I'd say it depends on the players; most of ther people I play with see immediately which side their bread is buttered on, so to speak, and given a point buy won't waste points on stats that aren't doing them any good. If your players engage in any level of practical optimization at all, point buy gets very cookie-cutter very quickly -- most especially for the SAD classes/builds. But this is starting to veer into "ROLE-playing, not roll playing!" territory, and we're probably better off leaving that argument in the hundreds of dead threads already littered with it.In my own games, I have never seen the 'cookie-cutter' effect with point buys.I agree. This is nothing but a myth. I have played/made the same classes several times, and the builds vary. Even if you sit at a table with cookie cutter players the issue is the players, just like if players min-max it is the players.
I was assuming cookie cutter meant exact same build.
The stats might be similar, but they will be different enough, and the concepts, feats, and equipment will vary enough that they are noticeably different.
|
I didn't bother writing code. First if all, I know the average is different after over 20 years of rolling dice :)
I did misread the results, however. 4d6 drop the lowest averages to 12.24.
You don't need to write code to know the average is different, or even to work out what the average of (4d6 drop lowest) is.
The key observation is that the average of (4d6 drop lowest) is (the average of 4d6) minus (the average of the lowest of 4d6).
The two separate terms are a lot easier to evaluate.
I'm pretty sure that everyone here knows (or can quickly convince themselves) that the average of 4d6 is 14, so the only tricky part is to work out the average (or expected value) of the lowest of 4d6.
There are 6*6*6*6 = ways of rolling 4d6.
Of those, there are 5*5*5*5 outcomes where no '1' shows up on any die.
That means there are (6*6*6*6 - 5*5*5*5) occasions when the lowest number is a 1.
Similarly, there are (5*5*5*5 - 4*4*4*4) occurrences of 2, and so on.
That gives us:
(6*6*6*6) - (5*5*5*5) = 1296 - 625 = 671 '1's
(5*5*5*5) - (4*4*4*4) = 625 - 256 = 369 '2's
(4*4*4*4) - (3*3*3*3) = 256 - 81 = 175 '3's
(3*3*3*3) - (2*2*2*2) = 81 - 16 = 65 '4's
(2*2*2*2) - (1*1*1*1) = 16 - 1 = 15 '5's
(1*1*1*1) - (0*0*0*0) = 1 - 0 = 1 '6's
for an expected value of
(671*1 + 369*2 + 175*3 + 65*4 + 15*5 + 1*6 = 2275)/1296
2275/1296 is 1.7554, and 14 - 1.7554 is indeed 12.2446
I was assuming cookie cutter meant exact same build. The stats might be similar, but they will be different enough, and the concepts, feats, and equipment will vary enough that they are noticeably different.
Maybe, but even with the glut of archetypes, there are still a lot of "gimmes" vs. "Timmy Cards." Pretty much all wizards will buy up Int to 18 and sell down Str and Cha to 7. All druids will take Natural Spell, because it's that good. Etc.
I was assuming cookie cutter meant exact same build. The stats might be similar, but they will be different enough, and the concepts, feats, and equipment will vary enough that they are noticeably different.Maybe, but even with the glut of archetypes, there are still a lot of "gimmes" vs. "Timmy Cards." Pretty much all wizards will buy up Int to 18 and sell down Str and Cha to 7. All druids will take Natural Spell, because it's that good. Etc.
You expect wizards to have a high intelligence because it makes them do what wizards do, it's the way the game works. Rincewind is a fun character to read about, but not much fun to play.
However, just because one wizard has an 18 intelligence doesn't make them the same as another wizard with 18 intelligence; there's a lot more to a wizard than his IQ. I've seen a necromancer with 18 intelligence and 14 strength swinging a scythe. Why? The player thought it was cool. He didn't use the scythe much, but now and then he did.
Myself I love to do dex-based fighting classes, because I like the idea of speed over power.
I agree, some people fall into the trap of thinking "this is the right way to play" because it is optimal, but point buy or dice roll will make no difference - the problem is in the person, not the character sheet.
