(or, perhaps, inspiration for a concept: "I could'a been a wizard, but flunked the entrance exam at the University; now, I just call on my eidolon to beat up those damn wiz-nerds"), then rolling is "better."You can do that concept just as easily with point buy.
That's pretty much the point: You can do any concept with point buy (within the limits of the points available). However, some people use rolling to spur their imagination ("I'd like to play a wizard... <rolls in order> Rats! 14 Str, 13 Dex, 13 Con, 10 Int, 12 Wis, 12 Cha. Damn! Sorcerer is out, too. Hmm... If I go with a human, I could put the +2 in Cha and make a summoner with a grudge against wizards. Hey, that's actually more interesting than Mr. Generic Wizard!").
Also, some people won't play anything but "generic uber-build X" unless "forced" to do so by using a rolling method that prevents them from min-maxing their scores. Sadly (IMO), many of them will still try to get as close to "generic uber-build X" as they can, regardless of the ability score generation method.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(or, perhaps, inspiration for a concept: "I could'a been a wizard, but flunked the entrance exam at the University; now, I just call on my eidolon to beat up those damn wiz-nerds"), then rolling is "better."You can do that concept just as easily with point buy.That's pretty much the point: You can do any concept with point buy (within the limits of the points available). However, some people use rolling to spur their imagination ("I'd like to play a wizard... <rolls in order> Rats! 14 Str, 13 Dex, 13 Con, 10 Int, 12 Wis, 12 Cha. Damn! Sorcerer is out, too. Hmm... If I go with a human, I could put the +2 in Cha and make a summoner with a grudge against wizards. Hey, that's actually more interesting than Mr. Generic Wizard!").
Also, some people won't play anything but "generic uber-build X" unless "forced" to do so by using a rolling method that prevents them from min-maxing their scores. Sadly (IMO), many of them will still try to get as close to "generic uber-build X" as they can, regardless of the ability score generation method.
Wouldn't things be better off just playing with folks who have similar preferences and play-style? Using sub-systems to try and force players into a certain style seems arbitrary.
I feel this is exactly where point buy fails. Knowing you only need one stat to be good makes it so much easier to only get that one good stat.One inequity with stat arrays is the MAD/SAD difference in classes, and the point buy can help to balance that out. It is really expensive to get an 18 in Pathfinder, but a string of 14's is easy to do.
No, this is where the GM fails (IMO).
A wizard with an 8 Str (-2 points), 18 Int (17 points), 10 in everything else (standard 15 point buy) before racial adjustments is going to be pretty useless outside of casting a handful of save-or-suck spells per day (even hitting touch AC is going to be around 50/50) and some skill checks for the first few levels; he'd better hope he doesn't get targeted by opponents (ranged attacks, etc.) in the first adventure with only 6 hp and an AC of 14 with mage armor up. Even a 20 point buy (13 Dex, 12 Con) is going to have issues with simple things like burst jars, ghast retch flasks, itching powder, pellet grenades, sneezing powder, tanglefoot/tangleburn bags, and thunderstones.
Basically, if the GM fails to mix up encounters (creature types, tactics, terrain, etc.) and lets the "one-trick ponies" run rampant without letting them suffer the consequences of their vulnerabilities, then they have no one to blame but themselves as the players demolish their predictable scenarios.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, some people won't play anything but "generic uber-build X" unless "forced" to do so by using a rolling method that prevents them from min-maxing their scores. Sadly (IMO), many of them will still try to get as close to "generic uber-build X" as they can, regardless of the ability score generation method.Wouldn't things be better off just playing with folks who have similar preferences and play-style? Using sub-systems to try and force players into a certain style seems arbitrary.
That was a commentary on the "point buy leads to stat-dumping and other min/max abuse" complaints. You are correct in noting that this is a playstyle issue and not a character generation method issue. Those who only want to play "generic uber-build X" will play "generic uber-build X" (or as close as they can get), regardless of the character generation method.
Personally, I prefer to model a concept with system mechanics, rather than pick a pre-defined "build" with the biggest numbers and change one or two minor details. In most cases, point buy is the best tool for "concept first" development, just as it is for "mechanics first" development. Rolling has it's own benefits for potential variations on a concept that may not occur initially (or even the development of a different concept altogether). Neither is necessarily "better" in all circumstances, and both can be abused, but have different effects on character generation.
