Lessons for 2nd Edition: 5th Edition D&D and Pathfinder's Complexity


Homebrew and House Rules

401 to 445 of 445 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

What I really want to come from this is seeing better advancement options for the classes, with each one getting a few feat levels ( to a maximum of 6 for the fighter) that are completely separate from stat raises. and perhaps the introduction of a second archetype for each character ( example my paladin takes the oath of vengeance at level 3, and at level 7 i also get to take one archetype XYZ) where the second archetype offers additional things to a specific class only, without taking anything away that it would already get. giving new abilities, and unlocking optional feats for each new archetype, similar to the fighter only feats idea from previous iterations of the game.

A (rough) example character generic leveling guide(hit dice, saves, and proficiency bonus remain the same) -

1. no change from current
2. one feat.
3. first archetype choice
4. ability score +2
5. no change
6. half benefit from a second background( varies )
7. second archetype (and fighter gains a feat)
8. one feat, ability score +2
9. additional skill proficiencies (2,3,or 4(class dependent) from
class list
10. second archetype advancement
11. Class power (varies, not effected by archetype)
12. ability score +2
13. second archetype advancement
14. one feat( and fighter bonus feat)
15. 1st archetype power (varies)
16. ability score +2, second archetype advancement
17. no change
18. 2nd archetype power (varies)
19. second archetype advancement
20. ability score +2, one feat, class specific awesomeness( you know what I mean)

basically giving you something to look forward to every level, in regards to customizing your character.

Where I use the word archetype, i prefer to think of it more as a sub-class each with their own advancements, and not dependent on each other, giving wide range to combinations

I would like to say that I will play with this more,and refine it, and I might, but that's a lot of work, and I prefer playing to creating, unless I have an idea to spitball with a DM in regards to a certain character.


Nathanael Love wrote:
I'd say a better analogy is an ice cream shop that up until now has had pistachio only available in cones, while vanilla is available in bowls and now they are offering the choice of ordering pistachio in a bowl for those of us who don't like cones.

I see the change (flavor of system vs delivery mechanism), but let me alter it slightly.

The store next door is the one that has offered pistachio ice cream in a waffle cone, and has been doing so for years. Now the current store is offering pistachio ice cream in a bowl, when everything else they serve is also in a bowl, and share lots of the same toppings too.

Can I just get a waffle cone, or a shake, or even a sundae, or something that isn't in a freaking bowl.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I'd say a better analogy is an ice cream shop that up until now has had pistachio only available in cones, while vanilla is available in bowls and now they are offering the choice of ordering pistachio in a bowl for those of us who don't like cones.

I see the change (flavor of system vs delivery mechanism), but let me alter it slightly.

The store next door is the one that has offered pistachio ice cream in a waffle cone, and has been doing so for years. Now the current store is offering pistachio ice cream in a bowl, when everything else they serve is also in a bowl, and share lots of the same toppings too.

Can I just get a waffle cone, or a shake, or even a sundae, or something that isn't in a freaking bowl.

My guess is because the people at Paizo don't happen to be interested in the same kind of alternate system that you are?

Though plenty of third parties have several alternate systems out there that you could use.

Also, Paizo did an alternate magic system in Words of Power two years ago-- it may just not be time for them to do another alternate magic system.

Also, since the very beginning of this game people have been asking for Psionics and its been a pretty consistent answer of 1. we don't want to do a power points system, 2. DSP already updated those rules, they are over there, we don't think/want to do a better job of it and don't want to simply crush their corner by doing our own update of it, and 3. when we do it, it will be called Psychic Magic and it will be its own thing.

I mean, this is all about a system of powers that we haven't even seen the playtest document for. Up till now, I've learned to trust that Paizo will have good stuff when they release a hardcover and go into the topic.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's already alternate systems: ki, grit, hexes, ...


Paizo did release an alternate system - no argument there. However, they haven't supported it in the slightest bit. Wait...

Was I actually about to complain that the Words of Power system was released, with few problems (if any), and hasn't been expanded through feats, archetypes, poorly thought out new words or mechanics which cause more problems, and overall reduces the power of spellcasters through missing words?

