We use 20 point buy and in my experience it's the ability to drop stats to 7 for the extra 4 points that fuels most of the min/max-ing I have seen.
So what game balance issues would be created if 7's were not allowed in a 20 point buy game?
A 20 pt buy has less overall available points in that case.
Most stats would look something like 16, 14, 14 10, 10, 10 because there'd be no way to go higher before racial bonuses.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
16, 14, 13, 12, 10, 10... or... 16, 14, 13, 12, 12, 8
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There would be 8's.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I ran a game where the cap was 18 and the min was 8, AFTER racial modifiers. You know what, casters are still awesome and out pace other classes at higher levels, but they maintained balance longer, and MAD characters were more doable.
Why would MAD characters be more doable with less points available?
I usually tend to not take less than a 10 in point-buy. Racial's can still drop it to 8. You can still min-max, and you are probably 98% as effective. But looks nicer.
People would start complaining about others taking 8s
I don't think so, really. 7s are more egregiously min-max, since you're getting 4 points for a -2 in a stat that most likely you won't care about, vs 2 points for a -1, which is still unlikely to come up, but doesn't provide as much boost in power. Though, I generally do 25 point buy, so people aren't starved for points, so 7s are less necessary to create a well rounded character.
However on the other hand, it's more of a power-boost to mundanes than casters, since most mundanes have little use for Int or Cha especially, beyond skills, where casters can afford to ignore stats entirely less. They may be more SAD than mundanes overall, but their "dump stats" can't be ignored as much as most mundanes' dumps. Though, admittedly this difference is pretty small, since most casters even have at least one ability score they can disregard.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
you live by the seven
you die by the seven
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wouldn't be winning at craps as much...
I ran a game where the cap was 18 and the min was 8, AFTER racial modifiers. You know what, casters are still awesome and out pace other classes at higher levels, but they maintained balance longer, and MAD characters were more doable.Why would MAD characters be more doable with less points available?
Less advantage to SAD maybe? If your max is 18 instead of 20 then a you have less reason to go with a class that has a single dependent stat and more reason to spread your stats with a MAD class. I personally thing that a bad argument... but its the only thing I could think of.
As to the OP. I don't see it being a big deal. I personally hate playing a character with a 7 to begin with. I guess if your group uses it alot they might feel it but for most builds you dont have to have a 7 dump stat to be effective.
People would start complaining about others taking 8s
Universal truth there.... People will always find a reason to complain (especially true in online forums).
I played a Dwarf Monk with a 5 charisma before. It was much easier to make him effective in combat. Unfortunately, because of that I was in combat much more often than I had to be because of the 5 CHA.
see my above post
What would happen if your players had to roll in front of each other?
They would complain about that one guy who got 5 18's. That was amazing! But seriously, why are my 3 15's, a 13, and a 6 supposed to be just as good as that?
I ran a game where the cap was 18 and the min was 8, AFTER racial modifiers. You know what, casters are still awesome and out pace other classes at higher levels, but they maintained balance longer, and MAD characters were more doable.Why would MAD characters be more doable with less points available?
Hmm, you make a good point.
Maybe I've got this the wrong way round. Perhaps capping at 16 before racial mods and allowing 7's would be a better option. Only 1 stat wonder classes get hit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a perfect world, just find people to play with that have similar priorities and everyones happy.
We use 20 point buy and in my experience it's the ability to drop stats to 7 for the extra 4 points that fuels most of the min/max-ing I have seen.
So what game balance issues would be created if 7's were not allowed in a 20 point buy game?
The issue that game is designed for 15ptbuy and therefore instead of forbidding 7s it makes more sense to do 15ptbuy?
^^Also this.^^
When a spell caster has save DC's 4 points higher than 'normal' it can make save or suck spell finish off encounters more often than you'd like.
Sometimes it does happen, which is fine as you don't want to penalize players spell options but min/max-ed stats can 'ruin' encounters too often when the chance to save is 20% lower every time.
Having 16 the most you can buy allows mad classes to compete for longer.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some people, are not there for total "min/max", but still love the RP value of a 7, or 18.
This "vanilla man" only crud just doesn't fit in my mind as the typical adventurer.
Adventurers are outsiders, and unique individuals.
They do things most sane people would never consider.
The only time low scores bug me, is when the player ignores it, and RPs as if it did not exist.
To me, if you choose to have a low score, you better dang well RP that, or I am going to have you adjust your scores accordingly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think if you are going to try and control what points the characters buy into, then you are better off not using a point buy.