Ultimately, YMMV.
|
We've always rolled stats and then decided what to play. Probably because it avoids that problem. We also assign the rolled numbers to the stats we want, not in order. (Although we did 3d6 in order once and the game was surprisingly fun.)
With it, you can craft the character you imagine, to the limits of the buy you are given. With dice, you might end up playing something completely different. I've rolled up wizards with intelligence below 5, leading to experience point penalties in early versions of D&D. Experience point penalties! Because I chose what to make, and then rolled badly. Whereas, with a point buy, I can make a marginally smart dude with abilities that round him out, or a genius with noodle arms and introversion that won't quit.
Earlier versions of D&D didn't give you such a luxury. It was really hit or miss in the '70's, back when I started.
i prefer point-buy over rolling
either way, you are going to have dump stats
personally, i prefer a 25-32 point allotment for PCs, it looks like a high allotment, but i like cinematic heroes and 20 points usually isn't cinematic for something that screams beowulf, hercules, homer and the like. it doesn't need 6 18s, and i like grand flaws, but i like equally mythic advantages.
|
There is a difference between a low stat and a dump stat.
A low stat is the stat that gets the lowest rolled stat number becuase its the least helpful stat to your build. Placing the stat here doesnt give you more points to add to other stats.
A dump stat is one of the least hepful stats to your build that you choose to lower to get more points to add to other stats. A dump stat is usually but not always lowered as far as its allowed.
A low stat is something you might get stuck with if your luck is bad.
A dump stat is something you give yourself.
Point buy systems have dump stats.
Dice roll systems have low stats.
|
|
The original (1975/1976) D&D only used one rolling method (3d6, in order; no re-rolls). But that changed quite fast - by the time AD&D came along in 1978 four methods were suggested in the DMG:Earlier versions of D&D didn't give you such a luxury. It was really hit or miss in the '70's, back when I started.
We've always rolled stats and then decided what to play. Probably because it avoids that problem. We also assign the rolled numbers to the stats we want, not in order. (Although we did 3d6 in order once and the game was surprisingly fun.)
- Roll 4d6 (discarding the lowest die) six times; the player assigns the results to the stats.
- Roll 3d6 twelve times, keeping the highest six results, and assigning these to the attributes as the player chooses.
- For each attribute, roll 3d6 six times; keep the highest result.
- Roll twelve characters, using the old-style "3d6, in order" rules. The player gets to choose which of those twelve sets of results to keep
The expected strength of characters generated by each of those methods varies considerably.
For most of my early gaming life we were playing something fairly close to AD&D 1E or 2E (just how close varied over the years), using the "4d6, discard 1; rearrange as desired" method for character generation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is a difference between a low stat and a dump stat.
A low stat is the stat that gets the lowest rolled stat number becuase its the least helpful stat to your build. Placing the stat here doesnt give you more points to add to other stats.
A dump stat is one of the least hepful stats to your build that you choose to lower to get more points to add to other stats. A dump stat is usually but not always lowered as far as its allowed.
A low stat is something you might get stuck with if your luck is bad.
A dump stat is something you give yourself.
Point buy systems have dump stats.
Dice roll systems have low stats.
i see no difference between a low stat and a dump stat
the point buy, you are lowering the least important stat so you can be effective at a more important stat
dice, you are assigning your lowest roll to the least important stat to not be screwed
either way, the fact you are putting your lowest stat in something irrelevant, such as charisma for most builds, can be seen as minmaxing
but at least with point buy
you don't end up with the guy with nothing above 10 alongside the guy with nothing below 14.
most of the people i know in person that prefer rolling, meet any of the following criteria
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm really thinking that from now on I'll just dispense with stat generation methods.
The players and I will just decide what stats the characters have.
I recall this method from somewhere. Everyone assigns there own stats and then calculates the Point Buy value. If your PB value is over a certain number, you get Hubris points. Anytime the DM needs to make a random decision, like which character will this random event/monster/attack etc... effect/hit, he picks the person with the highest Hubris score, and then subtracts 1 from that Hubris score. I wish I could remember where I saw this...memory is always the 2nd thing to go with age, I just wish I could remember the first.