Ha! Forget I said anything and please, pretty please, continue to ignore or forget that Words of Power was ever published. Thank you.

Shadow Lodge

The problem is that WoP, as released, was also incomplete. If you want to be a blaster wordcaster, what they put out was great. If you want to do anything else other than blast, then there's not much there for you to work with.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
They have also mentioned that, as far as business models go, they are focusing more on building and supporting DnD as a brand than specifically a game.

I can't wait for the return of Jeremy Irons.

".....MYYY DESSSTINYYYYY!!!!! GYEUGHAUUUHHHH....."


Kthulhu wrote:
The problem is that WoP, as released, was also incomplete. If you want to be a blaster wordcaster, what they put out was great. If you want to do anything else other than blast, then there's not much there for you to work with.

I cannot argue with that - it's a straight up nerf to casters (and a heavy one at that - a bit too far, as is). When you have phenomenal cosmic power, but no constraints, anything is a nerf.

Don't get me wrong, I like linear martials (to a point - I'm in the camp that everything post-5th level for martials SHOULD be not Extraordinary, but "Extramundane" - which is just another word for supernatural) and quadratic spellcasters, but the sweet spot I prefer for that was long-ago passed by Paizo.

I'm stopping now before I go on another spellcaster rant. Basically, while I'd like to see WoP rounded out, I wouldn't want Paizo or anyone else who seeks to maintain the status quo working on it.


Is it just me, or does the 5e core rulebook smell really freaking weird?


Thelemic_Noun wrote:
Is it just me, or does the 5e core rulebook smell really freaking weird?

Outgassing, as a general rule, sucks.

Silver Crusade

Da'ath wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
Is it just me, or does the 5e core rulebook smell really freaking weird?
Outgassing, as a general rule, sucks.

Not as bad as the last pathfinder book, "who's named cannot be named"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Da'ath wrote:
Thelemic_Noun wrote:
Is it just me, or does the 5e core rulebook smell really freaking weird?
Outgassing, as a general rule, sucks.

Not for starter fluid. Wheee!!!

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm. I mentioned that one of the things I like about 5e is that it's lower magic than Pathfinder; I just wanted to clarify that I am not against High Magic. I would not want Pathfinder to go similarly low magic. Rather; I want to have a low magic option as well as a high magic option.

But yeah, I agree with Rogue Jay; Opportunities to get new fun stuff in 5e is too few and far between.Maybe future classes will address that; I'm not looking for them to break the power curve in terms of maximum power, but I do want a much greater variety of options inside my character builds.

If they don't do it, I just might do it myself; and like I do with Pathfinder, always run a heavily houseruled version that is still compatible with the rest of the baseline material.

Silver Crusade

Darkholme wrote:
> You get very few opportunities to make meaningful choices for your character build, and there are many levels where you don't get anything new and fun at all, let alone a choice of a new and fun thing.

The only dead levels I've seen are levels when casters get a new level of spell to cast.

I think more paths will be published, and the classes are written to make that easy.

Some paths are more customisable than others; I love the fighter battle master path. I can choose which three things I want based on how I visualise the character. My swashbuckler/duelist will definately take parry, precision strike and riposte at third level, because that matches what fencers do.

Quote:
> Many of the more interesting parts of character creation are "optional rules" - so you may not get to use them at all, and you have to give up your statistical advancement to get them if they ARE allowed.

I think it's strange to make feats optional, and believe they will be universal beyond training games. Even organised play uses them out of the gate.

If it were up to me, I'd've not bothered saying feats were optional, and given each character a feat at first level because that helps make your character different from the norm.

As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6 ⇒ (1, 4, 1, 2) = 8=7

4d6 ⇒ (2, 3, 4, 4) = 13=11
4d6 ⇒ (3, 3, 5, 5) = 16=13
4d6 ⇒ (3, 3, 4, 2) = 12=10
4d6 ⇒ (3, 3, 2, 3) = 11=9
4d6 ⇒ (1, 2, 1, 3) = 7=6

Really?


thejeff wrote:


4d6=7
4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

Ha!

