| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer point buy. And when compairing builds, it's really the best (arguably) method for cross class/race comparison.
I never liked the random rolls, partly for how it was presented to me at first:
1) you roll stats because not everything is about choice.
2) now, choose race, gender, and age. And background.
It also prevents fudging/cheating stats in organized play.
Roll 2d6+6. Every person gets to roll three sets, and pick the set they want to use.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because it is not cool when Joe rolls 18, 17, 17, 17, 17, 15 while Jim is stuck with 14, 13, 10, 8, 6, 5.
Players like to see that their PCs are *capable* and when you have huge differences in stats, between PCs, one of the players is gunna feel left out.
But, at the end of the day, it is personal preference except in the case of organized play. :) I didn't come to Point Buy until I got into DDO a few years back.
Do the Paizo APs and modules assume a 15- or 20-point buy? I'm thinking about using point buy for our next campaign.
Up to this point, we've only ever rolled 4d6 and drop the lowest die.
|
I greatly prefer point-buy over rolling for stats, for the main reason that everyone else has mentioned: Fairness.
Nobody wants to be stuck playing out a campaign with crappy stats when everyone else has rolled well. I even hate being the player with good stats in that scenario. Knowing somebody else at the table got stuck playing out a crappy hand kinda spoils the enjoyment of the game for me.
The first few times I played AD&D (2dEd games), we did straight up 4d6 toss the lowest in the straight-up S/I/W/D/Cn/Ch order and THAT dictated what class you were; it limited your PC choices because you might not even qualify for what you might have wanted to play.
Then we switched to the 4d6 and put the stats where you want.
When I started DMing, I switched to a 9d6 descending to 4d6, keep three highest in each set, place them where you want, because I wanted PC's to be truly exceptional, and gives a far better chance to qualify for the classes that have those high stats as prerequisites.
I never got into any other iterations of D&D (3.0, 3.5, 4e, etc.) went straight from 2dEd to PF, and I like and prefer the buy-in method.
Do the Paizo APs and modules assume a 15- or 20-point buy? I'm thinking about using point buy for our next campaign.
Up to this point, we've only ever rolled 4d6 and drop the lowest die.
The pregenerated characters that come with the adventure paths are equivalent to a 15 point buy.
I like hybrid methods that combine rolling and point buy.
We roll for stats in my games. I've tried various rolling methods, and my most recent one is 3d5, drop lowest, +8. I prefer average to high stats from my players. I always offer the option of an array, selectable after rolling, something like 18 16 15 14 13 11.
I dislike point-buy conceptually, although I understand that's a personal issue.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I greatly prefer point-buy over rolling for stats, for the main reason that everyone else has mentioned: Fairness.
Nobody wants to be stuck playing out a campaign with crappy stats when everyone else has rolled well. I even hate being the player with good stats in that scenario. Knowing somebody else at the table got stuck playing out a crappy hand kinda spoils the enjoyment of the game for me.
As much as point buy might indicate fairness, that's only when the people have equal system knowledge and mastery, I find that having people who know how to make a character far more accurate in predicting who will have characters that are balanced against each other.
Point buy is fair regardless of system mastery. If you are worried that point buy is too daunting for new players, there are always stay arrays.
I don't believe in rolling for hit points either. Basically anything that is going to stick with your character through his entire life should be a matter of choice, not blind chance.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Point buy is fair regardless of system mastery.
It's fair between the same classes, those with the same kind of stat requirements.
It's not fair between differing classes, those with different stat requirements.
It is certainly fair at character gen, but not in play.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I've always preferred 4d6 drop the lowest, make 3 characters and choose the array you prefer then assign as you like. Not a fan of point buy because it's a lot easier for a SAD class to assign Most/all of their points in one ability than say a monk who has need of str, dex, con and wisdom.
It depends on the game. If I want a lower power game I do 20 point buy (I don't like 15 point it feels to low to me). If I want a super powerful game I do 4d6 roll 7 (8 or 9 depending on the rolls and players) times and take the best 6.
The game I am DMing we are using the 4d6 method, but 3 of the players are between the ages of 3 1/2 and 7 1/2 so I wanted a super powerful character build for their first game.
For the other game I am a player in we decided a 20 point buy was a more fair method of getting characters that were the right power level for the AP we are going to play.
I don't like rolled stats because it gives a permanent advantage to the player who rolls well and a permanent disadvantage to the player who rolls poorly. There is almost always one player who rolls significantly better than all the others.