I prefer rolling stats. I kinda like the one method I saw, where you choose 2 stats. 1 gets an 18, the other an 8, then you roll the other 4 using one of the other methods (3d6, 4d6 drop lowest, 2d6+6, etc). I think if I start up a game again, I might use that method.
I don't care for point buy, as it makes everyone the same. I don't mean "same" as in the wizard has the same stat points as the fighter, etc. I mean "same" as in, if there are 2 wizards in the party, they will be clones of each other; 2 fighters will be clones, etc and so on, with the only variation being their race. Even though the majority of the time they will be humans, or the wizards will be elves, so not really a variation. Those are just in regards to the stats, and I find that very boring.
But, different people like different things. There is no wrong or right universal way. I did once roll a character with these stats: 18, 18, 18, 17, 16, 16. I was amazed at the rolls. But, I ended up rerolling those stats because that was just too much.
The low stat makes your trollface at the Dm seem less intentional.
Hm. I feel like this thread might eventually get agressive, but I think I still want to contribute.
When I have a character idea, I MUCH prefer point buy. If I want to play the character, I want to be able to define them as I want, and I dislike the randomness of rolls.
I can appreciate high-rolling methods though (like the 4d6 drop lowest, 2d4+10, etc) since it can make for a powerful character. I'm not a huge fan of randomness, since I tend to never roll quite what I would like. The whole rolling first THEN deciding what you want to play goes against the main reason I want to play PnP (IE, creatnig my own characters). However, I think I've created in the last couple of months a sufficient backlog of character builds/ideas that it COULD be done, but I wouldnt favor it.
Little note on SAD vs MAD: SAD will always have it better. Always. Whatever the system. Point buy mitigates in certain ways (IE, exponentially higher costs for higher stats) but they are STILL advantaged because they only have one to focus on. It's no different for rolling, where your highest stat will go into that one thing, and everything else will be an afterthought
I prefer point buy because it is a little step towards balanced PCs.
But I would not mind if the GM rolled a stat array and every player could use this stat array for their PC.
If every one rolls for himself one PC will be equivalent to 30 point buy and the next one 10 point buy.
I'd rather roll for race and class than for stats. The only thing worse than rolling stats is rolling hp.
|
|
There is a difference between a low stat and a dump stat.
A low stat is the stat that gets the lowest rolled stat number becuase its the least helpful stat to your build. Placing the stat here doesnt give you more points to add to other stats.
A dump stat is one of the least hepful stats to your build that you choose to lower to get more points to add to other stats. A dump stat is usually but not always lowered as far as its allowed.
A low stat is something you might get stuck with if your luck is bad.
A dump stat is something you give yourself.
Point buy systems have dump stats.
Dice roll systems have low stats.
If the roll system allows you to place those stats anywhere you please, I still consider that a dump stat. I will admit the benefit is less than in point buy but its a dump no less.
Until you roll a bunch of 6s and 7s and nothing above and 11 and play with someone that rolled a bunch of 18s with nothing below a 14.As a GM, if you rolled a bunch of 6's and 7's, I'd have you roll again.
Out of interest, how many GM's would make someone stick with all poor rolls? In all likelihood, the player will suicide the PC a.s.a.p. so what would be the point?
While this is not a tale of bad stat rolls I'll tell it anyways:
I once had a Barbarian pc that rolled half his hp rolls as 1 and the other half below 5 (on the d12). He had the lowest hp in the whole party because his con was not good, too (rolled stats).And the GM refused to let me reroll any of the hp rolls, he refused to let me roll up a different pc and in the end refused to let the pc die no matter what I did.
When I charged a BBEG wearing no armor at all all that happened was that I was down in round 1 instead of round 3 or 4. I always got hit for amounts that did not outright kill me and autostabilized when unconscious.
I'm not against "dumping stats" but there is a difference between rolling a low stat and purposely lowering a stat for a gain elsewhere.
