Does anyone do 15 point buy?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 622 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Helaman wrote:


I don't allow for more than one stat below 8 (before racial adjustments)

I like that, too.

I also think that 1000 words is fairly trivial to be honest. Still, I would probably occasionally be the one who got the 10pt buy because I didn't want to mess with it. I like off the cuff characters. I wouldn't consider my character crippled. As mentioned, its about a +1 difference. So if you have two fighters, one with weapon focus and one without it the one without is crippled? Dice don't care much about +1...

Along those lines, its easy to have a false perception of self-efficacy in this game, either positive or negative. Increasing the odds by getting your mods up and up doesn't really matter as much as people assume. Sometimes dice go 2,4,4,2,6 and mods don't matter at all.

I mean, everyone works on their characters sheet, I realize that. I think most people just assume that when they see their friend doing awesome damage or whatever it must be because they worked harder on designing their stats.


DeathMetal4tw wrote:
Discuss.

In the ten years since 3.x dropped, I've used point buy five times. All of those instances were for organized play. Three times in Living Greyhawk and twice in Pathfinder Society. Every character I made for a private game used 4d6 drop.


We just decided to switch over to a 15pt buy with no dump stats (before racial mods).

For the last year or so we've been playing with 4d6 drop the lowest. On average this results in a party with the equivalent of a ~32 pt buy and the need to throw CR+3 or CR+4 creatures at the party. Honestly at that point you're not playing superheroes you re playing superman and every so often you run into you particular brand of kryptonite but on average you decimate everything that stand before you.

Our first 15pt buy session starts tomorrow and I am super excited. I think I may ultimately allow a 20pt but for now we are going to try out the 15pt buy.

I'm not sure that I buy into the 15 pt buy = stereotypes but with no real experience we'll see what happens.

As far as background goes I really fall into the less is more camp. I want a brief background and developed goals. For me it's more about where you want to go and less about where you've been. This is especially true for a first level character... Let's be honest at first level you haven't accomplished squat.

Has anyone tried giving out additional pts over levels? I was thinking of giving out 3 additional points over the first 5 levels but not sure if that will work.


Use 15pb for APs, 20pb for homebrews. Aps are designed for 15pb, and I cannot be arsed to retcon stuff to make up for powerful PCs.


I have never given out points before. I'm not sure how that would work. I know that at 10-15 points that a normal group of monsters is a relevant challenge. I think pumping the stats up beyond a 15 point buy would make my job as a GM a bit more complicated by having to monitor and keep track of how easily they dispatched encounters.

I do like the idea of no stat dump. I will think on that some more.


I awlays let people roll the 4d6 and take off the lowest dice when I'm game mastering. But next campaign we'll play I want to switch to 15points with limitation on dumping stats (I don't want to see 6 int in fighters to max their strenght), it looks balanced and funny - stop super heroes with super stats.
I will let you know


Nullpunkt wrote:
gang wrote:

I used 25-point buy for my 6 players in our just-finished Kingmaker campaign. That was one of many contributing factors that led to overpowered PCs and them largely trampling over everything in their paths.

Was that intentional? Because you kind of should have seen that coming... The published APs are based on 4 players and 15 point-buy.

No, it wasn't intentional. It was the first Pathfinder campaign I'd run so I had nothing really to base it on, and it was my first campaign in a long time that was based solely on published material. I looked at Chapter 6 and was sure none of my players would survive it.

Whoops.

Lessons learned!


I myself do not like 15 point buy. I only use 20 point buy or better. Coming from a group that rolled an average of 70 or 80 point buy I find 20 just right.

I find 15 to low, I want to run Heroes dammit.


I've never ran a game or played in one that was 15 point buy, though I have recently started GMing a 10 point buy campaign, and my players seem to be enjoying it.


SwnyNerdgasm wrote:
I've never ran a game or played in one that was 15 point buy, though I have recently started GMing a 10 point buy campaign, and my players seem to be enjoying it.