I was assuming cookie cutter meant exact same build. The stats might be similar, but they will be different enough, and the concepts, feats, and equipment will vary enough that they are noticeably different.Maybe, but even with the glut of archetypes, there are still a lot of "gimmes" vs. "Timmy Cards." Pretty much all wizards will buy up Int to 18 and sell down Str and Cha to 7. All druids will take Natural Spell, because it's that good. Etc.
I agree. If I make a druid with an animal companion I am definitely taking natural spell, and if I make a 2-handed fighter I am taking power attack.
I guess the other poster can explain what they meant by "cookie cutter".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree, some people fall into the trap of thinking "this is the right way to play" because it is optimal, but point buy or dice roll will make no difference - the problem is in the person, not the character sheet.
I disagree; I find the problem to be in the system balance, not in the player. If the various options were closer to poviding equal benefits, you could play whatever kind of character you wanted without being totally gimped for certain choices. It's one thing I tried to improve on with the "Kirthfinder" houserules.
I agree, some people fall into the trap of thinking "this is the right way to play" because it is optimal, but point buy or dice roll will make no difference - the problem is in the person, not the character sheet.I disagree; I find the problem to be in the system balance, not in the player. If the various options were closer to poviding equal benefits, you could play whatever kind of character you wanted without being totally gimped for certain choices. It's one thing I tried to improve on with the "Kirthfinder" houserules.
My point was that it isn't in point buy itself, but I take your point, it's like Two Weapon Fighting and Vital Strike not scaling the way Power Attack does. That's a matter of re-balancing the feats, though.
I agree, some people fall into the trap of thinking "this is the right way to play" because it is optimal, but point buy or dice roll will make no difference - the problem is in the person, not the character sheet.I disagree; I find the problem to be in the system balance, not in the player. If the various options were closer to poviding equal benefits, you could play whatever kind of character you wanted without being totally gimped for certain choices. It's one thing I tried to improve on with the "Kirthfinder" houserules.
I agree with Kirth, specifically because the system must be balanced around an assumed level of power, and variation too farm that point causes issues.
However, restrict the power band too much and it becomes too narrow, and all characters begin to feel the same, which is an issue many people had with 4e, from what I gather.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Purely in response to the OP(not going through all 300+ posts), Point Buy ends up leveling the field. You don't have the lucky players ending up with super-charged stats and someone having a bad day on the dice ending up with a cruddy character. While I like the idea of rolling old school, point buy end up creating an equal potential for all players involved.
and do tell why players like having an equal potiential, when all it does in the long run is screw everybody.
you end up at every 4 levels you put the new stat point into your main stat and look for stat increasers of that stat....
Who gets screwed, and how? I mean in an actual game, not in theory.
and do tell why players like having an equal potiential, when all it does in the long run is screw everybody.
I have to mirror Wraithstrike's question as to how point buy 'screws everybody'...in fact I am having trouble understanding how it screws anybody except maybe some munchkin with loaded dice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is an idea for a hybrid system: part point buy, part die roll.
1. Design a character with 20 or 25 point buy, no stats allowed below 10. Choose a race and class.
2. For each attribute at 10, roll 4d6 keep 3. No swapping is allowed - you get what you get.
All characters won't be equal, but they will differ in the power of their secondary stats rather than their primary stats. Race and class is chosen during step 1 so you can't take advantage of a good random roll (though it might make multi-classing more attractive).
Example: 20 point fighter with (pre-racial) 16 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex. Int, Wis and Cha determined by 4d6 keep 3. Whatever you get for the rolled stats, you will have a capable fighter with the point-buy physical stats.
I like your idea. It has both point buy and rolling.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
New idea:
--------+--------
Step 1: Roll 1d6 three times, rerolling any repeats. The results form a group of stats. (For example, a set of 1, 3, and 6 gets you a set of STR, CON and CHA.)
