|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A munchkin approach is possible regardless of stat gen method. Don't make the mistake of thinking one method is 'better' than the other.
I prefer point buy for the ability to keep everyone in the same power range. There are ways of accomplishing this with die rolls, but point buy tends to be a lot quicker and allows DMs to more control of the power level.
We've spilled a lot of digital ink over this guys, let's keep it civil.
I like the way my group does it. Roll 4d6, reroll 1s, drop the lowest. If you're not happy with your scores you can let the DM roll for you but you HAVE to keep those numbers. Alternatively, you can bump 1 stat below 10 up to 10.
Now we sometimes run into the problem most people grumble at and say the problem is with horrible rolls. Well, if you have no rolls over 16, and at least 2 rolls under 10, then depending on what every else has rolled (not likely since over half of us have fantastic luck with stats, I once rolled 3 18s and 3 16s, watched and confirmed by the DM), the DM may say "Ta hell with it, re-roll".
Usually with this particular system we wind up with, on average, the following array of 10, 13, 14, 14, 16, 18. Somewhere around there. Luckily most of us tend to play builds that aren't MAD. However, out of about 9 players, all but 2 of us never have int as a dump stat, even as a barbarian... I know I myself cannot justify putting less than a 16 or 17 in my character's int stat, simply because I come up with things that would be waaayy beyond my character... Genre Savvy for the win/loss.
I'm not sure point buy actively encourages optimization, but it does offer a lot of control to a player. Problem is, we gamers LOVE to complain (Don't deny it, you're probably complaining about that right now :p), so rather than complain about low dice rolls legitimately, we wind up with complaints of "Argh not enough points!" from those who can't stand to have below X in more than 2 stats.
I'm not sure point buy actively encourages optimization, but it does offer a lot of control to a player. Problem is, we gamers LOVE to complain (Don't deny it, you're probably complaining about that right now :p), so rather than complain about low dice rolls legitimately, we wind up with complaints of "Argh not enough points!" from those who can't stand to have below X in more than 2 stats.
Sure. But it's easy to complain about a 8,10,10,12,12,13 stat array if another guy in the group has rolled 14,15,15,16,17,18. It's alot harder to justify complaining about 15 point-buy if everyone has 15 points.
Sure you won't get 18 on one stat and 14+ on the others but neither will anyone else.If your mage drops 3 attributes to 7 so he can reach that 18 int then sure that's munchkinning, but he's leaving himself open to soooooooo much hurt in the future.
If your GM lets him get away with it, by playing on the PCs strength, but ignoring their weaknesses (because it's "not cool to target my weak save!" or something) then THAT attitude is what promotes munchkining, not the point-buy. If I know that when I get a -2 to willsaves instead of a +1 or at least a +0, I most likely get hit eventually by really nasty magic then I might figure "Hey, is that +1 str really worth that?" and will make alot more balanced characters even with point buy.
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach. I like the idea that I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice-gods, and that would affect the way I play my character.
Funny, "I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice" is exactly the reason I dislike rolling. While a wide disparity in stats doesn't have to cause problems, it usually does.
When I run games I tend to want to use 18 cards divided into 6 stats.
1- randomly divide 18 cards (1-6) 3 per stat, in order
2- add up each stat
3- add 1 to a stat and 6 (max 18)to another stat
3.5(optional) switch any 2 stats
4- adjust for race
The 1 is to make an odd stat even.
The 6 can make a moderate stat good (or a poor stat moderate), if you really want to play a specific class/concept.
This gets you the random/organic-ness of rolling, but keeps the fairness(all characters are around the same power) of point buy (without the cookie cutter sameness). Other methods that also do this;
- start with a stat array and randomly assgin them to stats
- roll 3 stats and then use some formula to determine the other 3 (something like 21 - rolled stat = new stat)
- everyone rolls an array, but then can choose anybody's array
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are 7 days over again?
No Love for stat rolling?
Not from me. Only seething, undying spite and hatred. Or vague dislike. I forget which. They're so similar on the net.
One thing I've noticed on this message board a lot is the general assumption of point buy.