Glad to see someone else doing this and getting a positive result.


I do, both as a PC and a GM. Right now we are running the first module of Carrion Crown with only 3 PCs (an Alchemist, a Ranger and a Wizard) with 15 point buy and everyone is still alive (we just finished clearing the first floor of Harrowstone). I think I could enjoy 20 point buy too but no more than that.


auticus wrote:
SwnyNerdgasm wrote:
I've never ran a game or played in one that was 15 point buy, though I have recently started GMing a 10 point buy campaign, and my players seem to be enjoying it.
Glad to see someone else doing this and getting a positive result.

I'd rather be more glad with everyone enjoying different methods in different tables.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Haven't read all the posts but....

Would I DM or play w/ a 15 point buy?

NO!
Absolutely not.

I play to have fun.
I play to be a "champion" or to challenge a group of "champions."

I don't play to be a mediocre hack, a half step ahead of the peasant farmer with dung on his bare feet.

We know what awesomeness exists out there in magic items, high levels, and uber stats -- ignoring that and playing lame PCs or NPCs sucks.

(Your mileage may vary -- especially if you drive a Yugo or a Sprint or a Tempo or an Edsel.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
auticus wrote:

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)

I seriously question the balance of a 15 point buy no dump stats party. We always allowed dump stats but usually the limit was 8. The SAD spell caster will walk away happy with an almost maxed stat while the rest of the party will struggle tremendously.

The rogue will be a non-factor in fights. Monks especially, but a lot of other heavily MAD classes might as well be banned. As always in 3.x, people keep limiting physical damage classes when they are almost never the problem or the dominant force.

At level 5+, the arcane spell caster is taking out dozens of enemies at a time in the surprise round. The divine spell caster, with a few rounds of prep easily surpass the fighting-oriented characters. The pet classes can go back to camp to craft while their pet handles things just as good as the rogue can.

I have never seen a campaign where the GM went: "damn, this rogue (or paladin or cavalier, etc) is really breaking stuff for me! I need to come up with a way to challenge him without killing the rest of the party in the process."

Neither have I as a player experienced that one of the warrior-types have made my character irrelevant. While higher point buy certainly is welcome for a spell caster, I find that they can always rely on one stat to do the job for them while other classes need different stats for dealing damage and survival.


Personally I despise 15 point buy and would politely decline to play. That being said we have zero min maxers in our group, I seldom see more than one 8 if any, and have never seen anyone start with a stat over 18 so all 15 seems to do in my mind is remove several classes from playability and make it impossible to do unique things like fighters with skills, or barbarians who are socialable.


Having tried the 4d6 discard lowest and the 15, 20 and 25 point builds - I must say the 15 point build is the most annoying one to play. It pretty much makes some classes moot, while others can work just fine. In other words, it leads to less variation in class choices I find.

25 point builds seems just as bad. I made some premades for someone new to the system, and some who have been stuck playing one class through 15 years or so of fantasy roleplaying - to make it less of a hassle to survive at the start. But then it just ended up relying to much on the numbers, and not on creativity.

Rolling is the most fun, as it makes pretty much every character feel unique in some way just by how the stats pan out. A ranger in my Kingmaker campaign found out that if he had used the point buy system, it would be 66 points or something like that - the dicegods made him roll minimum on all hit points the first 3 levels or so. Nothing like living in constant paranoia about losing your one in a million character once you see someone with a greataxe or so...


With a 20 point build, you WILL have a weakness of some sort, and some people I know have said it's almost impossible to makes certain classes with that much (Magus was the one he mentioned specifically, but I wouldn't know). And I've had to make hard choices on every character I've made, except my Alchemist (and even he will have to sleep on the ground, because a bed roll would push him into medium load).