Not really. My group used to roll stats throughout my teenage years. The usual 3.x method of 4d6 drop lowest. It was natural to put our lowest options into our least useful statistic (the only way to prevent players from doing this is the ancient method of rolling stats in order, which tends to result in fighters who can't fight or spellcasters who can't cast spells).
Point buy on the other hand says that you cannot be awesome and amazing without having some sort of flaw. I like it because point buy is innately anti-Mary Sue while being very fair. It also does this while making it incredibly draining to have especially high statistics, while also making especially low statistics impossible (a character, even with racial penalty can drop no lower than 5 in a statistic as well).
I've rolled 18, 18, 17, 17, 17, 17 with 4d6 drop lowest. For a bard. With witnesses. It happened for a friend of ours we were introducing to D&D one night at a friend's house.
Rolling is a chaotic affair that frequently gives you a lot of statistics instead of allowing you to make your own character.
I don't care for point buy, as it makes everyone the same. I don't mean "same" as in the wizard has the same stat points as the fighter, etc. I mean "same" as in, if there are 2 wizards in the party, they will be clones of each other; 2 fighters will be clones, etc and so on, with the only variation being their race.
We always used point buy in my late gaming group and often times the PCs were build differently to how I would have done it.
In one game I GMed we had two oracles, both completely different. In fact most PCs were different to their class' standard build.Just that there is one build that some think it the optimum doesn't mean that everyone agrees. Or that everyone even wants the optimal build.
And with some classes there are so many ways of building them, why should two in the same party be identical? Two fighters? Make one twohanded fighter (fighting style, not archetype) and the other a TWF sword and board. Both will have vastly different stats.
If you roll, on the other hand, it is not even sure one can build a TWF fighter because of the MADness of the build. So you could end up with two twohanded fighters because one wants it and the other can't build otherwise. More sameness buy rolling stats.
If you take dump stats into consideration then Point Buy is typically just as unfair as rolling... I mean one guy dumps to a pair of sevens in unimportant stats while the next guy doesn't dump any stats their characters are not equal. It just adds even more to the difference between the SAD guy and the MAD guy than rolling typically would. In that way it IS better to roll if you want a MAD character and better to point buy for the SAD guy (so he can always have the 20 starting stat that rolling likely wouldn't give him.)
The only fair way to use point buy is to remove the bonus points for buying down stats.
I used to hate point buy in RPGs because players would just recreate the exact same character, or make characters that were awesome at one thing and crap at everything else. Dice rolled stats made a more rounded character. Then I realised that most rolled stats worked out as much higher points than point buy did, so I relented and now we always work on point buy characters.
If you take dump stats into consideration then Point Buy is typically just as unfair as rolling... I mean one guy dumps to a pair of sevens in unimportant stats while the next guy doesn't dump any stats their characters are not equal. It just adds even more to the difference between the SAD guy and the MAD guy than rolling typically would. In that way it IS better to roll if you want a MAD character and better to point buy for the SAD guy (so he can always have the 20 starting stat that rolling likely wouldn't give him.)
The only fair way to use point buy is to remove the bonus points for buying down stats.
If you did that nobody would have low stats. It's justifiable that you're weakening your character if you're getting some sort of reward for not making them a Mary Sue.
Similar to how Deadlands grants extra Edges for you taking Hindrances.
And rolling does not favor MAD characters anymore than it favors SAD characters. Rolling means you need lots of good scores across the board if you're MAD, but you only need 1-2 good score if you're SAD.
You have a surprisingly good chance of scoring a 16+ on 4d6 drop lowest at least once out of your stats rolls. That's all the SAD guy needs. But the MAD needs to roll lots of stats to really stand out.
Rolling isn't really any better for a monk than a wizard. >.>
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you did that nobody would have low stats.
Not seeing the downside here. :)
If you did that nobody would have low stats.Not seeing the downside here. :)
Haha, point. :P
Though I have to admit I have a certain appreciation for having a few low stats. It just feels better to me, like it makes the character feel a little bit more human and not being just superior at everything from the start. But that's not really how everyone wants to play all the time I guess. Ctrl+8 for the win, right? :P
(Bonus points for anyone who gets the Ctrl+8 / Ability score reference)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It just feels better to me, like it makes the character feel a little bit more human and not being just superior at everything from the start.
