| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This forum has a strange and rather hostile definition of power gaming.
I personally prefer 20 point buys to 15 point buys, though I can play in both. with 15 point buy sets, it is almost mandatory to dump stats when playing an MAD class. I personally dislike having to dump stats, especially cha, which unfortunately is one of the easier stats to dump for most classes.
Most of my characters between a 15 and a 20 point buy tend to work almost identical for most functions, they just tend to lack dump stats. As Insain put it, I'm not looking for a perfect character, I'm just looking for one that's good at their area of expertise and pretty average outside of that.
I don't care if someone wants to invest into a dump stat, so long as they make it an honest part of their character and take into account whether or not their dump stat buys them points at the cost of unnecessary stress the rest of party has to deal with.
Someone mentioned a paladin with INT and WIS scores of 7. An INT score of 10 is considered average. Scores of 8-9 are considered below average, and scores of 6-7 are well below average. In the newest intelligence quotient tests, a score of 100 is considered the median average. A score of 70 is just at the bottom end of being two standard deviations below the median. Such a score falls within what is considered borderline intellectual functioning. Combined with a WIS score of 7, you're effectively playing a character who is borderline disabled AND lacks common sense and/or a proper survival instinct.
Frankly, I would probably have a problem with this. If you're specifically looking to play some sort of savant character, or if you want to play a pure tank who basically defers to another character for direction (think of an even more extreme case of Caramon and Raistlin, from Dragonlance ), or if you have some *plan* for the character to function! then that's one thing. But if the idea is to propose a character who succeeds in the mechanics of the game that matters to their class on account of dump stats that they don't intend to take into account in the game (or that they don't care how they will affect the game)... then forget it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I run using 25 PB, but no bonus points for dumping. It's only one PB higher than a 20PB player that dumped a stat. It really helps players who want to try an oddball concept, but don't have the stats to accomplish it otherwise.
|
I prefer 20 point buy but there’s nothing wrong 15 point buy. I’ve played a few 15 point buy games and the characters were fine, even the *gasp* monks/paladins.
The trick to playing a monk/paladin is to get over the idea that you must have high scores in all relevant stats to be competent. You don’t.
This forum has a strange and rather hostile definition of power gaming.
Any kind of mechanics based conception of the game is met with a significant amount of hostility.
The example above of a character with dumped intelligence is a fairly consistent one despite the fact that a dumped intelligence already has mechanical penalties built into the system. I see a lot of people bringing this sort of thing up over and over as though the person who dumped a score is getting away scott free, and that is just false.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My group does 15 point buy and we do not let players drop ability scores below 10 (that's just cheesy).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This forum has a strange and rather hostile definition of power gaming.Any kind of mechanics based conception of the game is met with a significant amount of hostility.
The example above of a character with dumped intelligence is a fairly consistent one despite the fact that a dumped intelligence already has mechanical penalties built into the system. I see a lot of people bringing this sort of thing up over and over as though the person who dumped a score is getting away scott free, and that is just false.
So how do YOU roleplay a low ability score? Mechanics are only a part of the game are they not?
So how do YOU roleplay a low ability score? Mechanics are only a part of the game are they not?This forum has a strange and rather hostile definition of power gaming.Any kind of mechanics based conception of the game is met with a significant amount of hostility.
The example above of a character with dumped intelligence is a fairly consistent one despite the fact that a dumped intelligence already has mechanical penalties built into the system. I see a lot of people bringing this sort of thing up over and over as though the person who dumped a score is getting away scott free, and that is just false.
I don't. I ignore ability scores completely when we're out of combat.
How do I roleplay a man with low intelligence? I don't take knowledge skills.
How do I roleplay someone socially inept? Don't take social skills
Base stats= Combat stats (Not for roleplaying)
Skills= Out of combat stats (For roleplaying)
So it would be fair to say that there is no real attempt to engage in any interaction other than stating, "My character does X." That's... disappointing - in my humble opinion.