I'd feel utterly boxed in by 15 points.


auticus wrote:
SwnyNerdgasm wrote:
I've never ran a game or played in one that was 15 point buy, though I have recently started GMing a 10 point buy campaign, and my players seem to be enjoying it.
Glad to see someone else doing this and getting a positive result.

It's a pretty brutal horror themed campaign and I wanted my players to feel overwhelmed, I was almost hesitant about the 10 point buy, but after a few sessions the were enjoying it, so I kept it as is


Our party does. Our DM at first thought a 10 point buy no dump was a good idea. I talked him out of it.

Silver Crusade

How about a 15 point buy, then allowing 2 points every four levels instead of the standard one? Or one point every two levels instead of four?

Shadow Lodge

Nope. Probably never will. I may tone things down from where it's at now, but never that low.


Ajaxis wrote:
Or one point every two levels instead of four?

This is what I was thinking about.

Only I would dictate 3 out of the 4 points based on how they role played with their character. So if they were the face of the party I would bump up char, If they were the meat-shield I would bump up con, if they were the thinkers I would bump up int.

It might piss off my players (me deciding what points go where) but I doubt it. A gift ability point is really questioned or argued.

Dark Archive

Always did 20 point buy till this latest campaign. Just went 15 and will prolly never go back.


Ajaxis wrote:
Or one point every two levels instead of four?

This is what I was thinking about.

Only I would dictate 1 out of every 2 points based on how they role played with their character. So if they were the face of the party I would bump up char, If they were the meat-shield I would bump up con, if they were the thinkers I would bump up int.

It might piss off my players (me deciding what points go where) but I doubt it. A gift ability point is really questioned or argued.

Dark Archive

Always did 20 point buy till this latest campaign. Just went 15 and will prolly never go back.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
auticus wrote:

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)

You see, this is what I utterly hate about some DMs views on gaming. I AM NOT AN AVERAGE COMMONER. By the Gods, I am a HERO. If I wanted to play an average Joe-shmuck, I'd play Call of Cthulu where I die or go mad every game.

I can't stand games where it starts out as . . . "You've lived your entire life on the farm and you have a walking staff, the shirt on your back, and ten coppers--and because your family of peasants couldn't afford to send you off to that wizard academy, you can be a fighter, barbarian, ranger, or rogue. Next level, you can take what you really want to be, because that would be more realistic."

I walk when I get some idiotic pissant DM like that--and so do my players that I bring to the table. We aren't cho-chos, and the DM sure as hades ain't B&O, so quit trying to railroad us and just play the game!

Master Arminas

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
master arminas wrote:
You see, this is what I utterly hate about some DMs views on gaming. I AM NOT AN AVERAGE COMMONER.

At those DMs tables, yes, you are. You want to be a hero, find a DM that matches your playstyle. Calling them idiotic pissants because you don't like the game they run is idiotic.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The main problem with 10-point and 15-point buys is it really is a kick in the groin for characters that depend on two, three, or four ability scores. Monks are renowned for their problems in low-point buy games.

As far as min-maxing, I have seen it, but I am of the balanced school, myself. Showing here (all stats are pre-racial mods):

10-point buy: Str 14; Dex 12; Con 12; Int 10; Wis 13; Cha 8.
15-point buy: Str 14; Dex 14; Con 12; Int 10; Wis 14; Cha 8.
20-point buy: Str 14; Dex 14; Con 14; Int 12; Wis 14; Cha 8.
25-point buy: Str 14; Dex 14; Con 14; Int 14; Wis 14; Cha 10.

Yes, you say it is only a few points difference. But those few points make a lot of difference to someone who doesn't want to be 'superhuman' but instead just pretty decent.

For my own games, I let people use a 20-point buy, but they can only have one stat below a 10, and that stat can't go under 8. Solves a lot of problems. But if they really want that 20 to start, they can get it (if they pick a race with a floating +2 ability score modifier). It might cost them 16 of their 20 points, leaving them with just 4 for everything else (6, if they drop one stat to an 8), which ain't a lot.