Step 2: Roll 2d4+2. You get that many points to point-buy the set of three stats determined in Step 1.
Step 3: Pick one of your remaining stats. It is a 10.
Step 4: Use 4d6 drop lowest for the remaining two stats.
There, that should please everybody, right? ;)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like your idea. It has both point buy and rolling.Here is an idea for a hybrid system: part point buy, part die roll.
1. Design a character with 20 or 25 point buy, no stats allowed below 10. Choose a race and class.
2. For each attribute at 10, roll 4d6 keep 3. No swapping is allowed - you get what you get.
All characters won't be equal, but they will differ in the power of their secondary stats rather than their primary stats. Race and class is chosen during step 1 so you can't take advantage of a good random roll (though it might make multi-classing more attractive).
Example: 20 point fighter with (pre-racial) 16 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex. Int, Wis and Cha determined by 4d6 keep 3. Whatever you get for the rolled stats, you will have a capable fighter with the point-buy physical stats.
Why wouldn't you like it? It's pretty unlikely that you'll drop an attribute below 10 (there's about a one in 6 chance for that to happen, and only about one chance in 17 to end up with an attribute below 7). The expected attribute gain is over two points, with almost a one in 4 chance of getting a 15 or higher.
This looks as though it works out, roughly speaking, to a power level somewhere around a point buy with five additional points.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want a way of putting a bit of random into a point buy, just roll a d6 when creating a character:
1=Str
2=Dex
3=Con
4=Int
5=Wis
6=Cha
This becomes you secondary attribute. Justify it and try and come up with a way of making this work. You might get something you need, you might get something totally off-beat (wizard with strength, monk with charisma).
If you DM is feeling generous, eliminate the 'useful' attributes to make sure that attribute truly unusual for your class and give it a +2 bonus.
There are lots of ways of making a character interesting and off-beat without going for rolling (which might not give you a workable character at all) and while maintaining balance within the party.
I was aiming at a system that was fair in allows the players to choose what they want, and add an element of randomness that allows them to develop the character in possibly unusual non-optimized ways. Your system once again relies on just being random, which is what point buy lovers don't like.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
New plan:
When creating your character, you may name your ability scores whatever you like. Call your strength 'charisma' if you want. It just means your melee attacks and carrying capacity are based on charisma. Then call charisma 'stamp collection' and so on.
Justify it... somehow?
Yeah, I just re-wrote my code and found the answer to be 12.25. My head is now exploding though! Your 2 dice answer makes a lot of sense.
The next puzzle is for me to figure out how my original flawed code came up with the answer 10.5!
If your code was always dropping the same die, then you were effectively rolling 3d6 drop none. That would yield you the 10.5 average.
Alternatively, if you were simulating random rolls and not enumerating the actual results of 4d6 drop low, you could get quite a variety of answers depending on how the luck turns out. With 100,000 rolls, you're highly likely to get an experimental average that is very close to the theoretical one, but sometimes random gets a little weird. Your observed average could vary from the theoretical. I wouldn't expect a nearly 2 point difference though.
Interestingly the flaw was (due to my bad code and the MUMPS language) that it was ignoring any rolls that were the same, but if none were the same then it was ignoring the lowest. So 6441 would become 641, but 6444 would become 64. Why that should give a result of 10.5 I can't see!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because character creation and advancement should be an exact science.
Because you shouldn't be penalized your character's entire career for one bad roll.
Because it lets you build the character you WANT, how you want it.
Thread necromancy, presumably for the sake of trolling by PzkwVIb. Nice work favoriting yourself, PzkwVIb, (if that is your real name).
I like being able to write my character's backstory, motivations, goals, and talents before ever even meeting up with the GM. It is hard to bring my full package if I need to roll those stats at the table.
If I want to write a swordsman in training, but when I finally get to the table I roll a strength of 10, dex of 12 and con of 10 it is hard to be a swordsman. I cannot make a concept before rolling, but I cannot roll til I am at the table.