That looks like every stat array I've ever rolled since the late 80s.


thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

*squints*

Wait, are there not any more rules for rerolls of stats because I'm sure that array would qualify for a reroll under the 3.5 rules for character creation in the PHB?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

No-- he has a 13 which is a +1, the rule was no stats without at least a +1


But the sum total of his ability modifiers is negative. That's a reroll.


4d6 ⇒ (5, 6, 2, 4) = 17 =15
4d6 ⇒ (6, 3, 5, 1) = 15 =14
4d6 ⇒ (4, 3, 5, 1) = 13 =12
4d6 ⇒ (4, 2, 1, 3) = 10 =9
4d6 ⇒ (1, 3, 5, 2) = 11 =10
4d6 ⇒ (3, 4, 2, 1) = 10 =9
^This guy can't reroll

4d6 ⇒ (2, 1, 4, 5) = 12 =11
4d6 ⇒ (5, 2, 1, 3) = 11 =10
4d6 ⇒ (2, 4, 1, 3) = 10 =9
4d6 ⇒ (1, 4, 1, 6) = 12 =11
4d6 ⇒ (6, 5, 3, 2) = 16 =14
4d6 ⇒ (1, 2, 1, 1) = 5 =4
^this guy can reroll


Squirrel_Dude wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

*squints*

Wait, are there not any more rules for rerolls of stats because I'm sure that array would qualify for a reroll under the 3.5 rules for character creation in the PHB?

I don't know. Are there rules in the PHB for rerolls? The Basic document doesn't have any.

That said, it's mostly just the assumption that you'll always have better stats with rolls than with PB, when generally at least someone at the table won't - Assuming a not extremely generous rolling (and rerolling) method.


thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

On average, yes. With 4d6 drop 1 you've got a 56.8% chance of rolling at least one stat of 16 or higher. You also have a separate 29.7% chance of getting at least one stat of 7 or lower.


Frankly, point-buy was the best thing to ever happen to me when I get to play and not GM. I consistently roll low for stats.


JoeJ wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

On average, yes. With 4d6 drop 1 you've got a 56.8% chance of rolling at least one stat of 16 or higher. You also have a separate 29.7% chance of getting at least one stat of 7 or lower.

That still means the average 4 person party will have 1 and quite likely 2 without that 16. And there's a pretty good chance you won't even the 15.


thejeff wrote:
JoeJ wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

On average, yes. With 4d6 drop 1 you've got a 56.8% chance of rolling at least one stat of 16 or higher. You also have a separate 29.7% chance of getting at least one stat of 7 or lower.

That still means the average 4 person party will have 1 and quite likely 2 without that 16. And there's a pretty good chance you won't even the 15.

That certainly is possible. Which is why I think it's a good thing that the standard generation method in 5e lets the player choose whether to use a default array or roll the dice and take a chance.

Silver Crusade

thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

Heh! Actually, the last set of stats I rolled (for my Kingmaker paladin) was 18 17 15 15 13 5. With that array (as with any array), the highest roll will be assigned to the ability your PC values most.

What I meant was that the available point buy tops out at 15, and it's not possible to have better than 17 after racial adjustments, and because point buy let's you, you probably won't want to waste 2 points on a 17 when a 16 will do, leaving you two wasted feat chances to be ability increases instead.

With rolled stats, an 18 could be a 20 after racial adjustments, meaning that you can choose feats each time! Even a rolled 16 could be adjusted to 18, resulting in only one wasted feat chance. Point buy leaves you with a minimum of two wasted feat chances, or one if you risked your first three levels with a couple of wasted points.

I've noticed a vocal but pretty even divide on this forum between fans of rolling and fans of point buy. You can guess which side of the fence I'm on. One of the things I don't like about point buy is that it makes me min/max my stats, and I tend to have many 8s and 15s (or 7s and 18s in PF), which leaves the arrays for all my PCs uncomfortably similar. At least when I roll, I can't fine-tune away the uniqueness into a chosen homogenous ubiquity. If I roll a 9 and a 13, I can't fine-tune them into an 8 and a 14 like I definately would if I could. This results in a more realistically varied bunch of PCs.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Heh! Actually, the last set of stats I rolled (for my Kingmaker paladin) was 18 17 15 15 13 5.