Master Arminas


TOZ wrote:
master arminas wrote:
You see, this is what I utterly hate about some DMs views on gaming. I AM NOT AN AVERAGE COMMONER.
At those DMs tables, yes, you are. You want to be a hero, find a DM that matches your playstyle. Calling them idiotic pissants because you don't like the game they run is idiotic.

It's funny because it was my PLAYERS that were the ones who suggested we switch from epic-super-awesome stats to a 15 pt buy. Personally, I think you can still be an effective player with 15 pts maybe not a one man killing machine but an effective player all the same.

Out of curiosity. What is the point buy that paizo designs their APs around? Isn't it 15.


I can't find reference now but I was under the impression that quite a few bestiary monsters use it as well.

Dark Archive

I have been toying with a idea for my homebrew setting I am working on.

Basically everyone starts off as a 0 level character(still deciding how to do this) with a 10 point buy.Then at level 1 they get the equivalent of 15 points for stats.

At level 4 instead of getting a stat increase their point buy increases to 20.

At level 8 it raises to 25 and then the standard 1 point per 4 level thereafter.


master arminas wrote:
auticus wrote:

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)

You see, this is what I utterly hate about some DMs views on gaming. I AM NOT AN AVERAGE COMMONER. By the Gods, I am a HERO. If I wanted to play an average Joe-shmuck, I'd play Call of Cthulu where I die or go mad every game.

I can't stand games where it starts out as . . . "You've lived your entire life on the farm and you have a walking staff, the shirt on your back, and ten coppers--and because your family of peasants couldn't afford to send you off to that wizard academy, you can be a fighter, barbarian, ranger, or rogue. Next level, you can take what you really want to be, because that would be more realistic."

I walk when I get some idiotic pissant DM...

So if we don't play the game how you like it, that makes us idiotic pissant DMs?

lol.

How about, you don't like games like that, so you don't need to play in them and don't worry about those that like to play that way. How's that? Or does it somehow enrage you to know that others are playing D&D/PF wrong/bad? Last I checked there weren't ninjas in stealth suits breaking into peoples' houses and making them play in ways that they didn't like.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mage Evolving wrote:
TOZ wrote:
master arminas wrote:
You see, this is what I utterly hate about some DMs views on gaming. I AM NOT AN AVERAGE COMMONER.
At those DMs tables, yes, you are. You want to be a hero, find a DM that matches your playstyle. Calling them idiotic pissants because you don't like the game they run is idiotic.

It's funny because it was my PLAYERS that were the ones who suggested we switch from epic-super-awesome stats to a 15 pt buy. Personally, I think you can still be an effective player with 15 pts maybe not a one man killing machine but an effective player all the same.

Out of curiosity. What is the point buy that paizo designs their APs around? Isn't it 15.

Supposedly yes the monsters are designed for four characters using the 15 point buy. That is "standard" mode. 20 point buy is "easy mode". 10 point buy is "hard mode".

I have yet to see how the 10 point buy has screwed people over either. I think people take things way too seriously and, it being the internet, exaggerate and blow things way out of proportion.

The difference between a 10 point and a 15 point buy character is two or so stats with a +1 mod difference. Same with 15 point compared to 20 point.

Catastrophic epic screwing of PCs over there lol.

If you need 20 point buy, then play in a group that does 20 point buy. If you like 50 point buy, play in a group that does 50 point buy (note this is not directed at anyone in particular, this is just general)

People who launch themselves on others for not playing like they do and go nerd-rage on them are their own special breed.


I am a 15 point buy archer ranger and I did fine in a homebrew and got to second level in a pbp until the gm got busy and the game ended.I did okay in the game and I had fun.


Personally I'd probably hate the hell out of playing 15 point point buy but we roll em 4d6 and 1's and end up high 20s or 30s in comparison and I don't know about the rest of you but I like to feel heroic while I'm playing after all if I wanted to be some useless shmuck I'd just live my life instead =P.