Of course. If you discuss the relative merits of specific classes, archetypes, builds, races, or whatever, it's important to have a standardised baseline. Saying the barbarian is way better than the fighter based on two specific characters where the barbarian rolled all 18s and the fighter all 3s is not very productive.
Now, for me, the way my group has always played, even in 4E, which is almost completely set up for point buying, is to do some sort of stat rolling.
I did away with it a long time ago (and had a very effective method* of convincing some GMs to do the same). That was before 3.5e even, I think.
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach.
Actually, I dislike rolling for pretty much the same reason.
I like the idea that I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice-gods, and that would affect the way I play my character.
I hate that idea. I want to play the character I envisioned, not the one the dice stuck me with.
Coupled with my observations that most people really just want a decent chance to get overpowered stats with little to no chance to get screwed by the dice, I feel strongly compelled to not use dice rolling, ever.
It's always "Roll X dice and discard the Y lowest. Reroll all 1s. Roll Z stats and discard the A lowest stats. Then raise 1 stat by 1 point. If you don't end up with decent stats, you get a do-over" or something similar. At that point, who are you kidding? Desna is really pissed! The chance for bad luck is all but eliminated.
Want the equivalent of 40 point purchase stats? Ask the GM to use the purchase method with 40 points to spend on stuff. It's only marginally more transparent that you want extremely powerful stuff than those dice rolling methods you need 10 pages to describe all the contingencies you can use to eliminate the bad dice results. Be honest about your hunger for power I say!
Otherwise, it seems it's just a lesson in optimization, how to budget your abilities to get the most bang for your buck.
Powergamers will be powergamers. The guys who optimise the hell out of their characters will do so with dice rolling methods just as much as with point buy/purchase. It might be one less thing they can shamelessly min/max, but do you really think they will have well-rounded, deep and more-than-two-dimensional characters just because you let the dice determine what overpowered ability array they're going to use?
Whenever one of my players says he wants to use point buy, I ask them why. Usually they admit that even the generous 25 point epic purchase I give them is sometimes not enough for them and they want a decent shot at a character with multiple 18s or something similarly powerful.
Of course, I already told them that if they really want to put their fate in Desna's hands, I'll let them:
You roll 4d6, discard lowest, 6 times. I watch and write down the 6 numbers you roll. Those are the 6 numbers you are going to use for ability scores for the whole campaign. Those exact numbers. Other than the discard lowest part, there are no re-rolls. If your character croaks for any reason and you bring in a new one, you use the same numbers.
That way, they accept the chance to get insane numbers by also accepting the very real chance to be stuck with crappy numbers - and there's no way to weasel out of this by "accidentally" having a character die, and there are no re-rolls, since Desna can be fickle and won't be second-guessed or cheated.
No takers so far, big wonder! :D
*Funny story. In the first 3e group I was part of, we started with rolling. Point buy was the new thing, everyone was used to rolling. It was a long campaign, and during that campaign, I looked into PB more and realised that it's hands down the better method. So for the follow-up campaign, I asked the DM - begged, even - to use that instead of dice rolling. I even had a decent argument, as one lucky bastard got 2 18s out of the dice in our first campaign and his character was really powerful because of it.
He wouldn't hear of it.
Of course, in the 2nd campaign, I was that lucky bastard. 2 18s! Woohoo. It was Stargate using d20 Modern rules, I played a Strong Hero/Soldier with 18s in Dex and Con.
Unsurprisingly, for our 3rd campaign, we switched to PB.
|
Most of the campaigns I have been involved with use point buy. The few that use stat rolling are generally lenient and allow 2 or 3 attempts to get a suitable array of numbers.
The problem with rolling isn't that I may end up with average ability scores. The problem is that I may end up with average scores and someone else gets lucky and has multiple 18's and nothing under 15. I personally believe that everyone should start relatively even in wealth, ability scores, etc and grow from there.
I've seen the same thing with hit points. More and more groups are going to predetermined hit points per level based on hit dice. I've also seen roll twice and take the best and roll once with a minimum of 1/2 your hit dice type. It only takes a couple of poor rolls for a barbarian to fall behind the curve in hit points.
