Your friends could end up paying for that. :\That's something you need to talk to your GM and fellow players about beforehand.
Well that's always good advice. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a silly statement. Point buy isn't to balance the system, it's to balance the party. Having one character with 20 more points worth of stats causes problems within a group of characters compared to that same group of characters all having a similar value of stats. Not one person is contending that point buys will balance fighters and wizards.The problem is balanceThen you should really check out a different edition, not trying to sound like a dick, but the devs have even said that balance is not the goal and if you want balance to be the goal point buy or any iterative of it is not going to fix the balance issues in the game.
Balancing the party doesn't happen if the classes they are playing among themselves aren't balanced.
Which is exactly the same point I made before.
15 point buy, wizards rule melees drool, every time.
20 point buy, wizards rule, barbarians are okay.
I don't think you can even compare the classes power levels to understand the point buy balance discrepancy unless you put them in the same party.
That's what 2 or 3 straw men for you this thread?
Without speaking for TOZ, this isnt actually true. It assumes people are motivated by a desire for more effectiveness (which I'm not, for one). If I played in a game based around pointbuy where a stat of 7-10 cost zero points, I think there's a good chance I'd have a 7 (though probably not all the time). I'm not being punished for making that choice - my payoff is playing the kind of character I want.But D&D/Pathfinder is a cooperative team-based game. Choosing to be weaker affects more than just you. It's a drain in the group as a whole. If you have a 7 Dexterity and nothing to show for it, then you're just making yourself easier to kill with nothing to show for it (not even a little bit). Your friends could end up paying for that. :\
Well sure, but they dont care so it's not a problem.
This is a silly statement. Point buy isn't to balance the system, it's to balance the party. Having one character with 20 more points worth of stats causes problems within a group of characters compared to that same group of characters all having a similar value of stats. Not one person is contending that point buys will balance fighters and wizards.The problem is balanceThen you should really check out a different edition, not trying to sound like a dick, but the devs have even said that balance is not the goal and if you want balance to be the goal point buy or any iterative of it is not going to fix the balance issues in the game.Balancing the party doesn't happen if the classes they are playing among themselves aren't balanced.
Which is exactly the same point I made before.
15 point buy, wizards rule melees drool, every time.
20 point buy, wizards rule, barbarians are okay.
I don't think you can even compare the classes power levels to understand the point buy balance discrepancy unless you put them in the same party.
That's what 2 or 3 straw men for you this thread?
But how are dice rolls any better for this? Are you just expecting the casters to have terrible luck and roll low?
If the discrepancy between martials and casters is that big on a 20 point buy (which it is), how big do you think the discrepancy is when the martial is working on 15 points and the caster 25?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The difference in point buy vs Random Gen?
Diversity.
In point Buy I see the same stat arrays used incessantly.
I do not see that in Random roll.
Granted its anecdotal evidence...
But after witnessing it for the last 15 years from a pool of close to 5000 players in 25 states I would say it is rather telling.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a silly statement. Point buy isn't to balance the system, it's to balance the party. Having one character with 20 more points worth of stats causes problems within a group of characters compared to that same group of characters all having a similar value of stats. Not one person is contending that point buys will balance fighters and wizards.The problem is balanceThen you should really check out a different edition, not trying to sound like a dick, but the devs have even said that balance is not the goal and if you want balance to be the goal point buy or any iterative of it is not going to fix the balance issues in the game.Balancing the party doesn't happen if the classes they are playing among themselves aren't balanced.
Which is exactly the same point I made before.
15 point buy, wizards rule melees drool, every time.
20 point buy, wizards rule, barbarians are okay.
I don't think you can even compare the classes power levels to understand the point buy balance discrepancy unless you put them in the same party.
That's what 2 or 3 straw men for you this thread?
But how are dice rolls any better for this? Are you just expecting the casters to have terrible luck and roll low?
If the discrepancy between martials and casters is that big on a 20 point buy (which it is), how big do you think the discrepancy is when the martial is working on 15 points and the caster 25?
I didn't say rolls are better, I just said point buy isn't as great as people claim it is, and it creates more problems than it fixes.
Here's the real kicker, I don't think that the classes need to be balanced, and if I did, I would play a different game.
My group uses 15 PB and we have no problems at all with 2/3rds of the martials in Pathfinder. Call me skeptical. >_>
We use Point Buy and people show up with all kinds of different characters and stat arrays. We've got the competent character builders and those who are less so. We've got the roleplayers and the rollplayers. Game runs just fine.