Meh. I've got plenty of characters with nothing below a 10 who aren't superior at things. My halfling rogue barely did any damage before getting an agile weapon. My life oracle has no weapon capability. Neither of them are any good in a grapple, which has nearly gotten both of them killed. My holy vindicator picked up a headband to give him 10 Charisma and still wasn't any good at social graces or anything involving Charisma.
Having an 8 doesn't mean you're weak at things, and having a 10 doesn't mean you're better. You still have strengths and weaknesses.
I roll because i like the luck factor , that is all there is to it.
And note , i have bad luck , playing with a cleric in one of my tables where all my friends got amazing stats and i got many poor ones lols ... kind of sad.
Then again , it is the usual , just not so much like this time lols.
I'm not against "dumping stats" but there is a difference between rolling a low stat and purposely lowering a stat for a gain elsewhere.Not really. My group used to roll stats throughout my teenage years. The usual 3.x method of 4d6 drop lowest. It was natural to put our lowest options into our least useful statistic (the only way to prevent players from doing this is the ancient method of rolling stats in order, which tends to result in fighters who can't fight or spellcasters who can't cast spells).
Point buy on the other hand says that you cannot be awesome and amazing without having some sort of flaw. I like it because point buy is innately anti-Mary Sue while being very fair. It also does this while making it incredibly draining to have especially high statistics, while also making especially low statistics impossible (a character, even with racial penalty can drop no lower than 5 in a statistic as well).
I've rolled 18, 18, 17, 17, 17, 17 with 4d6 drop lowest. For a bard. With witnesses. It happened for a friend of ours we were introducing to D&D one night at a friend's house.
Rolling is a chaotic affair that frequently gives you a lot of statistics instead of allowing you to make your own character.
I'm sorry. I'm confused. How did any of that contradict what I said ?
There isn't much of a contradiction. In fact, the only thing I disagreed with is that there's much of a difference between rolling low and placing your high stats elsewhere versus lowering a stat to gain elsewhere. The only difference I can find is that one removes the choice as to what your character is good or bad at from the player and instead throws random stuff at them.
Unless that's what you meant, in which case I agree that's the difference. :P
I must say that I enjoy rolling NPCs with 3d6 from time to time. ^_^
I prefer rolling due to the randomness.
But, honestly, it's not so random. I always roll on the high side (which sucks for GURPS and Champions) of a D6, so I usually end up with quite the above avg character.
When I run a game, I allow the players to roll 6+2d6, re-roll ones.
Because I'm rolling the NPC's stats.
I like the point buy as well, but I also came up with a solution I like for rolling.
If the group decides they want to roll stats, we let everyone roll with whatever method we are using, and then once everyone has rolled up stats, we decide on which 1 set of stats we all will use. This lets everyone roll, but also doesn't end up with 1 person having amazing stats and one person having low stats. Everyone gets the same array, and then applies their own racial modifiers and such.
We do something similar, except since we have 6 players in all our games, we keep the results lower by only creating a single array as a group. Each player gets to roll one stat (we do 4d6, drop the lowest) and a single array is created. If the stats turn out lower than a point buy 15 (the assumed baseline stats for only 4 PCs for an AP - this has not happened yet) then the DM rolls one last stat and replaces the lowest.
Our results so far are:
16, 14, 13, 12, 12, 11 (point buy 23)
15, 14, 14, 13, 12, 10 (point buy 22)
16, 14, 13, 11, 10, 9 (point buy 18)
I must say that I enjoy rolling NPCs with 3d6 from time to time. ^_^
I have been tempted to do this. If it's a monster (say, a centaur or worg), I would subtract 10 from their ability scores to get their modifier, and then use 3d6 (or 4d6 reroll 1s drop lowest) or other method, that way worg 1 isn't the same as worg 2, etc.
Honestly, if I could get the players to buy off on it, I might prefer for everyone to simply use the Heroic NPC stat array, and be done with it.
Barring that, I'd use point-buy if it were restructured (cheaper to get 12-15, fewer points gleaned from dumping stats, a lot more points required for 16-18 scores).