I do apologize if my tone was out of line. My problem is not with a 15-point buy (which is standard for APs and PFS), but rather with a 10-point buy.

I did go over the top in response to the idea of forcing a 10-point buy down the players throats as a way to make them roleplay how the DM wants them to roleplay while allowing other party members to use a 15-point buy.

Writing comes easy for some people--making up backgrounds on the fly is part of their fun. But that is not true of everyone. Some people really find it daunting and intimidating, especially when they are told to turn in 1,000 words before they can create their character and spend their points!

Sure, the peasant hero who comes from nothing and defeats the evil overlords, becoming the new king--rich and powerful--in the process is a staple of fiction, but it doesn't often work in RPGs. Because our games are not novels, and players do not like being rail-roaded, in even minor ways.

I remember playing a game once in the Forgotten Realms where the DM just kept pushing us (six players, including myself) away from what we wanted to do and into his own idea of what we should be doing.

It got so bad after we finally finished one of his little side-quests and thought we could get on with what we wanted; but no, he refused to give us the rewards we had earned because we didn't discover every last one of his obscure clues that he had designed. Finally the paladin--the paladin!--said screw it and drew his sword on the priest of Tyr, cutting him down in his own church!

The DM was livid, and said, well you just fell!

And the paladin said, Great! Now I can have some fun without that miserable blank-blanking-blank nit-picking everything I did for his church. Oh, rocks fell and we all died, but before we reached that point, the whole party got into the swing of things and we tore that temple and its defenders apart! DM never did come back after that night, though; he seemed to take it as a personal affront that we didn't enjoy his trips down the rabbit-hole.

What I am trying to say is this, creating unbalance--however minor--between player characters while using a ruleset (point buy) designed specifically for balance is putting a ready made wedge in the group. Someone is going to take it you are picking on him or her simply because they can't write as well as you do--and are not as imaginative as you are. And that resentment will grow and then you will have a problem.

That's how I see things.

Master Arminas


6 people marked this as a favorite.

The reason that I would never play a 15 or 10 pt buy game, outside of maybe an AP is that the entire feeling of the "gritty low-power" games that so many people are in love with disincentivises heroics. In every instance that I have seen it pushes players into a survival mentality which is generally undesirable*, since Tabletop RPGs in general are supposed to reward out of the box thinking and high-flying heroics, which at 10 and sometimes 15pt power levels just turn into a one-way ticket to the outer planes.

On the flip side, I find that 25pts is too high and throws the entire system out of whack. The only time that I as a DM have allowed the players that much power was in a game that I wanted to start out at low level but still give the characters chances to fight dragons fairly early on, so it was necessary for them to be able to take EL+3 and +4 encounters.

Since 3.0 I was always told that the CR system was balanced around 20pt buy. Did this change in PF and I just missed the memo?

* Unless of course the entire group is on board for a survival-horror game


Zaister wrote:
After some experience of always having to adjust the opposition upwards to be a challenge at all, my new campaigns I started this year are all using 15 points only, and I'm content with the development. I'll probably keep it as a rule for the future.

SO I used to play a lot back in the day and I am getting back in. We usually did 4d6 drop. I was looking at the 15 and 20 buy and was considering doing something like a 17 pt buy, not quite heroic but enough to have fun. We will probably have 5, MAYBE 6 playing.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Since 3.0 the CR system was designed around the Elite Array (15,14,13,12,10,8). In 3.x that was a 25 point buy I believe. But they started with an 8 being 0, rather than a 10. In Pathfinder the elite array equals a 15 point build. I find things usually work fine with the elite array.

Remember the common man is a 3 point build or 10.5 average. 15 is a substantial increase above that.