Everyone who uses point buy is by default a whiner. (...)
You can't handle the dice!
Insults are always helpful in a discussion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.
When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.
I think my major objection to rolling stats is that it does not model what it purports to model: random generation of a human being from your campaign world. If rolling stats is meant to represent the hand that "fate" dealt you, then why are you allowed to arrange the scores as you like? But if rearranging is not allowed, your highest stat is (for example) strength, and your party is already mostly front line warriors, why are you joining this party and not some other party that lacks muscle?
It used to. Granted, nowadays it's standard to rearrange, have a minimum, etc. Stats matter a lot more in PF (or recent incarnations of D&D) than they used to. We play a weekly 1e game, and while the stats are important, they're nowhere near as crunchy as in the d20 system.
As for 'why are you joining a party', well there are plenty other reasons than 'this party already has a cleric, I'm not making another one' or what have you. Hell, look at Salvatore's group (off the top of my head). Not all of it has to be about perfect game balance.
Male Drow Ranger
Male Dwarf Fighter
Male Human Barbarian
Female Human Fighter
Halfling ThiefNot exactly a 'balanced' party, but they seemed to get along nicely. :)
Novels work differently from games, though. The only way you would have a group like that in a real game would be if the GM imposed heavy restrictions on spellcasters (since the drow ranger has spells and spell-like abilities, the game isn't quite "no magic"). Otherwise, if you were going to join a group that included these characters, would you want to play yet another warrior?
I've played in and run parties like that before. It's not about balance, or making the perfect party for an adventure, it's about playing what you want to play and making due with your restrictions. It doesn't happen all the time, but it's fun once in a while. It's a unique challenge.
For any variation of the d20 system I much prefer point buy. For anything before 3.0 I would rather roll my stats (but I also like to play hackmaster. Hoody Hoo!) because prior to 3.0 it was roll stats, pick race if you meet the minimums, adjust stats, pick class. It just felt like you have even less control than when you normally roll stats in a 3.x game.
Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.
But are they really the same? What races are (insert class here) A, B, C, and D? Archetypes? Combat style/spell list? Alignment?
As many have pointed out, if they're set out to optimize they'll do so regardless of stat method. You may not see the exact same values. But you have a pretty safe bet the fighter who rolled a 9 as their lowest and the wizard who rolled a 17 as their highest are going to put them into Cha and Int respectively. Seems like a pipe dream to hope the player who wants to roll a caster doesn't get higher than a 16 or the martial doesn't roll lower than 10 every time.
All the iconics were built on an array of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Oh look, an 8. How DARE they give characters that will become familiar to a large part of the fanbase a dump stat! Even more, now all of them will have the exact same stats! So boring and unoriginal.
Biggest argument against rolling for attributes that I see is the very odd coincidence that I'm constantly hearing about how someone rolled GREAT stats for their character but I never see anyone playing with a character who rolled badly. Not too many '8 point buy' equivalent characters out there being played, are there?
Paizo's AP's are supposedly designed for 15 point buys. We play 20. I've never seen a group who rolled their stats, regardless of the method used, that didn't miraculously end up averaging 30 points or more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer rolling, becasue I like a player's luck or unluck being a factor.
Conversely, I also have absolutely no problem using point buy.
It's more important to me that the story or campaign idea the GM has will be fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do like having to see what I can do with the stats I get, rather than having total control over character creation. With rolled stats I often create characters that would never have thought to design myself, and have a more interesting time because of it.
For that reason, I'm a fan of 4d6, drop lowest, ROLLED IN ORDER (i.e. no rearranging stats).
However it does need some safeguard against AWFUL rolls ... (a usual recommendation is: reroll the whole set if no ability score is higher than 13 or if total bonuses are +3 or less).
One nice way of using this but still giving the player some choice; each player rolls two full sets of stats and chooses the one they prefer.
I like the group activity of all rolling up characters together at the start of a campaign; it also lets people check details with the GM and discuss with each other the composition of the party as they design their characters.
I agree to an extent with those that say a lot of point-buy stats look the same; there are a lot of characters with an 18 and a 7 in two of their stats.
Everyone who uses point buy is by default a whiner. (...)
You can't handle the dice!Insults are always helpful in a discussion.
