Classes should come with a point buy adjustment modifier


Homebrew and House Rules


For example

Monk +4 Point buy
Paladin +0 Point buy
Wizard -5 Point buy

Numbers not specific just an example. Having this number to tune would help a lot for game balance.


Not really. This is only a problem at some tables. Most tables dont have a problem with the current ruleset, and the skill of the player is also a factor. A good player can do well with almost any class, so no this would not do a lot for game balance. You might also want to look at differences in play style. Another problem with this rule is what happens when people multiclass. It really just creates more problems, and solves none.


wraithstrike wrote:
Not really. This is only a problem at some tables. Most tables dont have a problem with the current ruleset, and the skill of the player is also a factor. A good player can do well with almost any class, so no this would not do a lot for game balance. You might also want to look at differences in play style. Another problem with this rule is what happens when people multiclass. It really just creates more problems, and solves none.

It's really simple you just make them unable to multiclass into classes with less point buy points.

"But options <insert complaints" The barbarian and monk are lawful and chaotic, the druid can be neither. Full casting scales only on the base class.

It's not intended to solve problems. It's intended to give another balance leaver for GM's and devs to tweek. Do you really think if the summoner had a -7 PB it would be as big a problem as it is now?


Undone wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Not really. This is only a problem at some tables. Most tables dont have a problem with the current ruleset, and the skill of the player is also a factor. A good player can do well with almost any class, so no this would not do a lot for game balance. You might also want to look at differences in play style. Another problem with this rule is what happens when people multiclass. It really just creates more problems, and solves none.

It's really simple you just make them unable to multiclass into classes with less point buy points.

"But options <insert complaints" The barbarian and monk are lawful and chaotic, the druid can be neither. Full casting scales only on the base class.

It's not intended to solve problems. It's intended to give another balance leaver for GM's and devs to tweek.

Balancing is solving a problem. IF there is already no problem then this rule has no use. Like I said this is only creates problems and solves nothing.

If I am a caster and I intend to dominate the game it really does not matter if I have 15 or 20 point buy. What matters is how good I am at a player at doing so. On the other hand a monk could have 20 or 25 point buy, but if the player does not have the skill to build a monk well then it won't matter.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pretty much it's all about player skills and from my past experiences, and when I have seen Dm doing this for any games, casters tend to make the most broken combos since they are getting "shafted" by point buy and the likes. Usually it creates more problem, instead of relying on fluff like someone who wanted to make a "fun" evoker wizard, now you have void school wizard with the perfect spells setup to break your game since he can't afford to do what he wants.


wraithstrike wrote:
Undone wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Not really. This is only a problem at some tables. Most tables dont have a problem with the current ruleset, and the skill of the player is also a factor. A good player can do well with almost any class, so no this would not do a lot for game balance. You might also want to look at differences in play style. Another problem with this rule is what happens when people multiclass. It really just creates more problems, and solves none.

It's really simple you just make them unable to multiclass into classes with less point buy points.

"But options <insert complaints" The barbarian and monk are lawful and chaotic, the druid can be neither. Full casting scales only on the base class.

It's not intended to solve problems. It's intended to give another balance leaver for GM's and devs to tweek.

Balancing is solving a problem. IF there is already no problem then this rule has no use. Like I said this is only creates problems and solves nothing.

If I am a caster and I intend to dominate the game it really does not matter if I have 15 or 20 point buy. What matters is how good I am at a player at doing so. On the other hand a monk could have 20 or 25 point buy, but if the player does not have the skill to build a monk well then it won't matter.

So you're saying the 5 point buy wizard would be better than the 40 point buy rogue. I'm sorry. I don't buy that. If the rogue had "Double point buy" and the wizard had -15 on a 20 pb I assure you no matter how much you tried to break the game the rogue's raw stat advantage would bring it above you.