With stats like that, the "5" stands out even more...

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've been using a different random method for years (When I don't point-buy), which is less swingy. I think it's based on a post I saw on EN World a few years back.

The basic premise is this:
You shuffle and draw randomly, from 12 cards. One is a joker, and the others range from 4 to 9. My initial ratio was 2 of each, but that made the average of your stats be around a 15. These days I build a couple arrays I think are good based on point buy, and then use that to determine my ratios.

Here's my baseline, which I then alter based on the arrays I come up with that I consider acceptable.
4,4
5,5
6
7,7
8,8
9,9
J (Copies whatever it's drawn with)

This baseline can give you (at its extremes) 18(9,J), 17(8,9), 15(8,7), 13(7,6), 10(5,5), 8(4,4) - which is 38 point buy. If you take out the Joker, you end up with 32 Point Buy as the best that can be generated, and 18 point buy being the worst you can get (13 across the board). (78 as the total of all your stats)

When adjusting, I make sure there are never more than two 9s, and I try to limit the number of fours as well; but I'll shift the others around, turning 7s and 8s into 5s and 6s to match the totals I'm going for.

This results in stats that are still random, while being much less swingy than 4d6 drop lowest. I may or may not include the Joker.

Then, I'm also inclined to provide two stat arrays the players can just take instead of whatever they drew in cards, such as a (16, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8) and a (18,13,12,11,10,8), where the more MAD array has a higher point total.


Laurefindel wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Heh! Actually, the last set of stats I rolled (for my Kingmaker paladin) was 18 17 15 15 13 5.
With stats like that, the "5" stands out even more...

Yes. If that 5 doesn't inspire some aspect of your character's personality, your GM should throw dice at you all night.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

Heh! Actually, the last set of stats I rolled (for my Kingmaker paladin) was 18 17 15 15 13 5. With that array (as with any array), the highest roll will be assigned to the ability your PC values most.

What I meant was that the available point buy tops out at 15, and it's not possible to have better than 17 after racial adjustments, and because point buy let's you, you probably won't want to waste 2 points on a 17 when a 16 will do, leaving you two wasted feat chances to be ability increases instead.

With rolled stats, an 18 could be a 20 after racial adjustments, meaning that you can choose feats each time! Even a rolled 16 could be adjusted to 18, resulting in only one wasted feat chance. Point buy leaves you with a minimum of two wasted feat chances, or one if you risked your first three levels with a couple of wasted points.

I've noticed a vocal but pretty even divide on this forum between fans of rolling and fans of point buy. You can guess which side of the fence I'm on. One of the things I don't like about point buy is that it makes me min/max my stats, and I tend to have many 8s and 15s (or 7s and 18s in PF), which leaves the arrays for all my PCs uncomfortably similar. At least when I roll, I can't fine-tune away the uniqueness into a chosen homogenous ubiquity. If I roll a 9 and a 13, I can't fine-tune them into an 8 and a 14 like I definately would if I could. This results in a more realistically varied bunch of PCs.

Dont' really want to turn this into a roll/point buy debate, but I kind of agree with you. I like the feel of rolling, as you describe. OTOH, I hate when one person gets your roll and another gets mine.

But, my real point and as JoeJ pointed out, you really only have a 58% chance of the advantage you're talking about and you could do worse, as my roll showed.

You might get to 20 faster with rolled stats than with point buy. You also might take longer or do the same.

Dark Archive

Haha. Those are some unreasonably good stats.

There have been other times I got something like 13 12 10 10 9 8 ( I think that was it). It was the minimum possible to not get an auto-reroll.

Hmm. Odd. My post about stat generation should have showed up in a different thread...

Oh well, just ignore it.

A choice of arrays can be pretty good though. You can either take an array worth more points, or an array with a higher maximum stat, but less good stats overall.

