What is the recommended point buy for 1st level characters for the adventure paths and modules, and where can you find this info? - I missed it somehow.
Thanks
The iconics have always been built using 15-point buy. A lot of players (and GMs) use 20-point buy, however. And the Pathfinder Society games use 20-point buy, I believe. So, take your pick. I don't think it'll skew things too badly either way for you. New gamers might be better served with 20-point buy, whereas experienced players might enjoy the challenge of 15-point buy more.
My two cents,
--Neil
Thanks
um, what are the iconics? Are those the pregen characters in the back?
Thanks
um, what are the iconics? Are those the pregen characters in the back?
Yes and No, meaning yes the Ionics are the pregens in the back but as of the last Adventure Path (AP) they are no longer provided in the AP.
Thanks much
...um, what are the iconics? Are those the pregen characters in the back?
Yes. The iconics appear in all the art throughout each adventure. And, they're also statted up as pregens for fast-play if your gaming group doesn't have time (or interest) to roll up characters of their own.
Paizo recently stopped including the pregens in the back of each AP (starting with Carrion Crown) in the interests of freeing up the space those pages occupied so they can include extra content in the adventure itself, the bestiary section, or maybe one of the other articles in each issue. But, in general, you can lift any of the iconic pregens from an issue in the earlier APs. And, the stand-alone Pathfinder modules still include them.
But, bottom line: the iconic pregens used the 15-point buy method.
|
I suggest you allow players to roll for their stats using the methods found in the core rule book.
Use the 4 dice, minus lowest dice for newer character and the 3 dice straight for experienced players.
Let them roll say 2 sets and pick the one they like more.
Now, IF they end up with stats that they don't like at all, then have them use the 20-15 point buy to make the character.
This way they get to experience "rolling" for stats while not becoming too weak if they had bad rolls.
I suggest you allow players to roll for their stats using the methods found in the core rule book.
Use the 4 dice, minus lowest dice for newer character and the 3 dice straight for experienced players.
Let them roll say 2 sets and pick the one they like more.Now, IF they end up with stats that they don't like at all, then have them use the 20-15 point buy to make the character.
This way they get to experience "rolling" for stats while not becoming too weak if they had bad rolls.
Never really liked rolling much. Too easy to end up with a really weak or unbalanced character, if you're not really careful.
Depends on your players.If you have a group of min/maxers who you know will optimize to the extreme... you may want to go 15-20...
If there more 'interesting characters' or people are new to the game, then go the 25.
Honestly, I don't think it REALLy makes that big a difference. We tend to go the 25-Epic Fantasy level... and still come close to a TPK every third game session.
I think I heard somewhere the difference is basically a +1 or +2 to a stat, and when you roll d20s... It's not that big of an advantage... rolling low will still kill you dead ;)
Players get more excited knowing they're making 'epic characters' then knowing they're being held back... so for the difference in scores vs. Player giddiness... I'd say just toss the players a bone :P
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Guang, there are several randomization systems out there that prevent characters from being too powerful or not relative to one another. Here are three I've seen on these boards.
Method 1 - Two Cards
Draw the 4 of hearts through 9 of hearts, and the 4 of spades through 9 of spades. Shuffle the spades and place them face up in a row of six, representing the strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma your PC was born with as a gift of good genetics or the gods. Then distribute the hearts as you please, one per stat, representing how much effort you've placed into each category growing up. Then apply racial modifiers.
Method 2 - Random Point Spread
Roll 22 dice. Separate the dice that roll 1's, the dice that roll 2's, and so on. That how many points you invest into Stength, Dexterity, etc. Any left-over points are distributed as the player wilt. (buying a 15 costs 7 points, and buying a 16 costs 10 points. Let's say you rolled the 22 dice and 8 of them came up as "3"s. Your character would have a 15 Constitution, and there would be one die left over to add to any other attribute's point-buy.)
Method 3 - Compensation
Roll as normal. Find the PC with the highest point-buy total. That's the Target Number. Every other player gets a free additional trait for every 3 points his or her PC's point-buy total is below the Target Number.
The iconics have always been built using 15-point buy.
Note that the iconics are not used for playtesting the adventure paths, however. So any claims that the adventure paths are somehow intended for 15 point characters are mostly lip service (IMO).
My two cents: A 20 point buy should be fine, but so should 15 or 25 points. Personally, I think the point buy used has much less effect on how powerful a PC is than what class the PC is or the tactics the player uses.
