Which of these sets of stats is better? And what should I do with them?


Advice


After our game tonight in which my Monk died, my DM rolled me some stats. Originally, I was going to use the same stats I had for my Monk as I had planned for my Monk to die and had made the Bard as a replacement. But he rolled anyway and gave me the option of the two. Which is better?

17 | 16 | 15 | 13 | 13 | 11 (Old stats)

OR

17 | 17 | 16 | 15 | 10 | 8 (New stats)

I'm making a support/melee Bard. Or I had been.
Previously, I had assigned my stats thusly: 18 (16+2 (Human)) 14 13 13 12 18 (17+1)

I want a high strength and high saves for my spells, as I plan to be in the mix a lot but also using quite a bit of spells for team support/debuffing. I think the new stats are pretty solid but the one thing I'm loathe to give up, small as it is, is that +1 to skill ranks per level. My skill choices are pretty tight as is.

If I do use the new stats, how should I assign them? I was thinking: 19 (17+2 (Human)) 16 15 10 8 18 (17+1 (4th))

Another party member died which means the Pink and Green Ioun Stone he had may be up for grabs, so the CHA is good where it is, I think, to get me 20 CHA. But I'm wondering if I should go for 20 Strength to complement Power Attack and my Fauchard instead.


I like the first set, but neither set is bad.


I know people who would kill for either set. By Point-buy, they're 37 and 41 points respectively. I'd say either one works fine. The second one nets you better AC, Init, HP, Reflex and Fort, and come level 8, nets you more Melee damage. The first would net you more Skill points and more Wi11, and might open up a feat or two (but could also cut out a feat tree as an option), but as a Bard (and Human at that), you're not hurting for skill points, and the Will loss is significant, but it's a fast progression for you, so it's not nearly as much of a weak spot as it could be. Also the loss of perception is worth noting, but I'd probably go with the second option, personally.

Still, you probably know your DM better than I. If you and another party member managed to die with such stats (and I assume the rolling method was generous, since both times netted you an ungodly stat array, so I assume other party member had similar stats), you might want to focus more on shoring up potential problem areas, like Will, rather than getting better at strengths.


Tholomyes wrote:
I know people who would kill for either set. By Point-buy, they're 37 and 41 points respectively. I'd say either one works fine. The second one nets you better AC, Init, HP, Reflex and Fort, and come level 8, nets you more Melee damage. The first would net you more Skill points and more Wi11, and might open up a feat or two (but could also cut out a feat tree as an option), but as a Bard (and Human at that), you're not hurting for skill points, and the Will loss is significant, but it's a fast progression for you, so it's not nearly as much of a weak spot as it could be. Also the loss of perception is worth noting, but I'd probably go with the second option, personally.

Tonight's deaths had more to do with half our party being gone and a HORRIBLE night of dice rolls for those of us that were there. Meanwhile, the GM couldn't stop critting. Terrible. I think I'll go with the second set and keep my build pretty much as it was:

EWF: Fauchard, Arcane Strike, Power Attack. Can't decide if I should drop Imp. Init for Flagbearer (and take the Reactionary racial trait to make up the difference) since Good Hope will overwrite Flagbearer and is such a crazy good spell...


As a support character, I'd advocate Improved Init. Flagbearer is alright, but as you mentioned, Good Hope provides a bigger Morale bonus, and going first is really useful for encounters you don't have the luxury of preparing for, since you can deal out your buffs before your enemies can attack, and before your allies get to go. Though much of this depends on your level and party make up. If you feel you will need to use your spells on spells other than Good Hope and other buffs, to cover other areas, you might want to take Flagbearer. Also, remember UCamp has introduced retraining rules, so once you get to the point of being able to reliably grant a sizable Morale boost, you could trade it away for Imp Init.


Tholomyes wrote:
As a support character, I'd advocate Improved Init. Flagbearer is alright, but as you mentioned, Good Hope provides a bigger Morale bonus, and going first is really useful for encounters you don't have the luxury of preparing for, since you can deal out your buffs before your enemies can attack, and before your allies get to go. Though much of this depends on your level and party make up. If you feel you will need to use your spells on spells other than Good Hope and other buffs, to cover other areas, you might want to take Flagbearer. Also, remember UCamp has introduced retraining rules, so once you get to the point of being able to reliably grant a sizable Morale boost, you could trade it away for Imp Init.

Hmm. There's so many great 3rd level spells. Crushing Despair, Dispel Magic, Good Hope, Jester's Jaunt, Confusion, Slow, Haste...

It'd be nice to not have to have Good Hope so that I could do something like:

Round 1: Dirge of Doom + Crushing Despair
Round 2: Confusion/Slow/Cacophonous Call/Charm Person/Whatever! + Inspire Courage (Flagbearer)
Round 3: Attack!

As opposed to:

Round 1: DoD + CD
Round 2: Conf/Slow + IC
Round 3: Good Hope (when I can get three 3rd level spells per day, anyway) + IC
Round 4: Attack!

The Wizard should be casting Haste. I dunno, it'd be nice for spellcasting and action efficiency.

Sczarni

Tholomyes wrote:

I know people who would kill for either set. By Point-buy, they're 37 and 41 points respectively. I'd say either one works fine. The second one nets you better AC, Init, HP, Reflex and Fort, and come level 8, nets you more Melee damage. The first would net you more Skill points and more Wi11, and might open up a feat or two (but could also cut out a feat tree as an option), but as a Bard (and Human at that), you're not hurting for skill points, and the Will loss is significant, but it's a fast progression for you, so it's not nearly as much of a weak spot as it could be. Also the loss of perception is worth noting, but I'd probably go with the second option, personally.