Is point-buy just assumed for a standardized method's sake, or is this the way that people play in their games?
Its the Pathfinder Society standard and most people are finding out its the best way to go.
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach.
The powergamers want to roll stats. Trust me on this. Point buy is how you reign them into something realistic.
4d6 drop the lowest, while it sounds like you could get an a variety of stat scores, statistically speaking, you can count on the stats being higher than a 20 point.
|
The powergamers want to roll stats. Trust me on this. Point buy is how you reign them into something realistic.
Exactly. It seemed like in the 2e days every other fighter had a 18/00 strength despite the freakishly long statistical odds (something like a 1000 to 1 given 4d6 drop one and that you can assign stats). And every single one of them would swear to god that they "rolled" it. Uh huh.
My GM lets us roll 4d6 and drop the lowest. Once. If we roll badly, then we have to use the heroic npc stats (15,14,13,12,10,8). Most times, we end up using the heroic npc stats. He also let's us reroll our stats every five levels, though. So far, we still end up using the heroic npc stats. I have to say, after being stuck with a decent variety of stats, I'm not really missing the bigger numbers. Our group does just as well without them.
As noted, this has been discussed to death before. Some people like gambling during character creation, some don't.
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach.
Judging from the previous threads we've had on the subject, many "I like rolling" advocates are munchkin-y, too. E.g. they use rolling methods that average a 30, 40 or 50 point buy compared to the more common 15, 20 or 25 point buys.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The powergamers want to roll stats. Trust me on this. Point buy is how you reign them into something realistic.
No, it does not. They will dump stat and min/max scores to achieve the best possible array for their characters.
Game rules do not stop powergaming. Only honest communication can.
|
|
The powergamers want to roll stats. Trust me on this. Point buy is how you reign them into something realistic.No, it does not. They will dump stat and min/max scores to achieve the best possible array for their characters.
Game rules do not stop powergaming. Only honest communication can.
Sometimes. Often though playas are gonna play. For many power gamers optimization is the aspect of the game they enjoy the most. Telling them to stop optimizing is likely to fall on deaf ears and they will just min-max regardless or they won't really have a lot of fun. PB and other character construction rules lets them do what they enjoy without completely throwing the balance of the game out the window.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am pretty old school, but the 3d6 method has so variation. It also forces the player into something different from what he wants to play, if he gets several bad rolls (pretty easy to do, actually). 4d6 drop lowest has the same problem.
Now, when I was first shown point-buy, I didn't like it, because I was used to rolling for stats, and the idea that someone could just pick an 18 seemed wrong. But lately? I have grown more and more enamored of the 20- and 25-point buy system with the Pathfinder values. You can build a solid character on 20-points and a very good character on 25-points.
For example: Someone in the group has their heart set on playing a swashbuckling rogue. They need Str, Dex, Con, Int, and Char; not necessarily extravagant scores in those abilities, but they all have a reason.
With 20-point buy, that character could get the following (before racial modifiers)
Strength 14 (5 points)
Dexterity 14 (5 points)
Constitution 12 (2 points)
Intelligence 12 (2 points)
Wisdom 11 (1 points)
Charisma (14 (5 points)
Is he a super-uber character that is going to overpower at 1st-level? No, but he has no real weakness, and it fits his Errol Flynn concept. Strong, dextrous, smart, and witty, and able to take some punches.
Now, let's look at rolling for that same character concept. I won't have him assign his stats in order, either. I'll even let him roll seven times, and keep the six highest. Fair?
=12
=13
=8
=7
=12
=12
=11
We end up with 13; 12; 12; 12; 11; 8, for an 8-point buy.
Strength 13 (3 points)
Dexterity 12 (2 points)
Constitution 11 (1 point)
Intelligence 12 (2 points)
Wisdom 8 (-2 points)
Charisma 12 (2 points)
Is it playable? Sure. Did I get good rolls? Yes. But I could have just as easily gotten horrible rolls or a bunch of very high scores. In my mind, point-buy just makes things easier by letting your players choose their own path, instead of having to play what the dice say. It is their character, let them make it how they want it to be.