Sorry if the sarcasm wasn't clear.
It helps to imagine Stephen Colbert speaking my recent posts on this thread. :)
For example...
Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.
Right on, friend! Rolling straight down the line, with no rearrangements, is the only way to avoid all these awful munchkin cookie cutter PCs! Oh Crom, I just love to see a fighter with 15/9/7/13/14/12!
Point buy results in exactly the same characters every time. Rolling with rearrangements results in superficially different characters -- the individual scores are slightly different from what they'd be with point buy, but they're arranged in the same awful munchkin cookie cutter order. If able, wizard players still put their highest stat in Int and their lowest in Str and Cha, for example. And everyone knows that characters can't be different or interesting unless their stats are completely random!
...You were talking about the One True Way to roll stats, laid down by the two Fathers of True Role Playing, right? (3d6, straight down the line, no rearrangements, no complaints!)
It all just comes down to preference really. The uber characters with rolling happens once in a while, but I can honestly say that in my 30+ years of gaming I've seen maybe 4? Which is not a high number. All the arguments for and against are fairly valid. Just remember that as a GM you have the ability to adjudicate and reduce or lower the scores.
I do agree with the HP random rolls to an extent though. I usually allow max hp for the first 3 levels, and then go to random rolls after that. It gives the martials a good bump right at the beginning and helps avoid one shotting a pc with a badly timed crit. It also gives the spellcasters a bit more survivability. It may just be because I'm lazy and it makes designing encounters easier, since they have more hp and I don't have to worry as much about encounter balance. ;)
Everyone who uses point buy is by default a whiner. (...)
You can't handle the dice!Insults are always helpful in a discussion.
Sorry if the sarcasm wasn't clear.
It helps to imagine Stephen Colbert speaking my recent posts on this thread. :)
For example...
Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.Right on, friend! Rolling straight down the line, with no rearrangements, is the only way to avoid all these awful munchkin cookie cutter PCs! Oh Crom, I just love to see a fighter with 15/9/7/13/14/12!
Point buy results in exactly the same characters every time. Rolling with rearrangements results in superficially different characters -- the individual scores are slightly different from what they'd be with point buy, but they're arranged in the same awful munchkin cookie cutter order. If able, wizard players still put their highest stat in Int and their lowest in Str and Cha, for example. And everyone knows that characters can't be different or interesting unless their stats are completely random!
...You were talking about the One True Way to roll stats, laid down by the two Fathers of True Role Playing, right? (3d6, straight down the line, no rearrangements, no complaints!)
Hmmm.... I missed it...
Where in my two posts did I say one way superior to another?All I said was my anecdotal evidence showed a trend toward diversity for one method as opposed to the other.
It is a matter of personal preference, and of course no one way is the right way. The goal is to just have fun, but some gamers apparently find certain methods so abhorrent and un-fun that they will walk away from a table using them. Depending on the circumstances, this can be a bit rude and insulting. It's hard getting enough people together to play this game, and people walking away just makes it harder.
I think most Pathfinder gamers use the Standard method simply because it is called the Standard method in the Core Rulebook. However, the Purchase or Point-Buy method seems to have increased in use. I think this may partially come from the influence of 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons, because , if I recall correctly, it adopted the Purchase method as the standard. (I may be wrong about this, it has been years since I last played 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons).
Oh, if only we had some moron constantly threadcrapping in here.
;)
I think both systems work.
I have always used rolling the dices whenever i have been playing with friends or social places. When i tried PFS, it was a new experience for me but thank god, i have beenplaying NWN.
I think it really comes down to preferences in the end and it raises a valid question that i have to talk with me Co GM about, sinds both systems has it pros and cons.
One dice system i used is to allow the players to use 4d6, reroll the 1 and remove the lowest. From here on, if a player rolls 4x6, it turns into a 19, if the player rolls 4x1 it turns into 20. (again, all 1 would normally be rerolled) It encourages people, seening that they have a high chance for rolling some good stats and not being a dead weight. Taken from a real life view, some people are just born with natural high intelligence or other things aswell. But just as the players can make these rolls, so too can the GM.
the point buy system works very well, sinds PFS is there and they have to make it balancede in some ways if it has to work all over the different places.
I've tried warhammer system, where we players had to roll twice for which "class" we would start out with and that would lead to some not-so happy players.