Silver Crusade

thejeff wrote:

But, my real point and as JoeJ pointed out, you really only have a 58% chance of the advantage you're talking about and you could do worse, as my roll showed.

You might get to 20 faster with rolled stats than with point buy. You also might take longer or do the same.

In order to have to take three potential feats as stat increases (rather than the two basically guaranteed by point buy) is if your adjusted stat is 14, which makes your unadjusted stat 12. I think that the chances of your best score (on 4d6 keep 3, six times) being only twelve is a lot lower than your chances of your best score being 16 or higher.

Silver Crusade

JoeJ wrote:
Laurefindel wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Heh! Actually, the last set of stats I rolled (for my Kingmaker paladin) was 18 17 15 15 13 5.
With stats like that, the "5" stands out even more...

Yes. If that 5 doesn't inspire some aspect of your character's personality, your GM should throw dice at you all night.

Absolutely! I've discussed what I did on other threads, but (long story short) that 5 became a role-Playimg hook for the whole character, and in a much more nuanced way than, 'he is just stupid'.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
thejeff wrote:

But, my real point and as JoeJ pointed out, you really only have a 58% chance of the advantage you're talking about and you could do worse, as my roll showed.

You might get to 20 faster with rolled stats than with point buy. You also might take longer or do the same.

In order to have to take three potential feats as stat increases (rather than the two basically guaranteed by point buy) is if your adjusted stat is 14, which makes your unadjusted stat 12. I think that the chances of your best score (on 4d6 keep 3, six times) being only twelve is a lot lower than your chances of your best score being 16 or higher.

Relevant Anydice

Relevant Article

You have a 1.81% chance that your highest unadjusted attribute will be a 12-, and a 56.76% chance of it being a 16+. You can count on a rolled primary attribute of 14+ since it's a 92.8% chance.

Also interesting; the 5e example array of 15 14 13 12 10 8 is less good than the most likely rolled outcome of 16 14 13 12 10 9 - 50+% of the time you will roll that or better, rolling much worse is statistically improbable.

Using an online calculator that doesn't cap point buy at (presumeably based on the beta rules, but seemingly accurate when you dont go above 15, the most likely outcome of rolled stats is equivalent to 31 point buy, 50% of the time rolling significantly better.

I was playing with some variants on rolled stats I've seen before in anydice (reroll 1s, or no stat below 8). Here they are if anyone wants to see them.

And in case anyone else was wondering for comparison's sake, here are the odds for 4d6 drop lowest, within the variance of point buy. The average array that would produce is 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 9, an array that would cost 29 points to build.

Point buy results in lower stats than rolling, a bit more than 50% of the time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

when did this become about ability score generation?

Silver Crusade

Rogue Jay wrote:
when did this become about ability score generation?

It was suggested that a flaw in the game is that you have to give up your ability increases in order to get a feat, therefore no-one would take feats because ability increases are better.

I countered by trying to show that it would usually only take one feat (two with point buy) to get the max score of 20 in your primary ability, so the rest would be feats.

Shadow Lodge

Quote:
Dont' really want to turn this into a roll/point buy debate, but I kind of agree with you. I like the feel of rolling, as you describe. OTOH, I hate when one person gets your roll and another gets mine.

This is why I've gone with "roll two or three arrays, then have the whole group pick one and use it, arranged as they see fit". That way everyone's got the same range of stats, and you don't end up with one guy with four 18s and another guy with only one stat over 10.


A good note for consideration is that if you look at the currently published high CR humanoids you'll not see them with anywhere near maxed ability scores. Ability scores are incredibly secondary in 5th.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Dont' really want to turn this into a roll/point buy debate, but I kind of agree with you. I like the feel of rolling, as you describe. OTOH, I hate when one person gets your roll and another gets mine.
This is why I've gone with "roll two or three arrays, then have the whole group pick one and use it, arranged as they see fit". That way everyone's got the same range of stats, and you don't end up with one guy with four 18s and another guy with only one stat over 10.