And that's all I've got to say about that.
Master Arminas
|
Both systems are as much munchkin-y as you let them be.
Point-buy makes every player equal and allows you to play what you want to play, with a risk of all characters looking the same on the sheet, and more-than-heavy stat-dumping that the player will try to excuse with silly roleplay (or the allways fun "who cares if I have 7 Charisma and 7 Intelligence ? I'm awesome and I'm a born actor, I roleplay like a god !").
Rolling creates disparity, and most of the time, someone will ask to reroll or suggest it by looking like he isn't having fun at all with a character sucking at it's job in the group because of low stats. Because the DM isn't a jerk and it's only a game, the player will reroll it's awesomely bad character... and someone else will ask to reroll too, and finally, everyone would be happy of their stats once they all have incredible ones. Some people want to roll only for the chances to get an insane point-buy equivalent, not the risk to be sub-par. Seen it, been there.
Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach. I like the idea that I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice-gods, and that would affect the way I play my character. Otherwise, it seems it's just a lesson in optimization, how to budget your abilities to get the most bang for your buck.
Players are allowed (within the confines of the balanced rules) to pick their feats, skills, class abilities, known-spells, equipment (subject to availability), traits and actions. Does it really seem muchkin-y to also let them (within the confines of the balanced rules) pick the foundation of that character? Really?
I don't mind there being optional different ways to design a character, but it seems... odd... to draw the line in the sand suddenly at ability scores.
To me it's no more max-minning to let a player design a Fighter with a high Strength score than it is to let that same player pick Power Attack as his 1st level feat instead of rolling on a table and telling them "congratulations... you got Weapon Focus(sling)".
Munchkin is stacking a massive number of improbable choices to make a broken character. Letting a wizard hit Int 18 (if the point-buy allows it) not so much. If you don't like dump-stats, don't allow them.
I don't know, Greg Stafford has the best idea dealing with stats for Pendragon. However . . .
Both have their downsides.
In the Real World, not everyone starts out with the same circumstances. There are people with disabilities (Para-Olympics), who don't know where their next meal is coming from, etc. all the way up to the 1% that the OWS folks are screaming about.
Point Buy doesn't make any sense if the DM is seeking to make the world seem as real as possible. In a Versimilitude sense -- Point Buy sucks and it's communist. However, the Universe isn't communist. A Being that comes into the world is giving his circumstances and he is to make the best of them.
HOWEVER -- if you are approaching the game from a Hollywood Movie perspective . . .
HELL YEAH, POINT BUY ALL THE WAY, MAN!
I like rolling dice because it gives me something organic to work with. I'd never play a smart sorcerer by point buy , but i might throw the off 13 into int once cha and con are covered.
It also encourages martial classes. Casters are dual stated: casting stat and con. If i have a boatload of 14's i can make a decent monk or paladin out of that. Point buy its really hard to do a decent monk.
Not really. You can make a decent monk a 20-point.
Strength 14 (5 points)
Dexterity 14 (5 points)
Constitution 14 (5 points)
Inteligence 12 (2 points)
Wisdom 14 (5 points)
Charisma 8 (-2 points)
He's not spectacular, but he is certainly workable. And this is before racial mods (human for a +2 to one stat, bonus feat, and extra skill points).
With a 25-point buy, bump the Int and Charisma by 2 each. He is not optimized, but would be a fun (and viable) 1st level character to run. Trying to build a monk with random rolls is (mostly) an exercise in futility unless you roll high across the board.
Master Arminas
|
|
I like the idea of 4d6 and pick your stats. ie looking for a rogue character to play. You need high dex,int and good cha you roll 17, 11, 12, 12, 16, 16. Put the 17 in the dex, 16 for int and cha, 12s for con/wis and the 11 in str. It comes to me as realistic and you get the character you want. He may not be strong but he gets all the bennies of a rogue. Plus who wants to play a character who has 16's across the the board. Plus the GM will probaby make you re-roll anyway. Ok off my soapbox. :)
Genth Morstag: That is a 38-point buy. THIRTY-EIGHT. Even on 4d6 drop the lowest, you have to have some hot die to get that array.