More important than my opinion, though, is the fact that a lack of skills doesn't accurately reflect a low Ability Score where in-game interaction is concerned. All it reflects is ignorance or a lack of training in some area. Ignorance and lower-than-average intelligence, for instance, are two completely different things. Again, an INT of 7 could indicate someone who is borderline mentally damaged. Comparing someone like that to an individual who is mentally brilliant but decided to focus in fine arts instead of sciences (lack of Knowledge skills) is simply inaccurate. Or imagine me trying to say my character's STR, DEX, and CON of 8 is best reflected by an absence of the Acrobatics, Climb, Escape Artist, Fly, Ride, Sleight of Hand, Stealth, and Swim skills. Congratulations: NFL athletes don't have those skills, either.
See, this is why I separate ability scores from skills.
The fact that ability scores are tied to combat viability makes them mostly improper to be used for role play.
To be ACTUALLY good at say, swinging the club you will have to sacrifice a stat, such as charisma or int. However most men who are good at fighting in fiction also are pretty good talkers and average or better intelligence.
The easiest way to interpret these things is to just think of Ability scores as your stats in combat and your skills as your stats out of combat. What's the difference in diplomacy checks of someone with 7 cha to someone with 10 cha? Just 2 assuming it's a class skill and same number of ranks. This means that someone with 7 charisma can still talk to people fine if they actually invest the skill points to do so.
TL;DR We already have a system to decide what people do out of combat, it's called skills and it requires investment per level. Ability scores are a system used for judgements in combat.
Incidentally my fighter doesn't have those skills either because I spent my out of combat resource (skill points) on other stuff.
How would I roleplay it? Not offer amazing ideas. Or I would defer to people who are more obviously capable in that area. Don't take it personally when someone insults my intelligence because I'm aware of the fact that I am a little slow within the context of the character. Try to avoid making inferences that require knowledge checks.... etc.
|
|
How would I roleplay it? Not offer amazing ideas. Or I would defer to people who are more obviously capable in that area. Don't take it personally when someone insults my intelligence because I'm aware of the fact that I am a little slow within the context of the character. Try to avoid making inferences that require knowledge checks.... etc.
I agree this is a great way to roleplay a low int. If I were to give my character a low int thats how I would try (and hopefully pull off) to roleplay it.
Role play him however YOU want to. Don't let combat stats get in the way of your role-play.
Steps
1. Make a character, decide how you want him to be and how you would role-play him.
2. Pick his ability scores in a way that gives you the ability to do what he needs to do in combat to carry his own weight, IGNORE STEP ONE FOR THIS PART
3. Use skill points and possibly skill focus to make him good at what he should be good at according to step one. If you don't have enough skill points then go back to step 2 and get more Int OR alternate skill points.
For me what makes a character unique and interesting is how I role-play them out of combat. In combat that doesn't matter because he's slashing things or casting spells.
Stop thinking of stats as important part of your role-play, they really aren't. Think of them like you think of your spell DCs, something that you should only worry about in combat. If you're speaking to a king about your reward will you be using
A. Diplomacy
B. Your attack bonus
C. Your Dominate person DC
D. your bluff
(Hint: It's not B and probably not C)
See, this is why I separate ability scores from skills.
The fact that ability scores are tied to combat viability makes them mostly improper to be used for role play.
Please elaborate. I'm not trying to be a smartass, but I really don't see how you arrived at this. Combat is only a part of the game. Ability Scores tie in just as much to Skills, and the many functions they play outside of combat.
To be ACTUALLY good at say, swinging the club you will have to sacrifice a stat, such as charisma or int.
I just don't see how that's a valid assumption. What is this "In order to be good at X, you have to suck at Y" concept based on, other than the requirements of a game's Point Buy Table? How does that have anything to do with any number of heroic background themes goi back centuries or even millennia?
On one extreme, legendary heroes born to kings and nobles studied at the feet (err, hooves?) or Chiron, who didn't just teach them to be great warriors, but made letters and sciences available to them, and the arts as well. On the other extreme, you have the Count of Monte Cristo, who studied in a prison dungeon under a brilliant, well-read swordsman.