What a necro!
Personally, I use my own advancement system to great effect, which deals with the rolling/point buy issue. I start off the array with 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10. Then, add in racial modifiers... Then, at 2nd level, and every level thereafter, a character gains 1 stat point to put into an ability score. 2 at appropriate levels (4, 8, etc). Can't put it into the same score twice in a row, even for the double-point levels.
This lets players get their characters to what they want quicker, and generally generates more well-rounded characters. I also am one to adhere to the fact that PCs are meant to be special, so who gives a flying monkey if they wind up with high stats late game? Stat bonuses get lost behind class and spell noise around mid-game anyways (for reference, mid-game to me means around lvl 10). Course, I've also destroyed 'Ye Olde Magick Shoppe', but that's a different dead horse to beat.
Before hand, I personally preferred rolling. I've never had an issue with being the low-rolled guy, personally. I find the one thing he can do, and make sure I can do it well. Let superman deal with that horde of Doomsdays.... I'm just gonna kick back here and shoot the Lex Luthor that unleashed them. It was great RP when I rolled low-stat characters ('What do you mean the troll attacks me? Why not the weakling?!' 'Because he's a weakling, the troll doesn't feel he's worth the effort of killing while you're still doing 20+ damage to it' 'Plus, I'm hiding behind the archer'), the feel of actual accomplishment when I manage to get the character do something after all that hard work to make him work ('Wait a minute, did the tiny-statter just one shot the dragon?' 'Called shot to the head with a heavy cannon beotch!'). It's great fun playing a weakling, for me anyways.
Don't get me wrong. I love playing superman too... But I'm always the one who, if I rolled up a super three 17s and three 18s character, relegate myself to a supporting role so I don't totally outshine everybody. But, then, I'm just that kind of guy.
The only thing I can say point buy gives me over rolling, is the capability of having a character done before I get to the game.. Which, actually, I've only done twice, because I always like to see what the rest of the party is building. I've seen too many TPKs on either side of the screen with players who build their own characters before the game in their little vacuums with point buy. Conversely, those used with point buy at the beginning of the game with everyone together still wound up with major TPKs because everyone wanted to do what they wanted to do without paying attention to group cohesion.... But I suppose that's more of player fault than point-buy. In my experience though, I've seen less TPKs with rolled stats (disparate as they can be) with a group char-gen, because people actually pay attention to what everyone else can do.
Still... To each their own. There is no bad-wrong-fun in gaming, except for griefing (I think everyone can agree on that one), everyone has their own play style. If you don't like it, so be it, but seriously people... Please try to stop being inflammatory or insulting. I realize it's a hot topic, but there's no need to jump on someone's back with spiked cleats and beat people over the head with your opinion.
Point taken there, but the odds of rolling a 7 on 4d6 drop the lowest are remarkably low (average roll on 4d6 drop lowest is somewhere in the neighborhood of 10.5, as opposed to the average of 8.66 on straight 3d6).In my experience point buy systems only lead to Min-Maxing and Munchkinism, with ultimately low-balling of stats to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator. It also encourages people to build to mechanics as opposed to character.Then your experience does not reflect reality. People were dumping stats long before point buy came about. Putting a rolled 7 into CHA is no less "munchkiny" that putting a point-bought 7 there.
No matter the odds, someone WILL roll a really low stat at some time.
I recently rolled a 7 using 2d100 pick the better. Yes, I managed to roll a 7 and a 3 with 2d100.Because I managed to get a 14 with the same method and the rest of the stats were sub-par, too the rules in question told me to reroll completely so I did not have to play the con 7 (in a %ile system) but things like that happen.
I sure would have had a lot of fun with a guy who's about to die from a common cold, all the time.
TL;DR: Many people use point buy because it is better. At least subjective.
As a GM I like Point Buy because it ensures a power baseline, I know how strong (roughly) characters are going to be so I can have stuff ready for the first session.