Why is everyone so afraid of a PC having an 18 at the start of the game? It really doesn't break anything.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am pretty sure some folks wont be happy until everyone is forced to start with a specific array of stats that they deem are the "right" stats for people to be playing with.
In my day we rolled stats and we liked it!
Also get off my lawn you dern whipper snappers!
Up hill both ways...in the snow...and various other things that make me sound old.
I think if you are going to try and control what points the characters buy into, then you are better off not using a point buy.
Why is everyone so afraid of a PC having an 18 at the start of the game? It really doesn't break anything.
I prefer rolling to point-buy. My friend's first character has some insane stats thanks to lucky rolling.
He hasn't broken the game despite starting out with not one, but two 18's. His character almost died when the party got ambushed by a sea hag.
Good points BBT
Why 7? That's awfully unoptimized. If you go that way, go all the way to 6 for two additional points.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, this much restriction can create a number of bland NPC style characters.
Nobody below 10, and no one above 16.
A group of cardboard cutouts, each painted up, to look unique.
By the way, I am thinking I will build this "Vanilla Man".
Like a super hero, who has the power, to be average, at everything.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, this much restriction can create a number of bland NPC style characters.
Nobody below 10, and no one above 16.
A group of cardboard cutouts, each painted up, to look unique.
By the way, I am thinking I will build this "Vanilla Man".
Like a super hero, who has the power, to be average, at everything.
Might as well make him a rogue then.
|
What would happen if there were no 7s? Well, first of all, I'd never have to hear that godawful joke about how Seven Eight Nine again...
You may look at it in a different light after this.
In my day we rolled stats and we liked it!
Ahhhhh, those were the days. Roll 6 stats (ability scores) in order and don't apply any modifiers. THEN you can try to choose a class, but every class has minimums, so if you really wanted to play a magic-user but your INT was too low, better forget it because the RAW says you can't.
So, after seeing how lucky or unlucky you get to be, and which class you're STUCK with based on that luck (if you're too unlucky then the only thing you can play is a thief), then you can finally start to think about how to apply archetypes and feats to break the system, er, uh, optimize. Oh, wait, no you couldn't. Nevermind that last bit...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some people, are not there for total "min/max", but still love the RP value of a 7, or 18.
This "vanilla man" only crud just doesn't fit in my mind as the typical adventurer.
Adventurers are outsiders, and unique individuals.
They do things most sane people would never consider.
The only time low scores bug me, is when the player ignores it, and RPs as if it did not exist.
To me, if you choose to have a low score, you better dang well RP that, or I am going to have you adjust your scores accordingly.
(sarcasm) Yeah, you only have the range of 10-18 over six stats to play with.
I know a lot of folks claim they put a 7 in CHA or INt or STR for “roleplaying reasons’ but I notice they never dump CON down to 7, ala Doc Holiday or Elric.
This is one change I am pushing. You get no points for reducing stats below 10. You can if you want to.
Guys with a 7 in CHA are never adventurers in the first place. Adventurers require more force of personality that a wet dishrag.
|
Some people, are not there for total "min/max", but still love the RP value of a 7, or 18.
This "vanilla man" only crud just doesn't fit in my mind as the typical adventurer.
Adventurers are outsiders, and unique individuals.
They do things most sane people would never consider.
The only time low scores bug me, is when the player ignores it, and RPs as if it did not exist.
To me, if you choose to have a low score, you better dang well RP that, or I am going to have you adjust your scores accordingly.
Some dump stats are easier to RP than others.
I can see a 7 WIS as a wide-eyed idealist who lives in their own little world most of the time, or a 7 CON as being sickly and milquetoast and living in fear of disease and injury, but how do you RP a 7 STR? You could ask the barbarian in-character to carry your pack for you or insist that the party travels with a pack mule, but other than constantly whining about how heavy your backpack is, that's about it.
I know a lot of folks claim they put a 7 in CHA or INt or STR for “roleplaying reasons’ but I notice they never dump CON down to 7, ala Doc Holiday or Elric.
Mechanically however, 7 con is a short lived adventurer. By the same logic you put into charisma, adventurers should be able to survive. That said, I have met players who do roleplay a dumped con. They usually expect not to see battle, or the game is combat light. A 7 con rogue in 3.x had a week to live.
Guys with a 7 in CHA are never adventurers in the first place. Adventurers require more force of personality that a wet dishrag.