The easiest way to interpret these things is to just think of Ability scores as your stats in combat and your skills as your stats out of combat. What's the difference in diplomacy checks of someone with 7 cha to someone with 10 cha? Just 2 assuming it's a class skill and same number of ranks. This means that someone with 7 charisma can still talk to people fine if they actually invest the skill points to do so.
No, what that means is that, through study, you are able to function despite your "handicap". Your character's study of Diplomacy doesn't mean that he's no longer socially inept, physically unattractive, a combination of both, or even worse.
There's a difference, after all, between the unassuming, shy, and reserved farmer's son (unskilled, CHA 10) and the sleazy, lecherous old chamberlain whose mastery of the High Speech and the legal code of the Duke's Court keeps him employed (CHA 7, a number of skill points invested in Diplomacy, etc.). Your proposal ignores it, though. It reduces PC and NPC alike to mere numbers.
Yes, because the game is literally mere numbers that augment a d20 roll in response to our roleplay.
How you want to fluff those numbers is the actual role play aspect, stop placing such an emphasis on stats, it's blinding you from the bigger and more fun picture.
By 15 point buy you have to dump a stat, or multiple stats in order to function at your combat role, at least that's the case for Martials. Therefore it makes more sense to role-play however you want as long as you find the numbers that augment your D20 role to back it up.
It makes far more sense to go with "In order to be good at X you can only be decent at Y" which is what my style of role play allows than to go with "In order to be good at X you must suck at Y" which is what interpreting your ability scores as items that force you to role play a specific way does.
With 15 point buy you cannot create a "Strong, smart, charismatic hero" because you have to sacrifice Strength to be smart and dashing or you have to sacrifice mental attributes to be strong.
If you think of charisma and int to be the factors that make you smart or charismatic then it's impossible to realize that concept.
If you think of Diplomacy, Knowledge, profession, sense motive as the factors that make you smart and dashing that concept is possible.
Aside from that you run into oddities like every martial having above average wisdom because of will saves.
Alternatively you can use 20 or 25 point buy, no dump, and literally interpret the stats as character traits.
In are group we always have 6 characters, even if it means playing multiple PC's. We all believe it makes for a better (though more time consuming) overall gaming experience.
We usually role the dice (4d6) when we make the PC's for it just seems to start the overall AP with a build-up of excitement you don't get with the point buy system (maybe because it's a role paying game). Though if we are making character's to test and see how much enjoyment we get out of that class, we will use a 20 point buy.
Now as the GM it adds a little bit of work at my end, but I usually just add 2 points to either one stat or 1 point to 2 stats, along with a bonus feat. Then when the NPC's come into play I will give them a couple of traits to sweeten the pot, and in the end it all comes out in the wash.
I have even brought in a couple more reinforcements at times, if the group plows through the initial encounter.
I just find that when the players get most of what they want they seem to be more excited to be there to play at every session and for the little extra time it costs me, well worth it.
A human fighter 15 pb can easily start with a 17 Str, 13 dex and 14 Con. WITHOUT any 7s,8s,or 9s. At fourth level, eighth, twelfth level you can increase those higher physical stats. Assuming the rules are followed you can use wbl to go EVEN HIGHER. Why do you need to dump stats? Are you a greedy filthy glory seeking CHEESE MONGER! You can be powerful without stat dump and balanced. GM's usually like balance.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
See, there are two camps on roleplay and ability scores.
One is the "your scores should inform your roleplay" camp. These players think a 7 Int character should be played as mentally deficient in some fashion. A 7 Cha character should be unpleasant to be around.
Two is the "your scores have only their mechanical roles, play how you want" camp. These players see their 7 Int reflected in their penalties to Int-based skills. A 7 Cha character who maxes out all the interaction skills might as well not even have the low charisma.
Usually when there is a hostile accusation of powergaming, it's group one accusing group two. From group one's POV it seems like group two players get something for nothing - when a group 2 player describes their 7 Int, 7 Cha charcater as witty, erudite, educated, and good-looking, and then proceeds to roleply while never actually rolling any Int or Cha based checks, it seems a bit off.
