| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. Really. I prefer low-heroic games.I did not mean that, but the fact that you penalize players who do not put a character bio with at least 1000 words on paper (do you actually count the words?).
It's not a penalty. Everyone starts at 10-point buy. You get rewarded for putting in extra effort. Just like you get bonus xp for putting in extra effort. Don't put the effort in, you don't get the extra stuff. It's a choice.
Counting words in a document is as easy as copy/paste and having word tell you how many words it is. I'm a professional writer... 1000 words is a handful of paragraphs.
I don't buy in to th e"you're penalizing me" mantra. That's like me telling my boss I feel I am being penalized because a coworker got a raise for putting in extra effort and I feel entitled to a raise too even though I didn't do anything extra to warrant it.
I've played in a couple of games using 15 point buys. I never noticed much difference, but I usually play spellcasters of some kind. Instead of a wizard with 10 Str and 14 Dex (say), I'd have a wizard with 8 Str and 12 Dex. Big whoop.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can understand that; you're a GM trying to create a fantastic world and spending a LOT of time putting it together. You want to know the players so they feel more connected. I always request bios; but sometimes players are lazy, and it makes me feel cheated after all of my hard work that they won't even write a basic background. So I think it's the perfect encouragement; really you can look at it as a 15-point buy world where if you're too lazy to even do a little background setup for your character you are penalized 5 points.Sorry, reading stuff like this always makes me angry. Some players may have a time-consuming job and a family - they may have a hard time keeping that one evening free every other week.
I think if something like this makes you "angry" you need to look into some assistance at getting some of that negative energy off your chset.
A particular group's playstyle or house rules should never make someone "angry".
I have a group that is perfectly fine with this.
If you don't like this particular set of house-rules, keep on doing what you're doing and play with a group that doesn't use them.
Getting "angry" over what my group uses is silly. I was sharing what my group does in a group setting, not trying to force you to use my rules nor was I even inferring that my way is superior to your way or belittling you for how you play.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. Really. I prefer low-heroic games.I did not mean that, but the fact that you penalize players who do not put a character bio with at least 1000 words on paper (do you actually count the words?).It's not a penalty. Everyone starts at 10-point buy. You get rewarded for putting in extra effort. Just like you get bonus xp for putting in extra effort. Don't put the effort in, you don't get the extra stuff. It's a choice.
Counting words in a document is as easy as copy/paste and having word tell you how many words it is. I'm a professional writer... 1000 words is a handful of paragraphs.
I don't buy in to th e"you're penalizing me" mantra. That's like me telling my boss I feel I am being penalized because a coworker got a raise for putting in extra effort and I feel entitled to a raise too even though I didn't do anything extra to warrant it.
Semantics - its a penalty, and a hefty one.
The boss / coworker analogy you are creating frankly disgusts me. Its a game you play with your FRIENDS, who might be hard-working family persons and put a lot of effort in keeping the game evenings free.
You are massively disrespecting players like these with your ruling.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I use 15 point buy when 'testing' scenarios. Also used the 3.5 equivelant whe everyone else was using 4d6, drop lowest, reroll 1s. It's a nice comfortable spread.
Though the 20 point build for PFS does make me wonder how players who never had anything else (beginner's box?) will handle the extra points.
Just because your group is fine with it doesn't make it right for everyone, auticus. Sorry, but them's the facts.
Massively disrespecting players lol. Ok. I find people who enjoy playing like this. They form a group. I've played this way for twenty-four years now and have never had a problem with it.
The end.
If someone has an issue with this they choose to not play. Not insult or bash someone over the internet for playing a way they disapprove.
If you were here, and you asked to join the group and I told you the rules and you told me that they disgusted you, I would thank you for your time, wished you luck in finding a group more suited to what you were looking for, and that would be that.
That's the last I'll post about it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just because your group is fine with it doesn't make it right for everyone, auticus. Sorry, but them's the facts.
That doesn't warrant attacking someone verbally for it does it? I'm not trying to push it on anyone else. I was sharing what we use.
|
Since you're talking about it, we don't write backgrounds for level 1. Neither for later levels.
We provide basic informations on the character and what could be done with it roleplay wise (basically answering Who - Why - Where - How), also giving ideas about what kind of drama it could be interested to be confronted to, and expand the background when the story goes further on. A character usually begins as "Johan Sailor, young soldier from a noble military family, born from a dead lord and war hero but also from a peasant mother raisen in poverty, who is also his last parent alive. Is on his first official mission outside the capital (and it's gonna end badly)."