Or possibly they're just jerks. You can be a jerk and an adventurer. Or possibly you had an upbringing that led you into an anti-social personality, such one being extra studious or away from humanity.
how do you RP a 7 STR?
I usually do it by noting things are heavy or physical life is rough, or getting others to do it for me. My character appears lean and lacks muscle. He actively avoids work and finds ways around it. Depending on the character its usually the result of a backstory, such as being stuck in the same room forever without many ways to get big and strong like everyone in the outside world.
I think I smell... intolerance. Does it do a lot of harm for someone to drop something to 7 in your game? Its not actually possible to get 3-4 more to the save DC by dumping stats. If anything removing 7's would just lead to the same people who dump it to 7 dumping it to 8.
For my RotRL campaign, I used 15 points and didn't allow buy-downs, so 10 ends up being the minimum score before racial modifiers.
Next campaign, I might just switch over to the Elite Array and be done with point buys altogether.
-Skeld
15 point buy, no dumps? Sounds like the epitome of not fun. Elite array is for NPCs who are designed to be a whole level weaker than a PC with the same HD. What problem do you have with above average characters?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dump stats will always happen. No matter the game, no matter the edition. There are simply things you don't need. If you ban 7s, then 8 is the dump. Or 9, or 10 ...
I consider it the player's business. So long as the character is legal, he can put his points wherever he wants.
This gives a great deal of power to single stat builds. Casters become more powerful and frontliners get nerfed. Classes like monks, inquisitors, clerics, and bards are hurt worst of all.
15 point buy, no dumps? Sounds like the epitome of not fun. Elite array is for NPCs who are designed to be a whole level weaker than a PC with the same HD. What problem do you have with above average characters?For my RotRL campaign, I used 15 points and didn't allow buy-downs, so 10 ends up being the minimum score before racial modifiers.
Next campaign, I might just switch over to the Elite Array and be done with point buys altogether.
-Skeld
PCs also get more wealth plus, with the implementation of new optional rules, may also get traits, hero points (or an anti-hero bonus feat), and a host of other bonuses that NPCs would not.
APs are designed for 4 players with a 15-point buy at medium progression.
What problem do you have with above average characters?
You know, somebody with a few 10s and a few 12s is "above average". Not much, but a little.
IME, PCs plow easily though encounter after encounter. It's almost never even challenging, no matter who is DMing. Oh, sure, once in a while creative terrain or over-powered CRs can spice it up quite a bit, but doing that every time gets old too.
One problem that leads to PCs steamrolling everything is being too far above average. Combine that with "optimizing" (this is rapidly becoming as distasteful a word as "munchikinging" ever was, maybe even more), or worse, with having more than 4 PCs, and the "game" loses all challenge. It's like playing chess when you get all your pieces and your opponent only gets a king. That's not a "game" anymore, it's just a story.
Stories are great, but I like to have some "G" in my RPG, otherwise it's just RP and I can do that without ever buying a book or a pack of dice.
I'm not saying I insist on 15 PB with no buy-downs or that I even endorse that, but I can easily see why some GMs and some players actually do have a problem with PCs being too far above average.
For me, it boils down to this:
When the PCs are too far above average, the game becomes a whole different game. Instead of trying to solve problems in the story, the players get far more focused on solving character builds so that they can obliterate all story problems. It takes the focus off of the story and onto the character build.
I would much prefer to put the game back into the adventure, and leave it completely, or at least mostly, out of "hitting the forums to theory-craft the ultimate uberness to trivialize everything that happens in the adventure".
They're both games, of a sort, but the first one is immeasurably more appealing to me.
In my game, you can only have 1 stat below 10, and 8 is the minimum stat. And that's after racial adjustments. 20-point buy.
Core Rulebook plus feats and archetypes from APG only (plus the cavalier, inquisitor, oracle, and witch base classes). No traits, no hero points. Rules from other sources are only allowd on a case-by-case basis. (IOW, it's a "no" unless I specifically say "yes.")
My players all report that they're having a BLAST... and we've been running for almost 2 years now.
man do you droogs just play with people that you are not fond of, or is this like a tough love kind of thing
Ahhhhh, those were the days. Roll 6 stats (ability scores) in order and don't apply any modifiers. THEN you can try to choose a class, but every class has minimums, so if you really wanted to play a magic-user but your INT was too low, better forget it because the RAW says you can't.
So, after seeing how lucky or unlucky you get to be, and which class you're STUCK with based on that luck [etc.]
Of course, even in the old days there were people who generated stats some other way. Like Gary Gygax, for one.