3.5 had its own point buy system, but it was way different than Pathfinders, by a lot.
I think if one was to truly hold the game to a 'balance at all costs' standard then there would have to be a system set in place that accommodated the less fortunate MAD classes and prevented the SAD classes from dominating. Unfortunately there really isn't a way to do this without seriously limiting or encouraging multiclass options at the same time.
Consider, for either rolling or point buy, instead of starting with all 10s and adjusting your stats from there, you were given an array, and not just any array, but a base array that differed with every class.
From that array, you are given a number of variance, let's say up to 4 points. For rollers, that means a d4 + base to determine stats (or in more complex games 2d2 or 1d3+1 ow hatever other generation method you want) and for point buyers, it means you can't spend points on a stat higher than your base. Now, for the options to increase, you can dip into the other stats pools, at double the cost.
What would this look like?
Let's look at Wally Wizard, his base array looks like this
7/10/8/14/8/8
For rolling, he would roll his d4s and choose where to put them, or in order, whatever.
For point buying, he would have his variance of 4 points for each stat that he must stay within, with an imposed limit not too different from a point buy cap. but without the scaling difficulty. If he wants to raise a stat above his 4 point variance, then each increase in a stat would cost double points. Let's say you only give him 10 points to play with, and he spends 4 of them on INT, 4 on DEX, and 2 on CON. Let's say he has 16 and spends 4 on INT, 4 on CON, and then 8 points on DEX which only raises it to 16 and not an 18 because he went over his cap.
I think a system like that, while limited in the playstyle options for the longevity of the game, would be on the right track to 'balancing' point buy in a way that makes all the classes 'playable' in the same way that the SAD classes are and could allow for some concepts. Obviously this is not a final revised product and most definitely has not been play tested so take with that what you will.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.
Why? Don't your characters have personalities?
I prefer rolling for stats simply because all PCs are not, or should not be created equally. People aren't, so why should PCs? I believe the stats should be rolled in front on the GM. If you want big gosh-darn heroes, than use the 7 sets of 4d6 drop one and reroll 1s. If you are more inclined toward 15-20 point buy stats, than you can skip the rerolls and extra set.
One idea that I had, that was unique to me at least at the time I thought of it, is to roll the stats and allow the players to move points around using the point buy values, so if you want to bump that 16 to an 18, you still have to drop other scores enough to come up with the 7 points.
My PC can be unique by his/her mechanical build and the way they are RP'd. Rolling bad stats or continuing to reroll until I get a passable set is more a waste of time than anything else, and with point buy everyone will still have different stats just like they will with rolling. In addition despite the point buy being the same some choices with stats are still better than others, so once again it point buy does not guarantee equality, but it gives you a better chance of it. If that were not true then dumping stats would not be an issue. Someone obviously thinks that dumping stats is better and different than not dumping stats.
The closest thing to true equality for the purpose of stats is a stat array.
Biggest argument against rolling for attributes that I see is the very odd coincidence that I'm constantly hearing about how someone rolled GREAT stats for their character but I never see anyone playing with a character who rolled badly. Not too many '8 point buy' equivalent characters out there being played, are there?
Paizo's AP's are supposedly designed for 15 point buys. We play 20. I've never seen a group who rolled their stats, regardless of the method used, that didn't miraculously end up averaging 30 points or more.
I have never seen "groups" that rolled badly either, and that is NOT the argument being made. The argument being made is that individual players in a group will roll poorly compared to the rest of the group. Now if you are allowing rerolls then someone earlier listed a way to reduce the minimum. If you are not allowing rerolls then someone rolling poorly is likely to happen, and yes I am aware that "poorly" can be subject to individual taste.
PS: People don't often brag about sucking. As an example, as much as I dont like point buy I mention the times I roll well a lot more than the times I don't.
I can tell you plenty about rolling terrible stats. Like the campaign where I went through 5 characters where the single highest roll preracial was a 13 using 4d6-drop-lowest.
I have tried once playing a char with some not to shabby stats.
Warforged lvl 1 warblade. after 5 attemps of rolling some decent stats, none were good enough and a total plus modifier of 1. So i had to cut a deal with the GM, which ende up with: 17,16,16,4,4,6, starting from str to cha. It was pretty funny to play that warforged (i stil have his sheet) and some of us stil talk about that stupido warforged this day. The GM even made use of the jepardy sound whenever Dragger (Slæbeer in danish) was start thinking, which made us all cracked up! even got bonus xp for good roleplaying!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to mention the counter-arguments to the randomness of rolling always seems to be some sort of goofy methods of rolling that reduce the randomness of it as much as possible, which generally results in characters who are like they would be with point buy, except with the potential to be wildly stronger or wildly weaker.