Two sessions later, the background expands : "Black sheep of the family, seeing forward to reach the grade of his cold brother and sister, both respectable high-ranking members of the Guard, and born from a noble mother. Failing on the first mission would ternish their reputation and bring ridicule on the Sailor name."
Four sessions later, "Oh, since we are reaching a lake, he's also dead afraid of deep waters for having almost drown as a child ; before being saved by his sister, who is also the Empire's greatest sharpshooter still alive. The brother doesn't lack any occasion to exert dominance over the character and express disdain for this "official bastard son"."
And this keeps going session after session. But while we always have a pretty good idea of where we want to be going and about what we did previously, we don't feel the need to write the background down. Both because some around the table aren't as good writers as they are good friends (ex-GM who loves to copy-paste whatever book/manga he's reading at the time...), and because it feels more organic to develop relationships, weaknesses and background events while adventuring (but after some levels, it becomes harder to justify things that should have been explained early on, obviously, so there isn't any joker card to use, as the "hey, actually I know X who can help us with exactly what we need !".
I think if something like this makes you "angry" you need to look into some assistance at getting some of that negative energy off your chset.
Nice, underhanded insult.
What made me angry is that Thalin assumed players who are not willing or able to write a 1000 word character bio are lazy by default.
Also the sense of entitlement you ooze: "I have sooo much work as a DM, if the players do not at least XY, I will penalize them".
IMO, no good game will arise from such an attitude.
EDIT:
If you want an incentive for players to write a bio, give them a masterwork item as starting equipment. Or a bonus trait (as a maximum). But DO NOT cripple their characters if they dont do as you wish.
A PB 10 character is much less powerful than a PB 15 character.
That's cool and that works for you. All the power to you.
1000 words of a background basically boils down to the character's origin, basic desires, and minor family information. You can't get really detailed in 1000 words as it is a handful of paragraphs but its enough information to give a player a starting block.
The remainder does develop more naturally.
I think if something like this makes you "angry" you need to look into some assistance at getting some of that negative energy off your chset.
Nice, underhanded insult.
What made me angry is that Thalin assumed players who are not willing or able to write a 1000 word character bio are lazy by default.
Also the sense of entitlement you ooze: "I have sooo much work as a DM, if the players do not at least XY, I will penalize them".
IMO, no good game will arise from such an attitude.
I never said someone is lazy, nor did I say I do sooo much work as a DM. You are inferring all of the above based off of something that I never wrote from a person you've never met. I'm not interested in having an internet argument with you over whose play style is the daddy and the best and the other person is an obvious nazi overlord hellbent on penalizing and ruining people's fun. (lawl)
Also you may want to look up the word entitlement. Rage bashing on a stranger over a playstyle you don't agree with is pretty much a great example of entitlement. Getting bent out of shape because somewhere there is a person who requires bios for his characters to gain a bonus that has no effect on you whatsoever is warped.
You do your thing and what works for you. I'll do my thing and what works for me. If my players have a problem with it, they will let me know.
Good day.
I never said someone is lazy, nor did I say I do sooo much work as a DM. You are inferring all of the above based off of something that I never wrote from a person you've never met. Good day.
Note that my "that makes me angry" post was in reply to Thalin.
You, however, put that analogy with the DM as the boss and the players as the workers under him in this thread.
I never said someone is lazy, nor did I say I do sooo much work as a DM. You are inferring all of the above based off of something that I never wrote from a person you've never met. Good day.
Note that my "that makes me angry" post was in reply to Thalin.
You, however, put that analogy with the DM as the boss and the players as the workers under him in this thread.
LMAO!!!
The example had nothing to do with players working for a DM LMAO!!!! It was a generic example of reward vs "punishment".
How about this: "I'm angry because my teammate on the soccer team got promoted because he stayed late and practiced harder and got made captain, but I feel I should also be captain because I'm trying hard"
Or how about "My neighbor put in some extra hours and got a bonus and bought a boat. I feel I should also get a boat, it's not fair that I'm being penalized for not being able to work extra"
Or how about "It's not fair Billy got extra credit on his grade for doing that book report and got an "A" grade, when I tried hard but only got a "B". I could have gotten an "A" if I had done that extra credit but I didn't have time to do the extra credit"
Oh my. We can go on. The whole "we should all get a trophy" mindset is not something I adhere to. Sorry. If players have a problem they'll be sure to let me know. There is not a shortage of games where I live, there are plenty going on.