On a 15 point buy if the summoner and wizard are -8 but said monk is +8 you'll be at 23 to 7 point buy. You honestly don't think the free boosts to saves would make it more balanced?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Undone wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Undone wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Not really. This is only a problem at some tables. Most tables dont have a problem with the current ruleset, and the skill of the player is also a factor. A good player can do well with almost any class, so no this would not do a lot for game balance. You might also want to look at differences in play style. Another problem with this rule is what happens when people multiclass. It really just creates more problems, and solves none.

It's really simple you just make them unable to multiclass into classes with less point buy points.

"But options <insert complaints" The barbarian and monk are lawful and chaotic, the druid can be neither. Full casting scales only on the base class.

It's not intended to solve problems. It's intended to give another balance leaver for GM's and devs to tweek.

Balancing is solving a problem. IF there is already no problem then this rule has no use. Like I said this is only creates problems and solves nothing.

If I am a caster and I intend to dominate the game it really does not matter if I have 15 or 20 point buy. What matters is how good I am at a player at doing so. On the other hand a monk could have 20 or 25 point buy, but if the player does not have the skill to build a monk well then it won't matter.

So you're saying the 5 point buy wizard would be better than the 40 point buy rogue. I'm sorry. I don't buy that. If the rogue had "Double point buy" and the wizard had -15 on a 20 pb I assure you no matter how much you tried to break the game the rogue's raw stat advantage would bring it above you.

On a 15 point buy if the summoner and wizard are -8 but said monk is +8 you'll be at 23 to 7 point buy. You honestly don't think the free boosts to saves would make it more balanced?

I can still get a 20 int on 5 point buy. And, while I might suck in most other respects, I now have a very strong reason to try and break the game. Assuming I don't just walk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've been the most effective player at the table multiple times with a Bard. There were clerics and Sorcerers at the table. Not everyone is an uber-optimizer. If I am a wizard I can break the game. I choose not to.


Undone wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Undone wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Not really. This is only a problem at some tables. Most tables dont have a problem with the current ruleset, and the skill of the player is also a factor. A good player can do well with almost any class, so no this would not do a lot for game balance. You might also want to look at differences in play style. Another problem with this rule is what happens when people multiclass. It really just creates more problems, and solves none.

It's really simple you just make them unable to multiclass into classes with less point buy points.

"But options <insert complaints" The barbarian and monk are lawful and chaotic, the druid can be neither. Full casting scales only on the base class.

It's not intended to solve problems. It's intended to give another balance leaver for GM's and devs to tweek.

Balancing is solving a problem. IF there is already no problem then this rule has no use. Like I said this is only creates problems and solves nothing.

If I am a caster and I intend to dominate the game it really does not matter if I have 15 or 20 point buy. What matters is how good I am at a player at doing so. On the other hand a monk could have 20 or 25 point buy, but if the player does not have the skill to build a monk well then it won't matter.

So you're saying the 5 point buy wizard would be better than the 40 point buy rogue. I'm sorry. I don't buy that. If the rogue had "Double point buy" and the wizard had -15 on a 20 pb I assure you no matter how much you tried to break the game the rogue's raw stat advantage would bring it above you.

On a 15 point buy if the summoner and wizard are -8 but said monk is +8 you'll be at 23 to 7 point buy. You honestly don't think the free boosts to saves would make it more balanced?

I did not say a 5 point buy wizard is better than a 40 point buy rogue. In such an extreme case being allowed only 5 points is the problem. I am saying that player skill is a MUCH bigger factor, and 5 points of difference is not really a factor. As for how many points a wizard needs to compete with a rogue that depends on the two players. I think(really I am sure) a 15 pb full caster can compete with 30 point buy rogue if the players are of equal skill. Actually I am betting on the full caster(wizard or not) being more useful even if the rogue is a slightly better player in most cases. There is not much a 20 point pb wizard can do that a 25 pb wizard can't do. The 25 pb wizard will have a higher int, and a few other stats will be higher, but it won't be a substantial drop in power. They have access to the same spells, and most likely the saves of the spell's won't differ by any more than 2. Of course the wizard won't have to spam SoD's/SoS to be effective so he can live with the lower DC's.

edit: I just noticed your last sentence. Maybe at low levels but as the caster(not just wizard) levels up they get more access to cosmic power so that point buy will just matter less and less.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

You'd never be able to get a set of numbers that fit the tables out there. Best leave it to individual GMs to determine it.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
You'd never be able to get a set of numbers that fit the tables out there. Best leave it to individual GMs to determine it.