For example, 17s-18s in Point Buy are grossly expensive. I never go higher than 16 in a starting statistic and even then it's usually only one 16 in whatever is my primary statistic (usually Str for Barbarians, Clerics & Rangers, Charisma for Paladins, Intelligence for Wizards, Charisma for sorcerers, and depending on what kind of Druid I'm playing it might go into either Strength or Wisdom). I'm probably going to have a few stats between 7-9 to make up for the excellence in other areas.
The likelihood of me choosing to buy a 17-18 is virtually nil. If I did, I would have to accept heavy losses elsewhere. If on a wizard I wanted an 18 Int, 14 Con, and 14 Dex, I would have to eat a 7 in Str, Wis, and Cha (my carrying capacity is going to suck, my will saves and perception is going to suck, and my social skills and ability to influence with charm / planar binding is going to suck).
However with rolling? Pfft, fate's a fickle b+#&$. You could end up with 16s across the board. Or 12s. Or whatever. Once as a GM I was helping a player roll up a bard using the ol' 4d6 drop lowest (as was the standard in 3.x) and she ended up with FOUR 17s, and TWO 18s for her ability scores. We were all sitting around the table just dumbfounded. Her character was just randomly a pinnacle of human potential. Meanwhile our party's Barbarian had to eat a 3.
But oh, they say, we use a re-rolling method, they cry. You can re-roll if your stats suck! Well then what's the ****ing point? You're just pushing it harder towards the averages that point buy gives you anyway, except you're...
A. Creating some sort of disparity between the players.
B. Encouraging people to milk the system to get better rolls.
If I roll 17, 14, 15, 12, 9, and 8, I'm going to milk that for all its worth because I just rolled the equivalent of 24 point buy on what is likely a method intended to give similar results to the standard 15 Point Buy. I'm going to rock those stats so hard.
But if I roll 13, 14, 12, 13, 5, and 9, I'm just going to re-roll and try again. Unless you don't allow re-rolls and thus force disparity between party members. Even still, if I get a character that is not what I want to play, I will just roll a different character.
Even with the Point Buy system, characters aren't going to be equal because of things like stat placement, class selection, feat selections etc. Some choices are simply better than others. All PB really does is give players more control over their resources. And sure, it saves time and lobbying over random stat rolling issues.
edit: someone said people aren't equal and I certainly think that's true in terms of character building/development. Therefore, why not start the playing field out as level as possible? Point Buy does exactly that.
The next campaign I start will likely be a very rough kingdom builder one, and the character stat roll-up system I will use is..
each player rolls 4d6 drop the lowest, and down a line, generate 6 sets of stats and pick the one they want to start with...when the current character dies or what not, pick another set from the original generated ones, and so on until all six are used.
Why? Don't your characters have personalities?Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.
mine? Sure. Others? Not from what I have observed...
but again it is merely anecdotal evidence.
Why? Don't your characters have personalities?Well yes, in a controlled environment such as point buy people will generally use the spreads that are good. I don't see that as a bad thing though, it allows for much greater player choice in what you want to build compared to rolling and potentially getting stats unsuited for the character you want.When the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game A has the same exact stats as the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game B and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in Game C and the fighter/rogue/mage/cleric/bard in game D, Ad nauseaum...
It gets old... Fast.
Or further yet, why is everyone building the same fighter/rogue/mage/cleric every game? Last I checked, there are usually more than 2 valid options at the least for each class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even with the Point Buy system, characters aren't going to be equal because of things like stat placement, class selection, feat selections etc. Some choices are simply better than others. All PB really does is give players more control over their resources. And sure, it saves time and lobbying over random stat rolling issues.
edit: someone said people aren't equal and I certainly think that's true in terms of character building/development. Therefore, why not start the playing field out as level as possible? Point Buy does exactly that.
It really doesn't set a level playing field at all.
Weaker classes who require more resources are screwed by the point buy system every time, regardless of the person filling that role's natural ability.Point buy forces the game to design around it and it shows when there are so many options of 'getting X to Y' simply because you want to limit yourself because of what point buy has done to the game in forcing you to build characters certain ways to facilitate bad design.