I am starting a 2nd group up in a couple weeks, with the same rules. If they were that horrible and fun-ruining, I'd expect that I'd have a problem doing so.
|
I did; and seriously angry lady, an hour is not that much time, even if you have a full job and kids. Heck, you got almost 1000 words bickering at me :).
I do think character backgrounds flesh someone out; and always request one. Usually I get one, on the rare occasions I have not it is not the full-time kid laden parent that avoids, it's just an apathetic person who doesn't want to put in enough time. But I don't have a reward/punishment. With that system I doubt anyone I know would fail to write up a basic background.
It's not my system, but I like it; I do 20 no dump, next time I GM may do 15 no dump with +5 if I get a character background.
D&D/Pathfinder without spells is quite hard to pull off, but I applaud you if the players had fun with it.
We absolutely did. All of us hated vancian magic from the start, and "banning" them was practically unnecessary since nobody wanted to deal with it. Of course, we didn't really like the "feel" of the sort of spells available either. I knew how powerful it really was, though, so I kept it away just in case.
The game was a lot less "fantastic," in that the players mostly fought other humanoids with class levels, rather than bizarre monsters. I custom built all the enemies--I never just picked things out fo the monster manual. It had a very "Sword and Sorcery" feel that we all really liked, but yeah, it wasn't something you could just "do."
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I did; and seriously angry lady, an hour is not that much time, even if you have a full job and kids. Heck, you got almost 1000 words bickering at me :).
Well, priorities. I am a DM myself and put a lot of work in the game. I do not necessarily expect the same from my players though. As long as they arrive on time and put effort into the game as long as they sit at the table, thats fine with me. I someone wants to be more active and write a character bio or a campaign journal - very good.
BTW: I find detailed character bios to be counterproductive. A few bullet points, expanded upon when the need arises, suffice and are more flexible.
Oh my. We can go on. The whole "we should all get a trophy" mindset is not something I adhere to.
Never said I wanted that.
But a 10 point character will suck in a party of 15 point characters. He will never be able to bridge that gap. At least if the other players built effective PCs.
As said: You want an incentive? Give out a trait or a good item. Maybe even a minor magic item at character creation! Why do you feel the need to penalize the players in question that harshly?
|
|
it's just an apathetic person who doesn't want to put in enough time.
I don't like writting my backgrounds. Never did it.
Yet I rule-lawyer ; I help everyone building their character ; I build some monsters/encounters for the GM ; I heavily participate in roleplay (to the point I was able to help transforming a fellow player from a combat-crazy guy who checks his phone and sighs when there is no die-rolling, to a guy that wrote a background so huge and rich for it's new character it gave me dizziness) ; my character is the only one around the table who lasted 13 levels despite dying twice ; and the roleplay and drama around my character's whereabouts, duties and rights helped creating intensive and engaging roleplay sessions for everyone, including a nice "f+&% it" campaign beginning with myself losing my title and going rogue for saving the fellow guys who were caught in a conspiration to make them shut up about a drug traffic and minister assassination, by the way going through several levels with almost every character we met despiting mine with a passion... including the guys/fellow players I "saved" after having brought them myself on trial.
Do I deserve a 10-point buy for my slugishness ?
I'm all for rewarding zelous players, not so much for penalizing the others. But again, if it works for you then kudos.
I did; and seriously angry lady, an hour is not that much time, even if you have a full job and kids. Heck, you got almost 1000 words bickering at me :).
Well, priorities. I am a DM myself and put a lot of work in the game. I do not necessarily expect the same from my players though. As long as they arrive on time and put effort into the game as long as they sit at the table, thats fine with me. I someone wants to be more active and write a character bio or a campaign journal - very good.
BTW: I find detailed character bios to be counterproductive. A few bullet points, expanded upon when the need arises, suffice and are more flexible.
That's well and good for you. No one has any problem with what you find to be productive or counterproductive. I for one would be the last person in the world to leap on you and bash you for how you do things.
I am the opposite. I love fully detailed character bios and put them to good use.
Neither are more correct than the other. The key is finding a group of people that adhere or can exist with the same rules and expectations.
I also dislike power gaming and min/maxing. It's not bad/wrong it's just not something that I like. I won't go up to a powergamer and start bashing on them for ruining RPGs though just because I don't like that playstyle.