Master Arminas
My group does 4d6 drop lowest reroll ones before dropping lowest.
Yea, we like to be powerful.
In all my experience with each method it really boils down to this:
- Optimizers prefer point buy. They detest the chance for low stats and want to buy ANY stat they want WHERE they want it. And they are all too happy to buy down stats to 7 in areas that won't affect their build.
- Power Gamers often like rolling stats. They don't mind playing several lack luster characters to get to the one that is over the top.
- As a role player I try to convince any group to use Organic Rolling. It does a good job of eliminating the worst of each method. The only drawback is that this method can make it hard to play a specific build or concept you may have had in mind. It is often the favored method of players who don't mind letting their stats influence what character they make.
As far as why point buy is the thing used when talking about class comparison or builds... I agree with a previous poster: It is necessary to have a uniform basis to compare stuff. And since optimizers love comparing stuff, they use their beloved point buy rather than the default array.
I also agree with a previous poster about another topic: If you have a massive set of weird rules around your rolling... oh like, 5d6 drop 2, reroll ones, six sets with three stat choices each. ect... then you kind of missed the point of rolling in the first place. Just settle on a massive stat array (like all 18s) or high value point buy and make life simpler on your power gaming friends. Unlike that previous poster I have NEVER encountered such bizarre methods in real life... although I have seen it in web based games.
|
I discuss power level with my players.
Then I give them all the same stat array, to suit the power level they want.
currently we are playing with:
16
15
14
12
12
10
They wanted to feel heroic, weren't in the mood for 'interesting' weak stats and didn't want to smash through pre-written encounters.
That's a summary of half an hour of interesting chat.
Before that I had a group who wanted to be 'of the people' but high-achievers, so we went with
16
12
12
10
10
8
Which worked for creating the blacksmith-gone-to-war and humble-priest-taking-up his people's-cause type of characters they wanted.
My experience is that this method works much better than potin-buy or rolling - YMMV
- As a role player I try to convince any group to use Organic Rolling. It does a good job of eliminating the worst of each method. The only drawback is that this method can make it hard to play a specific build or concept you may have had in mind. It is often the favored method of players who don't mind letting their stats influence what character they make.Organic Rolling? I'm not familiar with the term.
It is where you roll your stats In Order: For example, you roll strength first then dexterity then constitution, ect. Usually the method allows for one stat switch to make it easier to make a specific concept.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
- As a role player I try to convince any group to use Organic Rolling. It does a good job of eliminating the worst of each method. The only drawback is that this method can make it hard to play a specific build or concept you may have had in mind. It is often the favored method of players who don't mind letting their stats influence what character they make.Organic Rolling? I'm not familiar with the term.
It is where you roll your stats In Order: For example, you roll strength first then dexterity then constitution, ect. Usually the method allows for one stat switch to make it easier to make a specific concept.
Ah, the method where you roll first, then come up with a concept.
Completely at odds with coming up with an interesting concept first.
May it burn in a fire.
|
|
I don't see the benefit of this. Some classes are better with a lot of decent stats, and some are good with one good stat, and the rest don't matter as much...I discuss power level with my players.
Then I give them all the same stat array, to suit the power level they want.
And, at my table, we could totally talk about this and come to an amicable solution.
The point isn't 'balance'; the point is that every player is happy with what they've got and thinks it will suit their character without feeling 'behind' another PC.
You could say that point buy advantages non-MAD characters, or whatever, you could argue until you're blue in the face about anything you want to if you were so inclined, that's how complex RPGs and humanity interact.
We prefer friendly discussion and conclusions which leave every player and the GM feeling comfortable with the game.
I have, in the past, offered a choice of three arrays which felt equally 'powerful': one very even, one mixed, one polarised.
That worked too, but only because it suited those players and that game.
Am I making more sense?