This is correct because if a GM were to do this he would have to base it on his table along with other things. Of course if you tell player A he has to take less points than player B, even though player B is a far superior player with regard to system mastery then dont expect it to go over well.


So,
1) If you pick Rogue, you can never multiclass. Well, maybe you can, into Commoner.
2) The OP didn't state how the point buy adjustment modifiers are decided. How would you decide on these numbers? Arbitrary judgement?


I think this is a bad idea for several reasons. First is that Stats are more important at the early levels. Those are also the levels that wizards and other top tier classes have problems. Past 5th level the class makes more impact than the stat. Consequently many lower tier classes actually do better at low level because they don’t get as much when they level up. This only makes the situation worse instead of better. Now the lower tier classes are significantly better at low level, but still do just as bad at mid to higher levels.

Second this is just going to encourage more min/maxing than ever. You have pretty much guaranteed that every wizard is going to have a 7 in both STR and CHA. The other effect will be for single first level dips in classes. Now almost everyone will take his first level in rogue and then take the rest of the levels in the class they want. This was very common in 3rd edition due to getting 4 times your first level in skills at 1st level.

Third is that the skill of the player often makes more difference in the power level of a character than anything. I have often been requested by the GM to tone my characters down because they are highly effective, where as someone else in the group is giving a lot of leeway on their characters. My characters are always within the rules, but we often bend the rules for this player. My characters are always more powerful even when hers should be. Even when I design the character to be fully optimized the other person does not fully utilize it.

Liberty's Edge

I agree with most of the folks here. This is a 'solution' in search of a problem. If an individual GM sees this as a problem in his games and wants to try it ... Well, have at it, but it's certainly not some sort of panacea.

Plus, this assumes everyone uses point buy for stats which clearly is far from true.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I'm aware that some people try this, but I think a more elegant solution would be capping max starting stat.

An 18 costs 17 points. That's huge, and a lot of people feel pressure to have an 18 mainstat.

It's only practical for main casters, who don't need anything else (besides some Con and Dex). If you give them a lower PB, they'll still get that 18, they'll just get a few more 7s to pay for it.

A 16 costs 10 points, which is still a fair bit, but only about 60% the cost of an 18.

So this way casters don't get lower point buys (which fail to limit their power anyway), and martials don't feel as bad for not getting an 18 Str.

Maybe I should make another topic for this.


I usually do a 25 point buy with a hard limit of 18 after racial adjustments. I feel this does more to balance the characters than anything else I can do. A wizard with a 13 STR is not really any more powerful than a wizard with a 7 STR, but a wizard with a 20 INT is more powerful than a wizard with an 18 INT. Since most of the lower tier classes tend to be M.A.D. it gives them what the need, without boosting the power level of the higher tier classes. Some classes are still underpowered, but you can only do so much. For rogues I have a couple of house ruled talents that helps them more than any stat will ever do.


Come to think of it, I can't see a core rogue with base stats 18/18/18/18/18/18 beating a core wizard with base stats 7/12/12/18/10/7. Unless it's at, like, level 1.

Shadow Lodge

Something which could work is that martial classes may get better stats growths as they level, for example, its sensible a fighter get more str a rogue more dex, a monk more wis, etc. Its sensible considering they are actively training their bodies. This could in turn be used with caster but due to balance reasons i would limit it in its case.


Hmm, if the caster or specifically wizard plays nice and makes the group shine and only blows out the stops to stop the tpk why mess with anything.

This is a group game,level headed adults at the table wI'll matter more for everyone having their time to shine more then monkeying around with point buys.

It has been stated that t1 and t2's get more out of class abilities then stats and this is true, but to antagonize the t1 and t2 players out of the gate seems like it could backfire. YMMV

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Classes should come with a point buy adjustment modifier All Messageboards

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