I'm still a sucker for "4d6, drop lowest," but that's nostalgia talking rather than hard numbers.
No, this is where the GM fails (IMO).
I'd say this is where class design fails, actually.
Of course, there's not a big difference between 'I need more points for this class to make it good' and 'I need to roll multiple high stats for this class to make it good', if you think about it for fifteen seconds
As a compromise for the upcoming game she's GMing, my girlfriend had us roll 3d6 in order and then use 12 point buy to adjust the resulting scores.
You forgot to mention that you can't buy down any stats, which is important because it keeps the rolls from just being a method of determining who gets a higher point buy.
ETA: To answer the original question, I'd almost always choose to use point buy as a player. I tend to roll badly for stats, and I'd rather play something I feel like playing. But folks around here sure do love to roll, so I gave them the option... even if I made it a trap! (Evil DM laugh.)
I really would prefer rolling, not entirely because I roll like the Blessed of the Luck Gods. My basis is 'that's the way we did it back in the day', a lousy reason. My current 'rolled' character has 18, 18, 16, 15, 14 and 13 rolls. In a seven person party, no one else has two stats above 16 (although one has 3 16s). I never get credit for roll playing, its always 'yeah, with those stats...'.
When I played Marvel SH 'BitD', I rolled a Human Torch, jr. Our group consisted of Thor's nephew (this guy was awesome!), a mech/tech type and two (2) Jimmy Olsens. Guess who did all the real fighting.
Point buy is fairer, but I can't argue against Array buys, our even pick your own Array systems.
I personally don’t like rolling scores. The averages are not a problem. The outliers that are still within the range of possibilities are the problem.
Almost every time I have been in a group that rolled abilities, I see one or both of the following situations.
A) One PC has abilities amazingly higher than everyone else. Now there is a tendency for everyone else to feel like the sidekick to the true hero.
B) One PC has abilities amazingly lower than everyone else. Now that player has a tendency to feel like the younger brother tagging along with the older kids who is only tolerated because mom made you take him.
For a short couple sessions, a one shot module, or a campaign designed around a hero (or younger brother) it can still work out. And sometimes it is fun to see if I can keep up with the big boys even with my poor stats. But not everyone enjoys that. At least not all the time. With our group’s scheduling, an AP can easily last a couple years. It can get very old when I have to spend the next 2 years struggling to survive that which the rest of the group finds easy. And every time the group find something challenging, I need raised from the dead. Again.
---------------------------------------------------------
As an example. A new group I joined rolled using the 2d6+6 method. One of the PC’s has close to 45 point buy equivalent. My PC has only a 7 point buy equivalent! Now I am still going to try and make a go of it and I picked as close as you can get to a NAD (No Attribute Dependant) class as you can get. The summoner. From some of what has been said, I think my system mastery is a bit higher than several of the other players and the GM let me be the CR+1 race, fetchling. But it will still likely be tough to survive.
And what if it had randomed out the other way? What if the guy with low system mastery had gotten the 7 and I had the 45? Would he have had fun playing in the same group as my PC in that case? I don’t know for sure, but I suspect not.
That is why I prefer point buy, so everyone is at the same ground zero starting point.
Honestly, if I could get the players to buy off on it, I might prefer for everyone to simply use the Heroic NPC stat array, and be done with it.
I would not have any problems with that.
In fact it isn't much different to my idea of rolling one stat array for everyone. Something others seems to use on a regular basis.For me nearly every way of generating stats is better than rolling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I use a point buy but first ask the players what class they will be primarily playing. The more SAD the class the worse their point buy is. In universe this is usually justified by their SAD or NAD class abilities taking some much time perfecting on their own that other areas needed to be neglected. Usually this breaks down as spellcasters 15 point buy, partial casters 20 point buy, noncasters 25 point buy. This is slightly changed though on a case by case basis.
I use a point buy but first ask the players what class they will be primarily playing. The more SAD the class the worse their point buy is. In universe this is usually justified by their SAD or NAD class abilities taking some much time perfecting on their own that other areas needed to be neglected. Usually this breaks down as spellcasters 15 point buy, partial casters 20 point buy, noncasters 25 point buy. This is slightly changed though on a case by case basis.