And to clarify a bit, I'm not opposed to point buy in other people's games, but I've just never used it, and was wondering why other seemed to. My group does 7 rolls of 4d6 drop 1, then drop the lowest stat. No rerolls past that.
For the record, that averages out to a Pathfinder point buy of about 25. As a munchkin/powergamer, I'd gladly take that rolling system over a 20 point buy (as is used in Pathfinder Society play) or a 15 point buy (which is the "normal" point buy, according to the core rulebook).
A munchkin approach is possible regardless of stat gen method. Don't make the mistake of thinking one method is 'better' than the other.
I prefer point buy for the ability to keep everyone in the same power range. There are ways of accomplishing this with die rolls, but point buy tends to be a lot quicker and allows DMs to more control of the power level.
We've spilled a lot of digital ink over this guys, let's keep it civil.
This, this... a hundred times this. (Although as a GM I once did the dice rolling... and some players were very lucky (some more so than others), others had about average luck... but one player (invariably) had the crappiest luck (or dice) and had maybe two stats in the low "teens" (like 13 or 14).
So, for me and my groups(s) it is point buy... keeps everyone on the same page. (Or same power range as TOZ said).
Dean
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea of 4d6 and pick your stats. ie looking for a rogue character to play. You need high dex,int and good cha you roll 17, 11, 12, 12, 16, 16. Put the 17 in the dex, 16 for int and cha, 12s for con/wis and the 11 in str. It comes to me as realistic and you get the character you want.
Both actually wrong. It has nothing to do with "realism" either way (both are going to have characters that are way above the average member of their race, which has an all-10s(or11s) array before racial modifiers.
And you don't get the character you want to play.
Let's pick a less overpowered array (note that the one you posted would translate to 38 point in PF purchase. That's 13 points beyond the most powerful purchase point allowance in the book.)
15 14 13 12 10 8. You can't play a focussed wizard with that. As a wizard, it makes sense to have a really decent int score, since so much of the class's abilities depend on it.
You can't really play that with 15 as the highest stat.
Or you have 18 14 10 10 10 10. Might be good for a wizard. Tough luck if you wanted to play, say, a monk. You're screwed. Is that 18 wis and 14 dex? That means a really low con and str. Good luck dealing or eating damage. And if you want to play a tripping expert, you'll have to put that 14 into int instead. You'll be easier to hit than a tied-up corpse!
Some character concepts work best (or require) focussed attributes (i.e. one or two high ability scores with the rest not that important) while others need several decent abilities (they can get by without any really high ones, but not having several decent ones will make playing it all but impossible).
Plus who wants to play a character who has 16's across the the board.
16s across the board would be good. It's possible with every single dice rolling method (unless they change the basic assumption that starting ability scores are between 3 and 18 because they're 3x1-6), but note that this quite overpowered array is absolutely impossible unless you get to use 60 points more than twice the points allowance the highest purchase method grants (all assuming we're talking before racial modifiers - but still, no standard race can get anywhere near all 16s with 25 point purchase)
Plus the GM will probaby make you re-roll anyway.
Why?
And, more to the point: Why bother with the rolling then? You roll too bad? Roll again! Roll too well? Roll again. Can't we just assume we rolled just right and skip the rolling? If only there was a method of doing that. Oh, wait...
I'm sometimes baffled by the idea that being able to fully control the creation of your character, like you already do everytime you pick feats or skills, pretty much makes you a bad roleplayer or filthy "optimizer".
Oh, let me explain: There are people who are deathly afraid of any change. They want to keep doing things that are wrong, because "it was good enough for us in the good old days", so they need to fling poo at the other side to shame others into being brain dead yesmen like themselves.
(See, both sides can talk crap about the other).
I've had my players roll stats, I've had them run point-buy. Generally speaking, my players prefer to roll, and we tend to candy-stat at our table. This works for us, generally, because we trust each-other and have known each-other for a good long time, at this point.
When I'm running the game for people I am less familiar with, I tend to be more strict.
But to answer the OP's question, part of the bias on this forum has its roots in the fact that many people here play, or have played, Paizo's modules, which are balanced for a specific range of stats. Too far above or below and the power scale of the adventure is thrown out of whack.
