never had much issue with game balance or much in the way of dice envy beyond the passing comment. I've found its easy to compensate for a tougher party with very little if any change in balance.
Good stats seem to make happier players honestly, playing that farmer can be fun but somehow Alanon, Conan, Legolas, Aragorn, Fiddler, and One-Eye seem to be more popular as heroic archetypes than Ted the farmer. Now I'm not disparaging Ted nor am I saying Ted can't be one heck of a hero, but they don't make that many epic stories about Ted the farmer and his mighty Hoe of Weeding.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, I just saw somebody trolling a Beach Boys song on Youtube, so nothing astounds me any more.
CLPARIS just hit the nail on the head - "Besides if you are having fun does it really matter where you start."
I wholeheartedly agree with DRAGONSAGE47's "Good stats seem to make happier players honestly, playing that farmer can be fun but somehow Alanon, Conan, Legolas, Aragorn, Fiddler, and One-Eye seem to be more popular as heroic archetypes than Ted the farmer. Now I'm not disparaging Ted nor am I saying Ted can't be one heck of a hero, but they don't make that many epic stories about Ted the farmer and his mighty Hoe of Weeding."
Again - no offense to bigkilla but I don't want a character vastly below my real life capabilities. I love D&D/Pathfinder for the ability to do things one can't do in Evanston, Illinois or Princeton, NJ. Having high stats does not preclude one from roleplaying or from the "heroic struggle & journey" or "hard won victory".
The heros of Shanara (the Ohmsfords) were small village doctors, the heroes of LotR (the hobbits) were farmers.Alanon and Legolas were supporting cast. Frankly, players want to be heroes, not supporting cast. Players enjoy experiencing their characters grow into power. They also enjoy triumphing over forces much more powerful than they are through cleverness, wit, and hard work.
Personally, I'd rather be Aragorn or Legolas, don't mind doing an escort quest and playing second fiddle if I end up defending the keep against overwhelming odds, or slay more Orcs than is possible.
But that's just me.
Guess it Depends which Shanara books you are talking about ...Walker Boh is not a mundane... they all had a Legacy of power which sets them apart from commoner folk..and Legolas may be supporting but he and Robin Hood are two of the most common archetypes for the heroic archer... I myself might add Hiawatha and William Tell to the list but not most people.
My point stands...Heroic types are what MOST wanna play, I've played a carpenter and had fun, but no more fun than I did with my Ranger or Cleric or whatever.
You may wish to play Ted the farmer or Joanne the Midwife or whomever but in my 28 years of gaming experience most of my players enjoy a character that is beyond the mundane because they exist in the world of the mundane every day.
IMHO its far easier to down grade a character if you wish to play Farmer Ted but its nearly impossible for a player to have the epic hero with a 15 or 20 point buy but I argue that Ted the Farmer can have good stats as well and still be Ted Triumphant if you roll your stats instead
To be quite honest, I've never met a player that builds by number crunch.
Most everyone I've met does concept first then builds accordingly.
And that is what I like about it.Being a normal guy facing incredibly powerful creatures/monsters. Players should die and become said monsters food. That's how heroes are actually made.There is a weeding out process of the weak and unskilled.For every 10 great heroes in the lands there had to be 1000's if not 10,000's to go before them and fail. I just prefer to start off as one of those weak and unskilled people who might possibly make it to be the hero. Making me the hero from the start is very boring to me, if I do not feel that my death and destruction is around every corner there is no fun in the game.
And odds say you'll have to roll up a new character 10,000 times to get past level one. (the 10,000 time being that you rolled straight 20's for all fights till level two) then you die at level two and the odds are even worse to make it past that.
Hero's never start from the ground up (seriously name one) they always have something special about them.
Yar.
Hero's never start from the ground up (seriously name one) they always have something special about them.
Samwise Gamgee?
My beef with obnoxiously high ability scores is that they really only beef up your numbers, and I don't think a +5 is that much more heroic than a +3. All it really does is screw with the CR system.
That being said, I allow 25 point buy in my home games, but restrict access to stat boosting magic items. That way they get a bit of a survivability boost at the early levels, and come into mid levels with the stats expected of them by the system (and without having to attribute their heroics to shiny headbands and belts).
Exactly. When I start a campaign, I talk to each player privately about their character. One of the questions I ask them how the view their character developing over the life of the campaign. If the player's reply is about what attribute points will go where, what PrC will be picked up wwhen, etc., I'll explain how I GM and politely suggest they might be happier with a different GM.
That does not make them a lesser RP'er. Maybe they had a restrictive or close-minded GM before on certain issues, and they don't want to be stuck with a 12 point buy equivalent from rolling or something. Maybe they want to be sure they will get to be PrC X. Maybe their backstory is based around a certain weapon for some reason. If you have a vision of how character X will develop but the GM keeps throwing roadblocks at you then you learn to address the road blocks before they come up.
Is this yet another thread of being angry at people that like different things?
Is this yet another thread of being angry at people that like different things?
Hey, I like those threads..
Yar.
Samwise Gamgee?
I don't remember him being a hero, he did some running and minor protecting that could be called heroic but never improved and mostly relied on others when any real trouble started. (no I don't count that spider as being a particularly tough enemy, CR 3 tops)
Yar.
Samwise Gamgee?
I don't remember him being a hero, he did some running and minor protecting that could be called heroic but never improved and mostly relied on others when any real trouble started. (no I don't count that spider as being a particularly tough enemy, CR 3 tops)
Err... did you read the same books? Or watch the same movies? Yeah, Samwise is a hero and defeating Shelob who had whole regiments of Orcs quaking in fear was a bit more than CR3. Then there's the whole courage thing. Infiltrating Mordor. Carrying the damn ring and giving it up. Etc.
Ordinary Hobbit and definitely a hero.
|
|
And that is what I like about it.Being a normal guy facing incredibly powerful creatures/monsters. Players should die and become said monsters food. That's how heroes are actually made.There is a weeding out process of the weak and unskilled.For every 10 great heroes in the lands there had to be 1000's if not 10,000's to go before them and fail. I just prefer to start off as one of those weak and unskilled people who might possibly make it to be the hero. Making me the hero from the start is very boring to me, if I do not feel that my death and destruction is around every corner there is no fun in the game.And odds say you'll have to roll up a new character 10,000 times to get past level one. (the 10,000 time being that you rolled straight 20's for all fights till level two) then you die at level two and the odds are even worse to make it past that.
Hero's never start from the ground up (seriously name one) they always have something special about them.
And I would be happy to play in that game.I would be happy to play a 0 level or level 1 character without ever progressing to level 2. It all depends on the game content.Substance over flash is much more enjoyable to me.
Err... did you read the same books? Or watch the same movies? Yeah, Samwise is a hero and defeating Shelob who had whole regiments of Orcs quaking in fear was a bit more than CR3.Orcs that are CR 1? I doubt that spider was more than CR 3.
Orcs are CR 1/3 individually. Hard to say the exact CR of Shelob, but there were a lot of Orcs, and only one spider. The spider wasn't the one quaking in fear.
*edit* In any event, one Halfling taking on even a CR3 enemy by himself would be a tough fight. It's not like he has three other characters backing him up like your typical party of adventurers.