These boards should be a place where we can collectively discuss our hobby and share our experiences without fear of someone launching into a rabid verbal assault because we do things differently from them. If I want those types of discussions I'll head over to CNN or FOX News message boards and post something about the GOP or Obama and sit back and watch the flames wash in.
Do I deserve a 10-point buy for my slugishness ?
Yes obviously, you lazy slob.. ;)
You should try to apply yourself, in order to get that bonus. Maybe put in a few extra hours of training. ;D
Oh my. We can go on. The whole "we should all get a trophy" mindset is not something I adhere to.
Never said I wanted that.
But a 10 point character will suck in a party of 15 point characters. He will never be able to bridge that gap. At least if the other players built effective PCs.
As said: You want an incentive? Give out a trait or a good item. Maybe even a minor magic item at character creation! Why do you feel the need to penalize the players in question that harshly?
I strongly DISAGREE with your assertation based off of 23 years or so of experience with this very thing.
They do not strongly suck vs 15 point buy characters. In fact, in 1st and 2nd ed we had dice rolled stats, which means you had characters who rolled well mixed with players who rolled like utter crap.
They can bridge the gap and be effective just fine.
I also dont' see it as PENALIZING a character. You are stuck on that whole PENALIZE word. It is not PENALIZING someone if they don't do the extra effort to get a couple extra points.
One of the 10 point buy characters in the group has the highest offensive output of the group.
5 points is a minor thing. It is the difference in secondary stats having a +1 instead of a +2. Which is a 5% difference in the grand scheme of things on one or two stats.
You are making it out to be much larger than it actually is. I've been doing things this way for years, and it has never been as catastrophic as you are trying to make it out to be. Not once.
In fact, in 1st and 2nd ed we had dice rolled stats, which means you had characters who rolled well mixed with players who rolled like utter crap.
1st and 2nd Ed were much much less stat dependent than 3E/PF.
|
|
I also dont' see it as PENALIZING a character. You are stuck on that whole PENALIZE word. It is not PENALIZING someone if they don't do the extra effort to get a couple extra points.
Not putting everyone on equal foot to begin with is indeed penalizing some of them. A player shouldn't get more stats because he writes more words. What he wrote in his background is already a kind of RP advantage and optimization.
Providing some advantages or leniency for people who put time in the game is rewarding them rightly - a character who goes through a phase of suffering, for the sake of everyone's pleasure or the installment of a good plot makes you feel like he's deserving to get access to a certain item that would make his life easier, or to help re-roll this d20 or circumstances d100 once in a while.But I guess it works with your way of GMing, and I can see how it works well with players who have the habit to follow such rules.
15 Pt buy no dump stats. Plenty to make a character work.
What does "no dump stat" mean exactly?
Personally, we've always played 20pt but I'm getting tired of the 20 STR fighters and 20 INT wizards. Maybe this is the solution. (On the other hand, the players whine about things being too hard so I can only imagine the complaints if I change it to 15pt).
|
|
15 Pt buy no dump stats. Plenty to make a character work.What does "no dump stat" mean exactly?
Personally, we've always played 20pt but I'm getting tired of the 20 STR fighters and 20 INT wizards. Maybe this is the solution. (On the other hand, the players whine about things being too hard so I can only imagine the complaints if I change it to 15pt).
"Stat dumping" means putting a stat at the lowest possible number/put your lowest rolled stat in the least useful stat as to get points to spend on other places (like a Fighter dumping Intelligence and Charisma to 7 to put more on Strength and Constitution).
If your players are the kind to take 20 on their primary stat at level 1 with a 20-point buy, they'll not change with a 15-point buy... it will even make things worse.
What I suggest with a 20-point buy is that the highest stat available should be 18 (or 19 in exceptional cases), and the lowest 7, with no other stat under 10. You remain vastly effective, you aren't bland, and you aren't a monster straight from level 1.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I've been very used to either rolling or 20 point buy. This year, our group has tried out 15 point buy for Carrion's Crown and I'm really liking it. You really have to pay to have a 20 at level 1, and our group is really adamant about making dump stats matter. I'm inclined to run my next game as 15 point buy, but to include hero points to offset the deadliness a bit. Just as an example, here are the stats for my CC fighter at level 1(weapon master):
S 16 +2human
D 12
C 12
I 13
W 8
CH 10
This array has worked just fine. Ran into a little bit of trouble with bad Will saves, but having weaknesses just makes things more interesting and tactical.