Saint Caleth wrote:

The reason that I would never play a 15 or 10 pt buy game, outside of maybe an AP is that the entire feeling of the "gritty low-power" games that so many people are in love with disincentivises heroics. In every instance that I have seen it pushes players into a survival mentality which is generally undesirable*, since Tabletop RPGs in general are supposed to reward out of the box thinking and high-flying heroics, which at 10 and sometimes 15pt power levels just turn into a one-way ticket to the outer planes.

On the flip side, I find that 25pts is too high and throws the entire system out of whack. The only time that I as a DM have allowed the players that much power was in a game that I wanted to start out at low level but still give the characters chances to fight dragons fairly early on, so it was necessary for them to be able to take EL+3 and +4 encounters.

Since 3.0 I was always told that the CR system was balanced around 20pt buy. Did this change in PF and I just missed the memo?

* Unless of course the entire group is on board for a survival-horror game

I'm not sure, but that might have changed since 3.5e showed up. Oh, and your post rocks but seems to be ignored.


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Remember that the point buy system changed from D&D third edition to Pathfinder. Mainly, I guess, because the D&D system isn't open content.


master arminas wrote:
angry stuff.

First the 10 point value set up has nothing to do with railroading. Railroading is separate from every point buy value or any stat method what-so-ever.

Second what you say makes NO sense. A GM asking for a good background is the very opposite of railroading. The very fact that he wants to know about your character's environment and motivations means he wants to let you have some control over the direction the game is going in! A railroading GM never requires backgrounds because they are not relevant in his game. He wouldn't even read them if you made them. He would just stick you in his plot train and do whatever he wanted regardless of your actual background. In fact every railroading GM I have seen has gotten upset with people who try to write a background. Most just assign you whatever background they feel like for their plot train and yell if you try to be creative.

Scarab Sages

15 point buys rock the house. I do not find it limiting in any way.


master arminas wrote:
anger

A 10 point buy system does not rail road anything. A 10 point buy system creates characters that are going to have a higher difficulty fighting things. It is "hard mode". Difficulty levels have nothing to do with railroading.

I've played most of my games since 1988 to today on hard mode. So to say it doesn't work in RPGs is a false statement, because it has worked fine for me. It has worked fine for the other people that I know that do the same thing. I prefer games where players aren't gliding over all of their encounters with no difficulty. My favorite game systems are Warhammer and Rolemaster, both of which are "gritty" and hard difficulty. My preferred video games are things like Demon Souls and Dark Souls and I play all of my RPGs on hard mode. That's me, that's what I like, and I find players in my groups that like or can enjoy that style of game.

If one doesn't like that style of game, that doesn't hurt my feelings or enrage me. I don't like easy mode or super heroic games, but it doesn't enrage me to know that you or someone else enjoys them. Nor will I post rants and tirades about how people who like that kind of thing are weak or whatever derrogatory term I can pull to try to diminish them because ultimately I don't care what you do for fun in your spare time, it doesn't affect me or my table at all, nor will it ever.

It doesn't work for YOU because you don't like hard-mode, and that's fine. Speaking for the entire RPG community and saying that 10 point buy doesn't work is ... here it comes... a fallacy.

Assuming that I push my players to do what I want because I use a 10 point buy is also a fallacy. You don't me. I have never once indicated that this is what I do. Somehow you are taking me using a 10 point buy and getting bios from players as me MAKING them do things that I want. That's like me saying that I know you wear women's shoes and have fetishes for small animals. Just because I know. o.O

I have six players in my Monday night group. We played our game last night and I brought this up to them and pretty much every single player present laughed and basically said "tell them to mind their own business and stop worrying how other people have fun".

My table ranges from 23 year olds up to in their 40s.

The way I do things seems to work fine because the same rules are being used in a Saturday campaign and we filled out again, and none of the players have an issue with it.

They all realize that going into it, 10 point buy makes things harder, if they want 15 points they will write 1000 words which none of them have an issue with doing.