While I and my local group all subscribe to the group one philosophy, group two is not having badwrongfun. Both styles are valid it's just when they clash you get some problems.
Back to the OT, I actually prefer 15 point buy. I can see why PFS uses 20 - in a group of basically random composition, you need the extra power to compensate for possible lopsided parties. But a group that works together well magnifies their power, and 15 points is plenty in that case.
See, there are two camps on roleplay and ability scores.
One is the "your scores should inform your roleplay" camp. These players think a 7 Int character should be played as mentally deficient in some fashion. A 7 Cha character should be unpleasant to be around.
Two is the "your scores have only their mechanical roles, play how you want" camp. These players see their 7 Int reflected in their penalties to Int-based skills. A 7 Cha character who maxes out all the interaction skills might as well not even have the low charisma.
Usually when there is a hostile accusation of powergaming, it's group one accusing group two. From group one's POV it seems like group two players get something for nothing - when a group 2 player describes their 7 Int, 7 Cha charcater as witty, erudite, educated, and good-looking, and then proceeds to roleply while never actually rolling any Int or Cha based checks, it seems a bit off.
While I and my local group all subscribe to the group one philosophy, group two is not having badwrongfun. Both styles are valid it's just when they clash you get some problems.
Back to the OT, I actually prefer 15 point buy. I can see why PFS uses 20 - in a group of basically random composition, you need the extra power to compensate for possible lopsided parties. But a group that works together well magnifies their power, and 15 points is plenty in that case.
I'm part of camp two, but I do frown on people who
and good-looking, and then proceeds to roleply while never actually rolling any Int or Cha based checks, it seems a bit off
because I always use my skill points to make it so that if I ever have to roll a check I have an appropriate and relevant score to apply to it.
If doing point buy I find the best way is to use 20 point buy with NO points awarded for buying stats below 10. This keeps everyone fairly equal at at a power level slightly above that of the 15 point buy the adventures were designed around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a PC with low Cha and no Diplomacy tries to be suave and charming the DM should call for skill checks and see how that goes.
That said, low stats can help define a PC as much as high stats. I generally have more fun roleplaying stupid PCs than smart ones. Weird accents, malapropisms, and mispronunciations are my roleplaying bread and butter. When I play a smart PC he's usually got some other comedic quality such as being absentminded, hot headed, arrogant, etc. I guess some of those might not sound comedic, but it sort of depends on how you play it.
It strikes me as odd that so many groups seem to have rules against having a stat below 10. I can understand that some people might not want to play a PC who is stupid, impulsive, socially awkward, clumsy, or phsyically weak, but I'm not sure why they'd want to make sure nobody else does either. Is the idea that the "dumpers" would gain an unfair advantage and outshine the PCs with more balanced ability scores?
Often times you need to "dump" or else you're to easy to kill
I can build with a 15, but as a GM I never use it. I always(99%) use 20 point buy, unless the AP is abnormally difficult, then I go up to 25.
My current group uses almost always 15 point buy.
The campaign I'm currently GMing uses 30pt-buy (!!!) because we felt like playing characters who were considerably beyond what a normal human can achieve from the get-to-go and I don't mind having powerful PCs at all.
I do have to boost monsters/encounters, but that's not a problem. I just consider them to be at APL+1 and it balances everything out. As a nice bonus, this reduces caster/martial disparity a little, since martial classes benefit much more from having multiple good attributes than casters.
I've played on 15pt-buy, but I don't like it. Character are almost forced into dumping attributes in order to work (I have nothing against dump stats, I just don't want it to be necessary).
20pt-buy works perfectly for most classes, IMO.
Yes, have you not played th game?
I think people are making a flawed assumption if they guess that PCs who dump ability scores almost always do so to get "the absolute maximum at your primary ability score". Sometimes a Bard just wants a little extra Str so he can carry a shield. It is tough for me to imagine somebody saying, "Wow, a Bard with 14 Str? That's totally overpowered munchkin cheese!"