I don't see how stat-dependent 3rd is compared to 2nd and 1st.
I guess I've been playing D&D bad/wrong all of these years.
I think people are too focused on optimization and get their panties all in a wad if someone else has better stats / toys than they do.
It also depends on how you run your games. If I use the 20 point stat buy, I know ahead of time I am going to have to make the encounters more difficult because the PCs are going to be pretty good at killing things and not have a difficult time doing so. If I'm running a low-fantasy low point buy, then I know that they won't be as powerful and the monsters need to reflect that as well.
I pointed out this thread to my group. We've had a good laugh. It was pointed out that maybe we should go back to 4D6 drop the lowest. Then things get real fun, especially if you roll poorly.
If you feel that 5 extra stat points (which comes out to be a +1 in a couple extra stats) is seriously screwing someone over and penalizing them, then you (collective you) and I will never see eye to eye, because I'm not that in to optimization and number crunching.
My daughter's character literally got to boost two stats up enough to make them go from +0 to +1. And we're having an internet discussion on how this is a big deal. A 5% difference.
I could see your point if it was a 10 point buy vs a 20 point buy, but a 10 point buy vs a 15 point buy is minor. In fact, considering that I ran 4D6 take the lowest for a LONG time, the disparity in the stats was always huge between players and the game ran fine. This was in 3rd edition as well, of which PF is based on.
I don't see the penalized thing. I won't see the penalized thing. I don't want to play with mega-optimizers and I don't play with mega-optimizers. The guys in my group can be mega-optimizers, and in fact some of them do so in other games, but understand how this group works and nearly all of them have expressed positive feelings on how the game runs so I know that it works for us.
And many of the group started with 4e so it's not that they are used to how this works either, they understand that lower stats and what not means higher difficulty and that's the thing that they like about it. They have their high powered game and then they have their higher difficulty game, which appeals to different people or different styles.
Neither of which is better than the other. When I put groups together, the rules and expectations are laid out before hand. Have I had people say that they don't like those rules? Yes. They then choose between a different game, or compromise. Again... they are neither more right or more wrong for their decision... it's a game and you play it to have fun. If my version of fun is not your version of fun, please don't play in my game.
The internet has clouded that unfortunately. That people rage on others for playing in a way that they themselves don't like is beyond me.
The mindset that everyone has to have the same stats also is not something I will ever agree with on either side of the screen. I see it as rewarding those who will take some extra time to write a handful of paragraphs, you (collective you) see it as punishing players who don't want to.
It boils down to this: if you don't like to write bios and also need to have the same as everyone else, you wouldn't like my game and you wouldn't be a part of it, and that's perfectly fine.
I was expressing a way that one group out there in the wild wild internet does things, of which all players are accepting of, and of which the majority of express positive reaction to (and the other that does not like it doesn't bang on it negatively, he just doesn't care either way and won't write a bio because he doesn't want to write a bio).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're saying "mega-optimizer" like it's a bad thing. You can also optimize roleplay by putting points in non-optimal stats.
Again, no rage on my side, but the difference between 11 and 12 is 4 levels or the price of a Tome, so I guess it's workin because you are a good GM (you still wouldn't get me to write a background ;)).
While my group has only ever played with characters built using 20 points, it does occur to me that 15 would be a nice way to de-emphasize the combat aspect of the game. That is not to say that capable combat builds could not exist in a lower powered environment, just that if a DM wanted to run a game that took more of a focus on the storytelling then he or she should consider using that as one of the potential tools to dissuade characters from fighting everything--if that is a problem for your group, of course. I know that there are groups out there than work perfectly well on the RP front with Point Buy as high as 25!
Further, I believe that a game with only 15 points for characters to work with helps to bring the game down to a little more of a grittier level, especially if characters are working in a low-magic environment so that their WBL gets halved and level progression is something other than fast. Just like anything else in the book, this is a rule that a GM can take or leave as a way to flavor the game to personal taste.
You're saying "mega-optimizer" like it's a bad thing. You can also optimize roleplay by putting points in non-optimal stats.
Again, no rage on my side, but the difference between 11 and 12 is 4 levels or the price of a Tome, so I guess it's workin because you are a good GM (you still wouldn't get me to write a background ;)).