Well , im fine with being worse than others because i rolled bad numbers (which happens quite lot but luck is luck ...) , but honestly , if i was playing point buy and my GM told me i got less because of my class , i would ask it to be equal points or well , nothing , i would leave lols.
There 0% chance (even with my friends) im playing a point buy where people do not get the same points.
In the end , it seems it is always a matter of getting people who agree with you to play with :D.
... Usually this breaks down as spellcasters 15 point buy, partial casters 20 point buy, noncasters 25 point buy. This is slightly changed though on a case by case basis.
To me this sounds like you are trying to discourage people from playing casters. Primary casters are so difficult to get to survive past the low levels, it seems like this would make it almost impossible.
Personally, I would be willing to give it a try. But I have a feeling many people would not be open to it.
Well , im fine with being worse than others because i rolled bad numbers (which happens quite lot but luck is luck ...) , but honestly , if i was playing point buy and my GM told me i got less because of my class , i would ask it to be equal points or well , nothing , i would leave lols.
There 0% chance (even with my friends) im playing a point buy where people do not get the same points.
In the end , it seems it is always a matter of getting people who agree with you to play with :D.
Whatever floats your boat, but I fail to see why. Just like rolling represents inequality due to luck of birth, this represents inequality due to rearing. Your wizard was learning the fundamentals of manipulating the universe when he could have been working out, socializing, developing logic, or gaining world experience. He still had time for some of that but far less than the guy whose class features required working out and training the body (fighter).
Whatever floats your boat, but I fail to see why. Just like rolling represents inequality due to luck of birth, this represents inequality due to rearing. Your wizard was learning the fundamentals of manipulating the universe when he could have been working out, socializing, developing logic, or gaining world experience. He still had time for some of that but far less than the guy whose class features required working out and training the body (fighter).
But what if the guy is a sorcerer? They develop their skill in a totally diferent way , they dont actually would spend all that time studing and so on.
Actually , from all classes , i would say the sorc is the one with the most free time.
Also raises the question to why after we reach level one we all take the same amount of exp to lvl , clearly the fighter is a much simpler class to master , to a point the guy had free time to do other stuff instead of trainning :P.
Haha , but this is just me messing around with ya , if you and your players have fun this way , then it is a nice way to play for you guys.
But what if the guy is a sorcerer? They develop their skill in a totally diferent way , they dont actually would spend all that time studing and so on.Actually , from all classes , i would say the sorc is the one with the most free time.
Also raises the question to why after we reach level one we all take the same amount of exp to lvl , clearly the fighter is a much simpler class to master , to a point the guy had free time to do other stuff instead of trainning :P.
Haha , but this is just me messing around with ya , if you and your players have fun this way , then it is a nice way to play for you guys.
That was the sort of thing that raised problems for me as well. The solution ended up ebing a revamp of the class system that ended up with everyone getting the same point buy (sorcs and wizards were replaced with homebrew specialist casters like dread necromancer from 3.5). I was just giving what i'd do for base Pathfinder.
I'm a stat roller. When I run table-top games of D&D and PF, we roll stats. No exceptions. There are a few reasons for this:
1) Rolling provides better balance between MAD and SAD classes - it's less likely that the SAD class will have the 18 to drop in their main stat.
2) Rolling provides better balance between power gamers and non-power gamers as well as experienced/inexperienced players for much the same reason - players are forced to make do with what they have rather than have full control over stat builds
3) No dumped stats - despite what other posters in this thread are saying, there is a substantial difference between having a rolled low stat that gets tucked away into a less-important stat and stat that is deliberately dumped to improve another stat. When you place your rolled stats, there is no extra value taken from one to maximize another. I also think there's a psychological difference that plays out at the table - fellow players seem to be more amenable to a PC claiming loot to fix a weakness created by a rolled stat than they are for a dumped stat because they perceive the player was "stuck with" the stat in the former, but deliberately took it in the latter.
4) Entirely subjectively - it's fun to sit around the table together and watch each other roll the stats. I have them roll up 2 sets of 6 and pick the set that they like better.