So again, as I've stated several times, just because you don't like 10 point buy, or you don't like writing bios, doesn't matter. I'm not pushing that that is the best way to play, I'm saying that's how I play and I don't have problems finding players either, nor have I through four editions of the game. That must mean there is an audience for higher danger games where you aren't super heroic.

There's nothing wrong with super heroic. IF you like super heroic, all the power to you. I'm not sending ninjas to your house to burn your books and make you play how I play. I don't like super-heroic. But I don't bounce on someone talking about how awful of a DM or player that they are because they need easy mode to survive because they are skill-less ameobas that couldn't hack it, or other derrogatory terms to put them or how they have fun down.

I personally don't care how people have fun. I shared how I have fun and how my players have fun.

You want to see my campaigns? They are online:

http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/the-age-of-kings
http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaigns/caer-twyn-age-of-kings (upcoming saturday group, site content is not really there other than a couple maps and the beginning of a guide)

http://dnd.chrisnye.net -> old 4th ed site with my maps

I've never once hand waived someone's death just because. The objective of our table is not to win at D&D. It's to tell a story. I prefer sandbox games and I put about 6-8 hours a week into preping and encourage them to go off the beaten path. I hate railroading. So much for assumptions huh? I ask for backgrounds because it helps me write the setting and give encounters and adventures that have a meaning for the character, not just dungeon delve random places, kill monsters, take their stuff.

Player death happens. That doesn't mean you lose at D&D. Characters die. If you don't like that style of game... don't play in one. lol it's really as simple as that.


A general problem I see with PB 10 (and even with PB 15 to a lesser degree) is that MAD classes really are having a hard time.

A PB 10 and PB 20 wizard won't differ that much in power, but for say a monk or paladin it makes a world of difference.


I think by this part the problem isn't your preference auticus, but the way you present it and how you talk down to people who present their reasonings as to why they disagree with you. And a 10 point buy CAN railroad things. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. You cannot go claiming that "it will never cause railroading" as if it was a fact, because it is NOT a fact.

Also, your DM pride is showing. "Yeah I never hold back and I'm an awesome DM because of that" is a pretty weak attitude. I never held back with my players either, but I don't loudly proclaim my superiority as a DM over it. And take note that the players were, by your standards, "playing on easy mode" yet all except one member of the original party ended up dying by the end of the campaign in CR-appropriate encounters and in a few slightly adjusted ones.


Hyla wrote:

A general problem I see with PB 10 (and even with PB 15 to a lesser degree) is that MAD classes really are having a hard time.

A PB 10 and PB 20 wizard won't differ that much in power, but for say a monk or paladin it makes a world of difference.

That's perspective really. We have a paladin in our party and he didn't write a bio and has a 10 point build and has been doing quite well.

I don't see them having a hard time at all. Overall 10 point makes it more difficult in general but that's the theme of the game.

I think if you are an optimizer type of person then I can definitely see where one would have an issue with it. One of our new saturday players is an optimizer and was over last night flipping through the manual thinking about his character with a 10 point buy and discussing it (in a constructive way).

There is also a monk present in that game as well (who is also not doing a bio and is going to be running 10 point build).

Part of the allure of that type of game is the challenge-factor. If one is worried about having a hard time and doesn't want to have a hard time, then I would definitely say this type of game is not something that one would enjoy, and that's ok.


Icyshadow wrote:

I think by this part the problem isn't your preference auticus, but the way you present it and how you talk down to people who present their reasonings as to why they disagree with you. And a 10 point buy CAN railroad things. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. You cannot go claiming that "it will never cause railroading" as if it was a fact, because it is NOT a fact.

Also, your DM pride is showing. "Yeah I never hold back and I'm an awesome DM because of that" is a pretty weak attitude. I never held back with my players either, but I don't loudly proclaim my superiority as a DM over it. And take note that the players were, by your standards, "playing on easy mode" yet all except one member of the original party ended up dying by the end of the campaign in CR-appropriate encounters and in a few slightly adjusted ones.