It's not a bad thing, it's just a style of play that I don't enjoy and do not wish to participate in.
This isn't meant to be downgrading or condescending, so I'm making that known right now (the net and text make that hard to convey) but I don't think of characters in terms of numbers.
I have played so long with rolling stats, that I switched over to point buy to make everyone more or less the same, but I don't get that down in depth to see that +1 stat is a 4 level or tome difference (though you are correct that is the mechanical difference)
I'd also like to point out that I don't fudge dice ever, and I don't even use a screen, and TPKs are still rare with low points. I also tweak encounters though. Some modules are tougher and will TPK regardless if you aren't careful.
|
Discuss.
In Carrion Crown, I gave my players a choice, 15 point Buy or roll 4d6 drop the lowest.
They looked at the options, and every one of them went with the roll 4d6 drop low option.
Since then, there has been much disscussion regarding the 15 point buy... not much of it positive.
Though it is a group of 6, and I did like the previously stated comment that mentioned using a 15 point buy to help 'balance' the party - in the future I highly doubt that I'll have a 15 point buy on the table as an option. I prefer to balance encounters by upping the Challenge of the opposition, rather than nerfing the players.
zWolf.
|
|
Well, 4d6 is going to average much higher than 15 points (someone statted it at about 24 at one point?). And there's always the belief (true or not) that if you roll terribly low you're going to be able to beg a reroll; I've actually found this to be true. So you leave yourself open for top-end with almost No potential failure. I'd take 4d6 over 20 points, too.
In the game I'm currently playing in, all of the players, myself included, have extremely high stats, since we have god luck for stat rolls. My lvl 8 human alchemist has these current stats:
Str : 12
Dex : 18 (bumped up from 17)
Cons : 15
Int : 20 (17 + 1 at lvl 4 + 2 for human)
Wis : 14
Cha : 12
The Paladin/Rogue and Fighter have *slightly* higher stats, maybe 1 or 2 more bonuses, while the druid is around my level. As such this makes for rather epic games, the Dm gives us monsters with much higher CR then we should be fighting. On the other side of things, our stock of magic items is rather small, and we don't gain too much money (yet) so it's balanced.
My Alchemist has a Chainmail +1, Sickle +1, Handy Haversack, 3-4 potions he made himself, 80% of the normal basic adventurers gear (ready for almost every situation) and an amulet of nat armor +1 with 2.2k gold leftover.
It's all about Balance, but we go using the cheap 4d6 reroll 1's method. No one wants to be weak. In my other game that I'm dming I had harsher methods, giving them a basic 4d6 no rerolls, or 3d6 you can reroll if you get back choices. In retrospect 20 point buy might have been fun too.
I prefer rolling.
My first PF game that I played in was 10 point buy... with the option to start with lower point buy and a higher level. So level 1 got 10pts, level 2 got 5pts, and level 3 got no points. I would say about 20%-33% of the players took the levels (can't tell exactly because I wasn't one of the GMs).
In regard to munchkins. I made the bold statement once that "You can't munchkin a 10point build". I was answered with several munchkined builds all put to a 10 point standard... One of them was a monk.
The 1000 word bio requirement brings back memories. In a mekton game I was playing I wrote up a full background on my character and her family. Then I kept up with my efforts by writing a page or two of "diary entries" after every mission. It helped me get into my character's head to read over these pages before a new session. The GM loved what I was doing SO much that he made it a requirement for his game that all players do the same. The penalty for not doing this wasn't lower stats, it was NO special power ups. In each mission the GM would drop items into the game specifically for use by each of the players who went this extra mile. For example in one game where we had to use hardsuits in combat with alien invaders. The PCs with the Bios got to customize their hardsuits, the ones who couldn't be bothered got basic unmodified models. Military ranks followed the same logic, so I frequently got to be team leader because I usually had higher rank.
I prefer rolling.
My first PF game that I played in was 10 point buy... with the option to start with lower point buy and a higher level. So level 1 got 10pts, level 2 got 5pts, and level 3 got no points. I would say about 20%-33% of the players took the levels (can't tell exactly because I wasn't one of the GMs).
In regard to munchkins. I made the bold statement once that "You can't munchkin a 10point build". I was answered with several munchkined builds all put to a 10 point standard... One of them was a monk.