If they have to change the requirements on the Swashbuckler so that he uses CHA instead of INT on feat prerequisites, that just proves that the point buy system is changing the game for the worse.
I'm not saying it's wrong to enjoy using point buy for the reasons stated, but it has nothing to do with balance, it's all about control over your own character and resources because in recent years such a thing has become a sacred cow.
[Point buy] really doesn't set a level playing field at all.
Sure it does. BAM! – Everyone starts out with exactly the same points from which to buy their stats. That’s seems like a leveling effect to me.
Weaker classes who require more resources are screwed by the point buy system every time, regardless of the person filling that role's natural ability.
And this is exactly where the level playing field ends – choices like class selection. And it goes back to what I was saying about not everyone being equal in terms of character building/development,
All Point Buy does, along with all the other rules for character building and further development, is assure that everyone draws from the same resources. What you do with them determines just how equal PC’s are or are not.
Weaker classes who require more resources are screwed by the point buy system every time, regardless of the person filling that role's natural ability.
How are weaker classes screwed? Wouldn't they be even more screwed if they rolled worse than the stronger class in addition to having a weaker class? Are you suggesting that you can somehow manipulate your rolls to guarantee that you will get better than expected results?
If you're going to fudge rolls to make sure the weaker class benefits from the stats they need, why not just agree up front to help the weaker class out with a higher point buy value to work with?
How are weaker classes screwed? Wouldn't they be even more screwed if they rolled worse than the stronger class in addition to having a weaker class?
Math is how. The odds of rolling 18 Int for your wizard using 3d6 are 0.46% (in order) or 2.7% (arrange rolls in any order). The odds of point-buying 18 Int for your wizard using point-buy are always 100%. And your wizard pretty much doesn't need anything else (average Con and Dex; you can dump Str, Wis, Cha and not even feel it).
The odds of getting above-average scores for Str, Dex, Con, and Wis for your fighter or monk are low but reasonable with dice, but are 0% using point-buy unless you're using a LOT of points (in which case the wizard is rocking a 20 Int and is also always winning initiative).
Or further yet, why is everyone building the same fighter/rogue/mage/cleric every game? Last I checked, there are usually more than 2 valid options at the least for each class.
Seriously. Mage, I could maybe see ending up with similar stats (but the mage is extremely customizable in other ways that are not reflected by their attributes). And I'm not too knowledgeable about rogues, so I won't comment there.
But clerics? Clerics are 3/4 BAB characters that have a lot of choices about what role to fill in combat, and have specific uses for basically all the stats, including charisma. I do not find it to be the case that cleric builds always have similar stats.
Fighters? There are str vs. dex fighters. Damage avoiding vs damage soaking constitution fighters. Combat expertise fighters with decent int vs not. Archetypes that can use charisma. My fighter has very high wisdom, which most don't have. Besides the will save, it helps with his AC and certain other monk abilities (he has 4 levels of flowing monk, uses no armor, and fights in wolf style using a combination of reach weapon with unarmed up close). I don't see how you could argue that fighters are always the same.
How are weaker classes screwed? Wouldn't they be even more screwed if they rolled worse than the stronger class in addition to having a weaker class?Let me use small words. The odds of rolling 18 Int for your wizard using 3d6 are 0.46%. The odds of point-buying 18 Int for your wizard using point-buy are 100%. And your wizard pretty much doesn't need anything else (average Con and Dex; you can dump Str, Wis, Cha and not even feel it).
The odds of getting above-average scores for Str, Dex, Con, and Wis for your fighter or monk are very slim with dice, and are 0% using point-buy unless your'e using a LOT of points (in which case the wizard is rocking a 22 Int instead of an 18, or else has his 20 and is also always winning initiative, if you max base value at 18).
Playing a Wizard is just a choice. You're acting like electing to do so is the same as playing some kind of "I win" card.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Neither is better, but Point Buy is usually a safer bet.
Playing a Wizard is just a choice. You're acting like electing to do so is the same as playing some kind of "I win" card.
It's a choice that's arguably better overall, but more germane to the discussion, demonstratively better under point-buy (especially low or moderate point-buy) than under dice rolling -- unless the latter is using fixed order of scores rolled, in which case class isn't much of a choice at all.
That's math, not opinion.