Still, you probably know your DM better than I. If you and another party member managed to die with such stats (and I assume the rolling method was generous, since both times netted you an ungodly stat array, so I assume other party member had similar stats), you might want to focus more on shoring up potential problem areas, like Will, rather than getting better at strengths.

I think that he has listed them in descending order, and that he gets to rearrange them, which makes the class decision important to the arrangement.

They are both killer arrays.

17/16/15/13/13/11 gets +3/+3/+2/+1/+1/0. You have a choice of 5 stats that could be bumperd for another +1 when you get to 4th level.

17/17/16/15/10/8 gets +3/+3/+3/+2/0/-1. You have a choice of 3 stats that could be bumperd for another +1 when you get to 4th level.

There are a couple of good archetypes you might want to consider that go with your concept, like

  • Arcane Duelist
  • Savage Skald

I wouldn't go with the second set, because your melee Bard needs good STR, DEX, CON, INT, and CHA, leaving you as bit gullible and unperceptive if you put an 8 in your WIS slot. That sounds kind of painful.

I think I would go with the first set, and do

  • STR 18 = 17 + 1 @ Level 4
  • DEX 15
  • CON 13
  • INT 13
  • WIS 11
  • CHA 18 = 16 + 2 Human

CHA is the Bard's prime stat and should start out highest.
Also, this build gives you the option to increase whichever of your other stats need boosting when you get to 4th level. You might discover that you're tired of getting jumped by pumas, and go for WIS 12 to boost your Perception instead of STR 18, or maybe there's a Feat that you need a DEX or INT bump to meet the pre-req. for.

Have fun!


Quote:
  • Arcane Duelist
  • Savage Skald

I wouldn't go with the second set, because your melee Bard needs good STR, DEX, CON, INT, and CHA, leaving you as bit gullible and unperceptive if you put an 8 in your WIS slot. That sounds kind of painful.

I think I would go with the first set, and do

  • STR 18 = 17 + 1 @ Level 4
  • DEX 15
  • CON 13
  • INT 13
  • WIS
...

Arcane Duelist is a no-go because I lose Versatile Performance, which is a big part of why I play Bard to begin with. Savage Skald though...I've gotten some good use out of Fascinate and Suggestion, but not often. I'll have to think about that.

The only reason I'm okay with the negative WIS is because we have a party that's so Perception heavy already. Our Inquisitor, Gunslinger, and Rogue have crazy good Perception scores as is. But it's a skill I hate having penalties to, that's for sure.


I think I'd disagree on the assertion that Cha should necessarily be the highest (Though I think the point is Moot, since my assumption is that it's post level 4 anyway, so the Str and Cha will both be +4 anyway.) Especially support bards, Bards don't rely on their casting stat as much as other casters, since they have less effects that rely on save DC, and the difference in rounds/day of bardic performance gets less noticeable over time. Strength matters for more, since chances are you'll be swinging your sword more times per day than you cast spells with save DCs, and that 5% difference in hitting will generally come up more often than the 5% difference in saving throws against your effects.


Tholomyes wrote:
I think I'd disagree on the assertion that Cha should necessarily be the highest (Though I think the point is Moot, since my assumption is that it's post level 4 anyway, so the Str and Cha will both be +4 anyway.) Especially support bards, Bards don't rely on their casting stat as much as other casters, since they have less effects that rely on save DC, and the difference in rounds/day of bardic performance gets less noticeable over time. Strength matters for more, since chances are you'll be swinging your sword more times per day than you cast spells with save DCs, and that 5% difference in hitting will generally come up more often than the 5% difference in saving throws against your effects.

This +1

Sczarni

Considering the party composition, it looks like they need more beef, and maybe more healing.

I would suggest a Paladin or a battle cleric. Considering the composition of the rest of the group, I would model him on a Three Musketeers type of swash-buckling, rapier-wielding champion of women and the oppressed: loyally and faithfully following orders from his Queen or Goddess to help the poor and down-trodden, and defeating evil paracountesses and their minions in the process. Not so much the Knight in Armor, but still a Lawful Good, cleric related warrior type.

By the way, D'artagnon had a "special salve" for sword wounds that his mother gave him, and Athos was a priest before and after he spent time as a Musketeer, so the healing and clerical side of this concept is well-established.

Also, the word "Musketeer" is a bit of a misnomer, as they relied chiefly on their swords, the muskets only being carried in times of war.

Or I would give your Bard a dip in Barbarian at 1st level to kick up his HP and give him Rage and then make him the Savage Skald to get the Bard abilities which allow him to make others Rage.


Arni Carni wrote:

Considering the party composition, it looks like they need more beef, and maybe more healing.

I would suggest a Paladin or a battle cleric. Considering the composition of the rest of the group, I would model him on a Three Musketeers type of swash-buckling, rapier-wielding champion of women and the oppressed: loyally and faithfully following orders from his Queen or Goddess to help the poor and down-trodden, and defeating evil paracountesses and their minions in the process. Not so much the Knight in Armor, but still a Lawful Good, cleric related warrior type.

By the way, D'artagnon had a "special salve" for sword wounds that his mother gave him, and Athos was a priest before and after he spent time as a Musketeer, so the healing and clerical side of this concept is well-established.

Also, the word "Musketeer" is a bit of a misnomer, as they relied chiefly on their swords, the muskets only being carried in times of war.

Or I would give your Bard a dip in Barbarian at 1st level to kick up his HP and give him Rage and then make him the Savage Skald to get the Bard abilities which allow him to make others Rage.

The party composition in full was: Rogue, Wizard, Inquisitor, Gunslinger, Barbarian, Monk (Dead), Cleric (Dead) The Cleric's probably gonna go Druid, maybe Bear Shaman.

As for me, I'm going full Bard. I don't like multiclassing Bards and damaging the spell progression/song progression. Those are more important to me.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Which of these sets of stats is better? And what should I do with them? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.