The 1000 word bio requirement brings back memories. In a mekton game I was playing I wrote up a full background on my character and her family. Then I kept up with my efforts by writing a page or two of "diary entries" after every mission. It helped me get into my character's head to read over these pages before a new session. The GM loved what I was doing SO much that he made it a requirement for his game that all players do the same. The penalty for not doing this wasn't lower stats, it was NO special power ups. In each mission the GM would drop items into the game specifically for use by each of the players who went this extra mile. For example in one game where we had to use hardsuits in combat with alien invaders. The PCs with the Bios got to customize their hardsuits, the ones who couldn't be bothered got basic unmodified models. Military ranks followed the same logic, so I frequently got to be team leader because I usually had higher rank.
My players have said the same thing. That keeping the bios, reading the bios, and doing the adventure logs helps them get into their characters, and also see things from the point of view of other characters and that they love doing it.
If I was in a group that hated it, I would never consider it.
To be fair, very few do the log because they don't want to write, but they are ok with the ones that keep the log and getting the extra xp reward for it because they enjoy reading them as well.
As to munchkinism, you can munchkin anything. One of the two that didn't do a bio at all made a half orc beat stick that is min/maxed and does more damage output than the 15 point guys. Even he pointed out that the extra 5 points wasn't enough to make him want to write out a full bio because the extra +1 in a couple stats meant little to him so long as he had uber strength and decent con, which he could pull off with 10 point buy and he still basically has the power to one shot equal level encounter creatures (and does).
Use monsters that will laugh at physical damage if you wanna punch that munchkin's ego in the balls.
Then again, I wouldn't resort to such things, I would just tell him to stop being a munchkin or leave.
15 point buy has a couple of effects:
- More min-maxing and munchkinism
- More GM fudging to avoid TPK in every other encounter
- Less role playing as everyone has to focus on survival
- More reliance on the GM leading you around
- Less opportunity for sandbox play and player initiativesSure you can have fun with 15 point buy, but it becomes more of a 4E style game that is entirely focused on the board game aspect than a traditional D&D experience. Since people came to PF because they didn't enjoy playing board games like 4E it's no wonder that most people don't like playing it the way that you do.
20 point buy is a lot more relaxed since players have versatility to handle things in more ways than simply fighting it out. You can role play more because your character has means to back up their own words and the GM is not playing your characters for you.
A lot of players dislike fudging and would rather know that they aren't being kept alive at every turn by the will of the GM, but the unfortunate effect of 15 point buy is that you get smashed a lot harder a lot more often so that control ends up firmly in the court of the GM in every fight.
Of course, a lot of GMs enjoy that power over life and death which is why some still use 15 point buy. Some GMs get off on having total control over the party at all times and directing what they do, basically having the players as slaves that must do whatever you say.
15 point buy is simply inferior if you don't want to play a board game.
That's all pretty much nonsense.
Min-maxing and munchkinism are done at pretty much any power level. Much more dependent on the people involved.The rest depends entirely on the GM. If he uses the same encounters as he would to challenge a 20 or 25 pt party, then he'll either kill them, or have to fudge. OTOH, if he realizes he's dealing with a weaker party and tailors the game to...
Actually, I have seen that happen. It even happened to me once. When the DM said "15 point buy" the first time, I looked at my Wizard's stat, dumped Str and boosted Intelligence as much as I could. I didn't wanna lose out on other stats though (and I wanted at least just a bit Charisma) so in the end I managed to resist the most horrid instances of stat dumping, but I certainly saw the paranoid over survivability and how that can take the focus off RPing for some...
Some people will dump stats no matter what option you give them unless you have a house rule at the table that says "thou shalt not dump stats".
It depends on the power level of the game you want to run. I dislike 20 point and higher buys because the players start getting to hit a level of power that puts them at a place where to challenge them, I need to bump up encounter difficulty in one fashion or the other.
15 points is not bad. 10 point buy allows a character to be good at one thing, and average at everything else.
The lower the stats the more the party depends on each other I find. The higher the stats, the more lone-wolf a character can be and the easier it is for that character to take on multiple roles. 15 points is a happy middle ground.
It is again subject to the style of game that you wish to run. One of the reasons I disliked 4e was that I thought and still think that stats are relatively meaningless. The PCs tend to be super-good at many things, and the fact that defense scores tied into two abilities meant that a character could jack up the three stats that mattered and walk away with high attack bonuses and defense scores, to the point where you could just drop the six traditional attributes and make a "physical" score and a "mental" score and just go off of that. (again... IMO)