As a player I prefer rolling because I enjoy the variability and I find it more fun to go, "Ok here are my stats, what's my character like" than "Ok here's the character I want what stats do I need."
Actually the character I've had the most fun with was a 3d6 in order Fighter with an Int of 3.
I would say that int is the least crippling stat to have that low. Sure, you can barely speak. But you can still function well and there are few things that take you out at once when compared to other low stats.
A human fighter with int 3 still has 2 skill-points per level (3 with favoured class bonus) and can fight the same a s the next guy. He just can't use combat expertise or feats with it as prerequisite.
I either let the players roll, or pre-gen the point-buy for them ("you have 16 14 14 12 12 10, distribute"
As a GM I like Point Buy because it ensures a power baseline, I know how strong (roughly) characters are going to be so I can have stuff ready for the first session.
As a player I prefer rolling because I enjoy the variability and I find it more fun to go, "Ok here are my stats, what's my character like" than "Ok here's the character I want what stats do I need."
Actually the character I've had the most fun with was a 3d6 in order Fighter with an Int of 3.
I would say that int is the least crippling stat to have that low. Sure, you can barely speak. But you can still function well and there are few things that take you out at once when compared to other low stats.
A human fighter with int 3 still has 2 skill-points per level (3 with favoured class bonus) and can fight the same a s the next guy. He just can't use combat expertise or feats with it as prerequisite.
The great thing about point buy is indeed the general knowledge in advance about the general strenght of the characters.
Although indeed hilarious an int 3 fighter under my GMing would have great difficulties using strategy. A low int character should not be allowed to make complicated strategy, like I ready my action to attack untill my fellow adventurer suplies me with a flank-bonus. As that kind of planning would be impossible for such a character. It would basically become a 'you mean, me smash' kind of character. Absolutely no problem with power attack, but tactics in a combat??? I don't think so.It's the same with characters making charisma a dump stat. PC's only do this when they know the GM doesn't (or they hope the GM won't) use social skills. I'd make characters pay for providing such a weak spot (not all the time off course, but enough to remind them).
I play in a kingmaker campaign now with a paladin that has charisma 18 and serious bonuses on diplomacy. Even in the wilderness this has payed off big time, when trying to negociate with some unfriendlies that basically became friendly in an instant (well several minutes later actually) and this made it even more frustrating for party members when I wasn't available for a negociation. The monster was evil and my paladin knew this and I did not want to negociate anything with him because my character would be unwilling to perform tasks for this evil monster. The only reason I didn't attack was because some valuable information was coming out of the monster, that wanted us to take care of some enemies for him. We have taken care of those enemies now and will return next session to the monsters and I have leverage on them because I secured something and want to use that to gently persuade (yes I mean blackmail) them to move from their current location. The reason I consider not eradicating them is because they were not aggressive towards me and because I think I can persuade them to leave using my leverage. I was smart enough not to make any promises and did not conduct the negociations to make sure I could not be pinned by a promise. The great part about this is that my fellow PC's have no idea of my planns yet, but I will fill them in shortly. I am very curious how the GM will react to my proposal as I haven't informed him yet. I am hoping out of character that the monsters will accept my offer and then deceive me so I will have a good reason to retaliate, but if this plan of persuading them to leave the area (which was our assignment) actually works without violence I won't mind either and consider that a good in character strategy from my paladin. One complication is that we learned that the monsters have an internall power struggle and I have not yet considered how to use that to my advantage.
If I had a paladin with a dump stat on Int, no GM should allow this strategy, but since I have a int 12 paladin I think it's not unreasonable to assume my character could come up with this strategy. And considering my +13 bonus on diplomacy and the leverage I hold I think I might actually have a chance to pull this off.
|
Just a curiosity, but why do so many people swear by the Point-Buy system? I understand that it is THE system used in Pathfinder Society, but why would anyone use it outside of organized play?