My preferred variant on that is to roll the multiple arrays and then let everyone pick whichever of them they want. Most likely it'll work out the same, if one is obviously better, but there may be cases where one is better for MAD and one for SAD, for example.


I tried that for my 5th ed. campaign. One guy consistently failed to roll similarly decent stats compared to 4 other PCs. He went so far as to do a statistical analysis with his dice and even purchased drilled casino dice with no better results. I had to eventually roll an array and assign it to him. The salt in the wound is that the first array I rolled with the intention of assigning it to him was better than everyone else's.


Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber

Recently I've just used point buy, because it's relatively easy.

In both campaigns that I've played with rolled stats, there were major disparities between the player characters. The first, I can't remember because it was so long ago, but I think my high stat was 15 and another player had an 18 and probably also a 16 as well.

In the other, we once calculated up 3.5-era point buys for the characters existing stats. My wizard had something like a 42 point buy (I had something like 17 16 15 14 12 10). The fighter/cleric, on the other hand, had more of a 20-25.

Ever since, we've used either simple point buy, or something more complicated but designed to ensure every PC has a stat array of roughly similar power. The one current game that isn't simple point buy used our choice of two randomly generated stat arrays, where all arrays were of a similar point buy (about 28-32 in 3.5, as this is a 3.5 campaign).

Getting back to the main topic, as usual, I'm undecided on the way skills work in 5e. I'm pretty sure that your average Pathfinder player character does in fact just max N skills, so for those people, there probably isn't much difference. I often end up trying to invest in a couple more skills than I truly have the skill points for. But it's that whole "fewer, but more meaningful choices" thing. You basically pick skills once, and that's it. There is no mechanism to be somewhat good at a skill and then stop investing in it while still progressing overall.

The thing is, I often find myself regretting what I end up doing to squeeze more options out of my character. Ok, the paladin I'm playing... not a lot of skill points, a few prerequisites, I don't actually expect to succeed on anything but Perception on this character (Survival, but I don't expect it to ever be rolled; in this case max ranks in Survival fits a backstory and helps justify the Skill Focus (Survival) feat investment needed as a prerequisite). I also find that figuring out how to best spend skill points was actually more interesting in 3.5, when cross-class cost more. (Note, I'm not asking to return to that mechanism; I found that 3.5-style cross-class skill investment was pretty much a trap.)

So I think that for many players, the change in skills won't be that significant, especially with the reduction in number of skills and concurrent increase in how much of the skill spectrum a single character can typically cover (4-6 out of 18 instead of 1-12 (high-Int rogue, unlikely) out of 34 (counting all knowledges but not splitting out craft/perform/profession)). A minimum-skill 5e character covers not quite a quarter of the possible skills. Most characters are minimum skill, but it's a lot more options. Most Pathfinder characters are sitting on 2+Int, perhaps 4+Int, but most don't have much Int, so you're looking at, let's be generous and say 4 skill points with at least 24 skills that are worth investment (I'm ditching craft/perform/profession and knowledge skills outside of the big 4 for this). That's a (generous) typical case of being able to cover a sixth of the possible skills. Which means that a 5e character will feel like they have a broader selection of abilities.

Also, I don't recall seeing any 5e skills flagged as Trained Only. Combine that with the much smaller difference between a skill you're proficient with and one you're not, and it also feels less painful to not be trained in a skill. It may even help push back on the "I'm not trained in that skill / maxxed out in that skill, I can't even try" notion, which is something I suffer. (Interesting anecdote: about a year ago, I think, I was rebuilding a character who was, between my choices and the DM's, a huge mess; a magus with a couple of levels of rogue and a bunch of free psionic power, as a full psionic character. I gave him some free stuff as I built him... and then last week, I was chatting with the DM and he said "does your character have telepathy?" I said "no, of course not." But the reasoning behind that was that when I looked for a few freebies to boost the character's capabilities, mostly in the sense of what I'd already seen given out (basically it amounted to a free archetype and a free rogue talent), I didn't even consider things that were not standard PC abilities. The notion of giving my character the telepathy monster ability, even on a character it does make perfect sense for, just didn't even occur to me.)