In a "We Be Goblins" based campaign we've been planning for a while players had the option to either use 15 point buy or roll 3d6 in order and apply a modest point buy on top of that. I think it was 12 points. Everybody chose the latter method for some reason, and it has resulted in some pretty low ability scores in some cases. We've got an Alchemist who had to buy his Con up from 3 and a Druid who didn't bother to buy his Int up from 4. My Feral Gnasher has a Cha of 6. His social skills are limited to not eating creatures we're negotiating with, but sometimes he screws up, especially if he's out of pickles. In the one session "prequel" we played the Druid, who has no ranks in Knowledge (Nature) yet, called his snapping turtle companion "Shell Thing".
Not all of our games are silly, but low ability scores can really help in those which are.
I tend to make my characters fairly balanced. I refuse to set any stat lower than 10 (after adjustments). This makes a 15 point buy (or worse, 10 points) extra painful for me. Basically, if I am allowed anything less than a 20 point buy, I won't be playing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issues with dumping stats are well documented but my biggest issue is the unbalance between characters it creates and the hypocrisy that claims this is balanced. By min/maxing the barbarian can dump his charisma/intelligence and have a much better strength and constitution. The melee ranger next to him doesn't want to dump his stats and ends up as little better than mr barbarian's side kick as a result. The difference is 8pts... Would you play a 10 pb ranger while the guy next to you gets effectively an 18 pb barbarian? The fix is to give NO points for buying down stats. That way people like Devilkiller can have their low role play stat without being more powerful than the other player's characters. This does put a slight hindrance on a 15 or lower PB however so it is best to use 20 pb if not granting points for buy downs. As an added bonus since they use 15 pb when building adventure paths and 20 pb for PFS scenarios it places you right into the appropriate power level pocket to get the best challenge from existing content.
If being completely incapable of functioning in social encounters for your barbarian doesn't have an effect in game, then I think you need to adjust how you handle social encounters.
How does a 7 charisma equate to "incapable of functioning"? MOST of the time you can interact with NPCs without needing either a skill roll or a stat check. In fact the skills only do very limited things; things you can fully enjoy the game without. As for stat checks, they are generally only used when trying to do something noteworthy that would be governed by that stat... such as bending prison bars or such for strength. So when is such a check useful for charisma or intelligence? Influencing people is a skill... knowing things is a skill... maybe an Int check to solve a puzzle? But how many puzzles will your barbarian face that couldn't be done far batter either OOC as most in game puzzles are intended OR by the party wizard who has a much higher Int by his very nature? Certainly Int can be safely dumped. Cha? There is NO stat check required by the game for Cha. The GM could make some up to be deliberately punitive. But that is the sign of a passive aggressive GM not a good GM. But perhaps the barbarian is FORCED into a situation requiring Cha? Then I ask, where is the Bard? Why isn't he around to make these "face" checks? Isn't that his forte? "Oh but make the poor barbarian roll anyway!" you might say. Ok... so he has a -2 on his roll vs the ranger who has no dump stats. Certainly he has decent odds of beating the ranger on that d20 even if the rangers odds are slightly better. False logic to assume all stats are equally needed. Can you do cool things with a high Cha or Int? Yep. Do you need them to function? Nope.
I prefer 20 point buy because it's roughly equivalent to the average results of rolling 4d6 drop 1 for your stats. Or, at least it's closer to it than 15 points is.
I tend to make my characters fairly balanced. I refuse to set any stat lower than 10 (after adjustments). This makes a 15 point buy (or worse, 10 points) extra painful for me. Basically, if I am allowed anything less than a 20 point buy, I won't be playing.
Who the f$&% is playing a 10 point game?
I have played in a couple games with 10 PB and 5 PB respectively. They have their own charm... Very gritty reality type stuff.
I have played in a couple games with 10 PB and 5 PB respectively. They have their own charm... Very gritty reality type stuff.
Yeah, not to insult the people who are running those games, but they're probably using the wrong system at this point.