In my experience (32 years of RPGs ranging from BECMI D&D to AD&D 1st Ed., 2nd Ed., D&D 3.X, Pathfinder, GURPS, White Wolf's Storyteller System, Champions, and Fuzion, among others) point buy systems only lead to Min-Maxing and Munchkinism, with ultimately low-balling of stats to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator. It also encourages people to build to mechanics as opposed to character. (I cannot count the number of times when Charisma / whatever is the social ability of the system in question has become the "dump-stat" because too few GMs build social challenges into their games, and/or penalize players for RPing higher social ability that the character should have.)
My group uses Method one (4d6 drop the lowest) from the core rulebook, and has for years. We tried point buy when it was introduced in 3rd Ed. and didn't care for it, finding it far inferior to Method one, and (especially when I am DM, I admit to a certain level of harshness here) a far higher rate of character mortality.
The only thing we add to this system (4d6 and drop the lowest) is we roll two sets of stats and pick one. You never know when you might be born a runt instead of a hero.
I like rolling because it is fun, but dice hate me nowadays so I end up being really crappy character with rolling.
Me jiu-jitsu Troll. Like rolling.
Ever try making regenerating creature tap out? Heh heh.
I have a confession to make:
When my current group first started playing, none of them were familiar with the stats and how they interacted. They hadn't looked online to see the best ways to optimize stats.
So I told them, "order your stats from most important to least important" and told them what each stat did for their particular characters.
I then used the elite array. And honestly I think it's sort of been a godsend. The monk's stat grouping is a little less than ideal for him, but they're roughly balanced. The wizard had to work to get a really high int score. The difference between MAD and SAD became immediately less apparent when people weren't able to point buy their stats into the ideal places. It's true that builds got more similar, but when it's your first character you don't have any comparison points and really don't notice.
Whenever I did 4d6 minus lowest d6, I ended up feeling bad for players and letting them reroll if their stats ended up too low. Inevitably, everyone's stats ended up ridiculous. This was problematic and limiting.
My own first rolled stat character was a mystic theurge to be who had 17 15 10 10 10 8 as stats (no racial modifiers). The point buy here ended up at 27. Apparently near average, but it was a nightmare. My stats really limited my options at the low level we played the game at.
I see the value of the roll system, especially for shorter, laid back games. There's a whimsy to it, and it's fun to run high stats and sometimes fun to run bad stats. However, I find any dice roll that effects your character concept in a permanent manner is something that sort of puts me on edge and seems unnecessarily punishing.
|
|
Two years too late, friend.Because you can have stats and character sheets ready before the session starts, avoiding spending time on character gen.Too true rolling, that is the only fair way. Point buy schemes suck.
I faved my comments so I could find them quicker. I find these message boards rather cumbersome. PzkwVIb is a handle. My Real Name is Joseph J Schuler Jr. and I have been roll playing since the D&D boxed set with several long stretches of inactivity.
I am merely expressing my opinion as a long time gamer. How that is trolling is anyone's guess.
I have no problem with either but prefer normal Point buy (15 or 25 in 3.5, i am not a fan of the higher point buys personally), just like being able to design the character i want completely while leaving nothing in that part to chance.
Though i have no problem rolling either, i just would like to know ahead of time so i dont have a preconceived notion of the character i want to play and go by the stats i roll, that can be a really fun as well!
|
|
Two years too late, friend.Because you can have stats and character sheets ready before the session starts, avoiding spending time on character gen.Too true rolling, that is the only fair way. Point buy schemes suck.I faved my comments so I could find them quicker. I find these message boards rather cumbersome. PzkwVIb is a handle.rst My Real Name is Joseph J Schuler Jr. and I have been roll playing since the D&D boxed set with several long stretches of inactivity.
I am merely expressing my opinion as a long time gamer. How that is trolling is anyone's guess.
Ok, first, welcome to the forums.
Second, you might want to dial it back a bit - you've expressed your dislike of point buy over and over since you've starting posting. We get it - you don't like point buy
Third - don't favorite yourself, it's cheesy. To easy find all your posts, just click on your name and then click the Posts link