I touched on this in a totally different conversation recently: one big thing 3rd edition did, which has remained through Pathfinder, is aimed to have a rule for everything, while 2nd edition, somewhat 4th, and definitely 5th (so far, given that I don't have a DMG to look at) goes more towards the general guidelines for resolving whatever, and leaves it to the DM to figure out how to resolve specifics. A few years ago, I found the "rules for everything" notion very helpful; knowing I could look up a rule for anything buttressed my confidence when it came to running a game. Now I look at it more as a straightjacket; I have to fight the parts of my brain that say "there's a rule for that, and it says you can't succeed" or "there's no rule for that, it's just not possible" when I want to do something that isn't entirely standard.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

thejeff wrote:
Squirrel_Dude wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
As for ability increases, once you've got 20 in your main stat you'll probably stick to feats from then on. You'll get to 20 sooner with rolled stats than with point buy.

4d6=7

4d6=11
4d6=13
4d6=10
4d6=9
4d6=6

Really?

*squints*

Wait, are there not any more rules for rerolls of stats because I'm sure that array would qualify for a reroll under the 3.5 rules for character creation in the PHB?

I don't know. Are there rules in the PHB for rerolls? The Basic document doesn't have any.

That said, it's mostly just the assumption that you'll always have better stats with rolls than with PB, when generally at least someone at the table won't - Assuming a not extremely generous rolling (and rerolling) method.

Rolling really screws with the inter-party balance in 5e anyway. It's pretty much "point buy only" as far as I'm concerned. Having played several sessions of the finished version now I'm pretty firm on that. The difference between some rolling the equivalent of a 15 point buy and someone rolling a 25 point buy is just too huge, since the higher roller has better to-hit, saves, skills, etc. And since the numbers are kept so low, that's a big freaking deal, as 5 more points towards stats for me can be the equivalent of multiple extra proficiencies or class features for the lower buy character.

Shadow Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Dont' really want to turn this into a roll/point buy debate, but I kind of agree with you. I like the feel of rolling, as you describe. OTOH, I hate when one person gets your roll and another gets mine.
This is why I've gone with "roll two or three arrays, then have the whole group pick one and use it, arranged as they see fit". That way everyone's got the same range of stats, and you don't end up with one guy with four 18s and another guy with only one stat over 10.
My preferred variant on that is to roll the multiple arrays and then let everyone pick whichever of them they want. Most likely it'll work out the same, if one is obviously better, but there may be cases where one is better for MAD and one for SAD, for example.

Very good point, thanks.

Heck maybe I'll make it a group thing. Everybody rolls an array like normal, but then we take all the arrays and put them in a pot and everyone gets to pick the one they like.

Dark Archive

Orthos wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Orthos wrote:
Quote:
Dont' really want to turn this into a roll/point buy debate, but I kind of agree with you. I like the feel of rolling, as you describe. OTOH, I hate when one person gets your roll and another gets mine.
This is why I've gone with "roll two or three arrays, then have the whole group pick one and use it, arranged as they see fit". That way everyone's got the same range of stats, and you don't end up with one guy with four 18s and another guy with only one stat over 10.
My preferred variant on that is to roll the multiple arrays and then let everyone pick whichever of them they want. Most likely it'll work out the same, if one is obviously better, but there may be cases where one is better for MAD and one for SAD, for example.

Very good point, thanks.

Heck maybe I'll make it a group thing. Everybody rolls an array like normal, but then we take all the arrays and put them in a pot and everyone gets to pick the one they like.

I like giving my players 3 different arrays to choose from, which I build using point buy. Some may have more points; they would be more generalized - for MAD classes.

In the case of 5e, I'm not 100% sure what I will do yet, but I am currently leaning toward giving out an an array such that if you want to have something maxed, you start with it maxed, and then tell my players that the "stat raises" are only for feats, attributes never go up, and also give them a feat at level 1.

401 to 445 of 445 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Lessons for 2nd Edition: 5th Edition D&D and Pathfinder's Complexity All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules