
![]() |

You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension - a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of mind. You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into the Pathfinder Point Buy Zone.
The hero's of literature, movies, sports figures, and real life personalities are all created equal, this is after all the Pathfinder Pt Buy Zone. Create these "hero's" with only 20 pts and all no higher than starting level
Conan
Gandalf
Aragorn
Bilbo Baggins
King Arthur
Merlin
Julies Caesar
Martin Luther King
JFK
Albert Einstein
Peyton Manning
John Elway
Larry Bird
Babe Ruth
Lou Fragigno
Joan of Arc
William Wallace
Henry V
Henry VIII
Patton
William Rommel
Micheal Jordan
Jesus
Gandhi
Tarzan
Bruce Lee
George W Bush
Barak Obama
This is after all a place of equality and ALL are created equal
Have fun with just 20 pts

Ben Kent |
The hero's of literature, movies, sports figures, and real life personalities are all created equal, this is after all the Pathfinder Pt Buy Zone. Create these "hero's" with only 20 pts and all no higher than starting level
There are a number of flawed premises here.
1) It's not stated anywhere that every character in the Pathfinder universe is "20 points". Or equal to each other. I personally have always assumed it varies, and that at "20 points", the PCs were on the high end of point-values - but not the extreme.
2) Pathfinder has - excluding Strength - very few ways to compare stats to real-world figures. There's no good examples of "how Charismatic" a 16 Charisma is. Was MLK Jr an 18? Was Ghandi? Or were they "16s", allowing for even <more> charismatic fantasy figures? What if they were just "15's".
3) Many of those figures, at the point that they were legendary, would have additional levels or HD. At 1st level, they all "sucked", by definition - they were first level. When they got to 4th level, they sucked much less - as they were 4th level.
TL;DR - This is only a problem if you make it a problem; the difficulty here is the constraints you put on the design process, not the idea of point-value characters (or even level advancement).

Bruunwald |

I'm not going to argue the premise because, like a lot of nerds over the history of the game, my friends and I have statted up many a hero from both real life and fiction over the years.
But I will praise you for putting Tarzan on the list. Once, way back in the mid-nineties, I attempted to stat him as a ranger, and my two friends Jason and Jason, tried to tell me I was crazy.
But come on... Tarzan totally has levels in ranger.
I notice Robin Hood is not on the list. Is this because of the alignment arguments? Robin Hood is totally NG, by the way. He only breaks the law when the Prince and Sheriff twist it for evil uses. Before and after that he followed the King's just law to the letter as a soldier and a lord.

![]() |

I'm not going to argue the premise because, like a lot of nerds over the history of the game, my friends and I have statted up many a hero from both real life and fiction over the years.
But I will praise you for putting Tarzan on the list. Once, way back in the mid-nineties, I attempted to stat him as a ranger, and my two friends Jason and Jason, tried to tell me I was crazy.
But come on... Tarzan totally has levels in ranger.
I notice Robin Hood is not on the list. Is this because of the alignment arguments? Robin Hood is totally NG, by the way. He only breaks the law when the Prince and Sheriff twist it for evil uses. Before and after that he followed the King's just law to the letter as a soldier and a lord.
Actually... I was just popping names on randomly
Robin Hood would be a great one as would be many others I did not add.
There are a number of flawed premises here.
1) It's not stated anywhere that every character in the Pathfinder universe is "20 points". Or equal to each other. I personally have always assumed it varies, and that at "20 points", the PCs were on the high end of point-values - but not the extreme.2) Pathfinder has - excluding Strength - very few ways to compare stats to real-world figures. There's no good examples of "how Charismatic" a 16 Charisma is. Was MLK Jr an 18? Was Ghandi? Or were they "16s", allowing for even <more> charismatic fantasy figures? What if they were just "15's".
3) Many of those figures, at the point that they were legendary, would have additional levels or HD. At 1st level, they all "sucked", by definition - they were first level. When they got to 4th level, they sucked much less - as they were 4th level.
TL;DR - This is only a problem if you make it a problem; the difficulty here is the constraints you put on the design process, not the idea of point-value characters (or even level advancement).
Actually if you played 1st ed they DO state comparisons. Hitler and Julius Caesar would both have been an 18. It also said something along the lines as Star Athletes and dancers would be 18, and guys like Einstein would be 18. So yes there are comparisons.
As for the level... even at level 8 or 12 or 16 it would not matter that much as that is 4 PT's to add.
My point to all of this is... I see people say PT buy is fair. Well... what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Adventures are not equal. not Conan to Aragorn to Henry V to Gandhi.