Usually varies depending on the campaign and feel I'm going for but definitely have used 15 pt buy before and it went fine.
I have played in a couple games with 10 PB and 5 PB respectively. They have their own charm... Very gritty reality type stuff.Yeah, not to insult the people who are running those games, but they're probably using the wrong system at this point.
I disagree as long as everyone is having fun what does it matter how many points you had to build from? And how does that matter at all to what system you use?
Personally, I run with 25 point buy, wounds and vitality, as well as gesalt for my games. Although, I have been debating a switch to 25 point buy and mythic adventures just to see how mythic plays. Possibly for a campaign to stop the return of the old ones if I ever get my hands on this, this,and this.
@Aranna - I was pointing to the fact that a barbarian with dumped intelligence and charisma will have few skill points to apply and a penalty to all skills associated to those particular ability scores. I don't think those are small penalties to take and in the example you give, the ranger will become more and more important to the party outside of combat where the barbarian will become a liability.
I have personally never played a game where one party member could expect to simply never interact in the social side of the game, nor do I think it makes sense that these sorts of characters would have their hands held every time they went to the magic shop to buy something. I can just see this sort of character getting swindled out of his cash constantly given the nature of medieval economics.
I disagree as long as everyone is having fun what does it matter how many points you had to build from? And how does that matter at all to what system you use?I have played in a couple games with 10 PB and 5 PB respectively. They have their own charm... Very gritty reality type stuff.Yeah, not to insult the people who are running those games, but they're probably using the wrong system at this point.
Because Pathfinder isn't a system very well designed for dark and gritty fantasy games. It's pretty high fantasy, especially past very early levels when everyone starts to carry around magical items. If one is a player who wants to play a gritty game or a DM that wants to run one, it's probably better to use a system built from the ground up to try and accomplish that task than to try and work around the PF rules for that goal.
The d20 system is very versatile, but the PF rules do have some limitations, and to use an analogy to video games, in some cases it might be better to buy a different game than doing an overhaul mod on the game one currently owns.
I don't. I ignore ability scores completely when we're out of combat.
How do I roleplay a man with low intelligence? I don't take knowledge skills.
How do I roleplay someone socially inept? Don't take social skills
Base stats= Combat stats (Not for roleplaying)
Skills= Out of combat stats (For roleplaying)
That's an interesting perspective. I never really thought about that before - I've always thought about stats as defining your "innate" personality, in a sense (ignoring the fact they improve over time) whilst your skills/feats defined your training and experience.
@Aranna - I was pointing to the fact that a barbarian with dumped intelligence and charisma will have few skill points to apply and a penalty to all skills associated to those particular ability scores. I don't think those are small penalties to take and in the example you give, the ranger will become more and more important to the party outside of combat where the barbarian will become a liability.
I have personally never played a game where one party member could expect to simply never interact in the social side of the game, nor do I think it makes sense that these sorts of characters would have their hands held every time they went to the magic shop to buy something. I can just see this sort of character getting swindled out of his cash constantly given the nature of medieval economics.
No one is ignoring the social side of the game. The barbarian will have all kinds of fun interacting with NPCs. You don't NEED diplomacy to interact with the NPC. You don't even NEED a high Cha stat. All you need to interact with NPCs is a player and a GM.
Is the ranger truly going to be more valuable outside of combat? That depends on the player not his stats or skills. As a solo player the ranger may be more versatile, but as part of a team the barbarian rocks. The ranger is going to be a bit bored in a team if he spreads himself thin and never excels at any one thing. He will always be someone's sidekick. That depends more on the player than anything else. Can he excel? Sure, but so can the barbarian. It's best to keep a stat policy that encourages a wide variety of fun options rather than just rewarding the dumpers.
Just saying that if we dont have dumps a wizard can just buy int and con and be amazing because he doesnt need other stats. In fact most full casters just need the casting stat and con to be fine.
Meanwhile melee man needs str,con, dex, wis to function.
Higher point buys somewhat balances the classes because of diminishing returns on buying high stats.