Go back and read the thread. Being verbally attacked does that to anyone. I'd be interested to see how you take it if someone pounced on you and called you a "pissant player because you like playing with heroic characters" or something similar.

You taking what I'm posting and then saying that I'm proclaiming my superiority is telling on where you are standing... you are seemingly offended and are putting words that were never said out there as if they were. I never once said that I'm an awesome DM because I don't hold back, that's what you are reflecting back (presumably because you don't like low power games and have alreayd entered the discussion with a negative attitude towards it)

10 point can railroad you? Sure. So can 15 point, 20 point, 25 point. Railroading is all on the game itself, not on the build. If a DM wants to railroad, they will railroad. I've always actively tried to avoid railroading and I think I've done a good job. If you can show me how 10 point builds encourage railroading, I can show you how 25 point builds can do the same. Who then is right?

My last 3.5 campaign was easy mode. And I could kill the party too. That's part of the whole thing really if you want to make a 25 point character build party, I can still wipe you out by putting you up against CR+2 or CR+3 as a standard encounter. In essence, the difficulty level can be the same regardless of build, it's just that one takes more work to challenge the players than the other.

The whole issue comes down to people saying "my way of playing is the best way, and how you are doing it is wrong. Not only is it wrong, but it "disgusts me", "enrages me", etc... to know that you are doing things this way. How you are doing things "railroads" people, and not only that but that means you hand waive their death if they make you mad. And because you say you think you do a good job, that makes you arrogant and you have a weak attitude"

Really when you post attacks on someone, particularly baseless ones about someone you don't know and have never seen play before, how do you really expect them to respond back?

lol have a good day everyone. We will still be using our 10 point builds (15 for those that write the bio). I have an adventure path to work on writing.

Dark Archive

15 point no-dump rogue (Human Rogue)
Str: 13 Int: 10 Wis: 10 Dex: 18 Con: 12 Chr: 10

Comments: Archery style; will get deadly aim and such, but mostly made for out-of-combat.

15-point no dump monk (Dwarf Manuever master monk)
Str: 10 Int: 10 Wis: 16 Dex: 16 Con: 12 Chr: 8

Comments: will eventually combine Wis and dex for Manuevers (agile manuevers and the manuever master bonus). Good AC, great at lockdown. I think playing a monk as a damage machine is generally a mistake. When you do want to go that route, you should be able to afford an amulet of agility by level 5. Highly effective.

No, these guys aren't the supergods they would be with 20 and 25 point stat-dumps, but they're quite good at the 15-point game with the 16-18 statted casters and 12 dex 12 con fighters. All classes scale, and believe it or not casty types use the points better than SAD classes (getting that 18-20 doesn't hurt as badly, so they can work on defenses).

The game breaks to a large degree if you go up from 15 (or 20 no dump), as it makes a sharp difference early but only a minor later (so CR differential is hard to calculate). A better way might be to start with a 15-point build and give them an additional point every other level; so they'll be a 20-point buy at 10 and 25 at 15.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
auticus wrote:
I think if you are an optimizer type of person then I can definitely see where one would have an issue with it. One of our new saturday players is an optimizer and was over last night flipping through the manual thinking about his character with a 10 point buy and discussing it (in a constructive way).

I don't think you've ever played with a munchkin. They absolutely love low-powered campaigns and challenging content as that makes their optimization stand out more above the rest. They play to "win" and if you make it harder to "win" their efforts will make it all the more worth it.

Meanwhile the players who enjoy making diverse and unique characters will be harshly punished for their efforts to do so in a low point buy game. Not only will they simply be worse at everything, they will probably die so often as to make character development largely pointless.

As a side note, saying that you're The Best GM Alive and that your players love you and have no problems ever is not giving you any bonus points in this discussion as there is nothing to base that on. I've played with plenty of GMs who thought their campaigns were great while the players had no fun at all.

101 to 150 of 622 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Does anyone do 15 point buy? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.