Beyond that, Point Buy does offer the advantage of being able to know exactly the range of power you have to tailor your adventures for. It's one less thing the DM has to worry about, and the DM has to worry about quite a lot. Due to the drop in likelyhood that you will have PC's of widely varying power levels, Point Buy is also a lot easier a method to use when learning the ropes of the game.
But really, it's all a matter of preference, play-style, and finding that golden medium that works for you and your group.
|
|
The fun fact is that EVERYONE optimizes his/her character. Even those people who play "nerfed" characters due to a weird stat array. And if it's not for combat, then it is for versatility, roleplay, or DM pity - we all know that the best way to have it work when attempting something dangerous/difficult is either to be really good at it (lots of bonus to attack or to skill), or to look like we, as a player, deserve to be cool and do something nice with a sub-par character.
After all, if we play an unconventional character, we should get some easier roleplay situations to compensate, no ? Or are you honestly saying you just like feeling weak and not contributing a lot in a party ?
One thing I've noticed on this message board a lot is the general assumption of point buy. Now, for me, the way my group has always played, even in 4E, which is almost completely set up for point buying, is to do some sort of stat rolling. Is point-buy just assumed for a standardized method's sake, or is this the way that people play in their games?Personally, I dislike point buy, because it gives the game a more munchkin-y approach. I like the idea that I could get god-stats, or I could get screwed by the dice-gods, and that would affect the way I play my character. Otherwise, it seems it's just a lesson in optimization, how to budget your abilities to get the most bang for your buck.
In my game PCs roll 4d6, drop the lowest and place to suit. I think this gives enough flexibility to run the character the player wants without agonizing over every point. I've had any number of players roll, take them in order, and then figure out what they want to play.
I think it depends on the type of game being played as to whether rolling or point buy is better. In an AP that requires certain PC power levels / types and assumes everyone is at a more or less identical level / xp total point buy might be better. In a sandbox game where there is more player choice and the possibility of PCs level etc. varying, rolling is probably fine.
Mine is sandbox. When people roll in my game everyone is hoping the other guy rolls high (his PC may be the one to save your butt). I haven't had any significant whining about "his PC is better than mine". Maybe I've been lucky there though...
Let's pick a less overpowered array (note that the one you posted would translate to 38 point in PF purchase. That's 13 points beyond the most powerful purchase point allowance in the book.)
Its not that overpowered.
What your point buy isn't considering is that some stats are less useful than others. For a fighter charisma is a dump stat. Having a 12 instead of a 7 matters far, far less than having a 17 strength as opposed to a 20. The same with a wizard and their strength score.
Dear lord, no. I hate random chargen with a passion.
I just started a game that required it, 4d6, drop lowest. My first attempt yielded the following 7,7,8,13,13,14 at which the DM took a look and said "Try again." The next set: 14,8,7,8,11,10
Did I mention I hate rolling stats? Fortunately for most people, it's an extremely dated concept. Fortunately for me, the DM is merciful and let me keep trying until I came up with something with considerably less suck and one stat as high as 15.
Should've just used point buy.
Did I mention I hate rolling stats? Fortunately for most people, it's an extremely dated concept. Fortunately for me, the DM is merciful and let me keep trying until I came up with something with considerably less suck and one stat as high as 15.
There is a built in mercy rule
Did I mention I hate rolling stats? Fortunately for most people, it's an extremely dated concept. Fortunately for me, the DM is merciful and let me keep trying until I came up with something with considerably less suck and one stat as high as 15.There is a built in mercy rule
If you say so. No DM is bound by it and this DM just decided that the equivalent of a 1 or -4 point build wasn't going to survive in his game in which he likes to pull no punches.
I'm a dice roller for stats. I'm no fan of point buy which, in my experience, tends to exacerbate the differences between MAD and SAD classes as well as between power gamers and non-power gamers and experienced players and non-experienced players. I have enough diversity along these lines at my table that these are the differences I want to control for, not the differences between individual characters generated by the rolls.