I suggest you allow players to roll for their stats using the methods found in the core rule book.
I would suggest the opposite. It's too easy for one player to get stuck with a 'weak' character if they roll poorly.
We've been playing Rise of the Runelords for 3 years now (almost finished). While I didn't roll all that poorly (I think it was like a 25 point buy as the GM was generous with the rolling method), I ended up with 13 as my low and 15 as my high for all abilities. I play a barbarian and having 14 INT and CHA is pretty much a waste. I would have put those points into a physical stat obviously. Meanwhile, our druid rocked the house and got like a 35 point buy and was able to boost his physical stats to the point where at 13th level he has more hit points than the barbarian! (We also roll for hit point which I would again recommend against.)
So, for three years we've played a campaign where I have an above average character, he has no stand out characteristics because I rolled 'average' on six handfuls of dice. Seems like a lot riding on so few rolls.
While the allure of rolling dice for characters is strong, I've never seen in nigh on 30 years of D&D it generate a 'fair' party. Someone always seems to have a character that doesn't measure up or else someone has a superhero that overshadows the others or someone ends up with a character they don't want to play.
Note that the iconics are not used for playtesting the adventure paths, however. So any claims that the adventure paths are somehow intended for 15 point characters are mostly lip service (IMO).
Have you playtested for Paizo before? I don't mean that to be snarky or anything. I'm actually somewhat worried I've been doing it wrong, as I'd always assumed we do playtest with 15-point buy.
Note that the iconics are not used for playtesting the adventure paths, however. So any claims that the adventure paths are somehow intended for 15 point characters are mostly lip service (IMO).Have you playtested for Paizo before? I don't mean that to be snarky or anything. I'm actually somewhat worried I've been doing it wrong, as I'd always assumed we do playtest with 15-point buy.
I'm just going on James Jacobs' past comments that any playtesting that is done is up to the adventure writer and only the adventure writer. So there's no explicit assuption that the iconics are being used at all.
Which iconics did you use for your playtesting, Neil?
I'm just going on James Jacobs' past comments that any playtesting that is done is up to the adventure writer and only the adventure writer. So there's no explicit assuption that the iconics are being used at all....Which iconics did you use for your playtesting, Neil?
Typically, the traditional adventuring party. Fighter, wizard, cleric, and rogue. So, Valeros, Ezren, Kyra, and Merisiel. Sometimes, I might substitute Seoni just to see what happens with a sorcerer in the mix. I tend to steer away from the niche character classes, though, unless there's a situation where I specifically want to see how a particular class ability might affect things (e.g., Seelah's paladin abilities, Lem's bardic abilities, etc.). Just depends on what level the adventure is being written for...and thus, what class abilities could come into play.
Typically, the traditional adventuring party. Fighter, wizard, cleric, and rogue. So, Valeros, Ezren, Kyra, and Merisiel. Sometimes, I might substitute Seoni just to see what happens with a sorcerer in the mix. I tend to steer away from the niche character classes, though, unless there's a situation where I specifically want to see how a particular class ability might affect things (e.g., Seelah's paladin abilities, Lem's bardic abilities, etc.). Just depends on what level the adventure is being written for...and thus, what class abilities could come into play.
Neat! Which adventures have the 15th level PFRPG stats for the iconics, or did you just update the 3.5 versions for your testing?
Neat! Which adventures have the 15th level PFRPG stats for the iconics, or did you just update the 3.5 versions for your testing?
I just rolled with the 3.5 versions from earlier APs since they're generally viewed as compatible. I didn't do much (if any) tweaking for them, though, I think I remember throwing in more feats for the Serpent's Skull group due to the elevated acquisition under PFRPG. And, obviously, I had to take the 3.5 versions up a level and consider any new class abilities they gained under PFRPG. I didn't have time for much else, or a full rebuild. And I didn't want to use the Kingmaker group, because they're an odd mix (barbarian, ranger, druid, and monk).
|
|
If dice rolling is not your cup of tea, how about a standard array?
Example, all players get the following stats to be place as they see fit:
17,15,14,13,12,11
or 15,14,13,12,11,10
and so on.
The whole party starts on equal footing and can place the numbers in what ever stats they like.
It helps against possible unreasonable min-maxing, like a player making a cleric, with only 7 in Intel and yet wants to act like he/she is perfectly normal.