My problem is the 3E system doesn't allow random rolling to work well. To make it work better folks have applied all kinds of failsafes. To me adding dice, rerolling 1s, and rolling multiple sets takes away the randomness and fun of rolling. Now looking at 5E and its stat cap it appears to be a game that works a lot better with random rolling.
Point buy allows my players to build characters reliably out of game and make them easier for me to audit. I prefer this fully understanding pt buy has its own faults. Keep in mind I don't have "cookie cutter" chargen problems a lot of folks seem to. I dont stress a lot of RP on stats unless it becomes a problem, which it hasn't; YMMV. That is a whole other discussion.
Ultimately, there are two sides to stat gen preference, the subjective and the objective. Both pt buy and rolling can have balance issues that may need to be mitigated. Also, some people feel the process needs to seem organic or random. How a GM/table reconciles those elements will determine the preference of stat gen system in my experience.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What's the point of rolling randomly if you'll give rerolls for bad rolls? Do you want people to have unique statblocks? Or do you want them to have good ones?
Point buy is fair regardless of system mastery.It's fair between the same classes, those with the same kind of stat requirements.
It's not fair between differing classes, those with different stat requirements.
It is certainly fair at character gen, but not in play.
It is still fair. Stat buy is actually more fair towards all classes because you have the freedom to arrange your stats in a manner that best fits that class. If you use rolling, you are likely to end up with an array that locks you out of more MAD classes.
Basically point buy gives you more decisions and decisions are good.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
More and more I just want to tell my players "Pick the stats you want" and be done with it. Rather than waste time with convoluted methods of 'fairness' and 'balance'.
If you use rolling, you are likely to end up with an array that locks you out of more MAD classes.
If you use point buy, the MAD classes either don't have enough points to buy what they need, or the SAD classes get to have more points to spread around on non-important scores. So, not fair in practice.
If you use point buy, the MAD classes either don't have enough points to buy what they need, or the SAD classes get to have more points to spread around on non-important scores. So, not fair in practice.
That's completely fair. This is the design of the game. MAD classes are balanced around being mad. And no one has demonstrated how rolling is somehow more fair regarding this.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's completely fair.
No, it's not. We just don't mind it in play, because the differences only come into contrast when player skills are widely varied.
It's the same way that flat taxes aren't always fair. 15% of 100 is much more significant than 15% of 100,000.
I hate rolling. I made several of my non-luck-believing friends believe in my statements of bad luck.
In ONE character making session where we roll 4d6 7 times. Drop the lowest die in each roll and drop the lowest result (the 7th one), I've:
- Rolled two sets which were deemed too low to be considered anything more than a peasant. One set had a total modifier added up to a +1 and there wasn't any specifically low stats but the highest was only a 12. Still better than...
- The second set of rolls which had a final result two 3s! I actually rolled four 1's THREE times and dropped one of them for the final set.
- As an experiment/sad joke, I jokingly revered the value of each number on the D6's. 1 becomes 6, 2 becomes 5, 3 becomes 4, etc. THEN I started rolling "high" with things that would have been 15's and 18's before the experimental change.
- I ALWAYS have to play on a the 3rd set of dice, which thankfully ends up SOMEWHAT comparable to a lil bit higher than 25-point buy character, but still significantly lower than rest of the majority of the party. If it wasn't for the Rerolling rules in the Abilities chapter in the PHB in 3.5, I'd have been boned.
REROLLING
If your scores are too low, you may scrap them and roll all six scores again. Your scores are considered too low if the sum of your modifiers (before adjustments because of race) is 0 or lower, or if your highest score is 13 or lower.
When we made the switch to Pathfinder, party threw me a bone when I continued to roll poorly for the first two sets, and we house-ruled that old Rerolling rule over. Anytime I GM, I do point-buy (20 pts thanks to the PFS standard). It's not a great feeling consistently beating the odds and do poorly and I'd hate for anyone in the party to look at some demigod stats someone else has and wonder, "Why am I even needed here?" They can feel that way if they made crappy character-design choices as I'm less sympathetic for those that feel roleplaying = non-optimized, but it's sucky when it's right out of the gate with ability score generation.
I have noticed that a lot of people on here like to use the stat purchase method for building their stats. I have never used that method in over 20 years of play and was curios what methods are the most popular and why?
The method I have used for most of my characters has been the roll 4 D6 and remove the lowest and depending on the GM rolling up 3-6 sets and picking which one works best.
I don't believe any element of character creation or advancement should be random. Your character should be what you envision it to be, within reasonable limits, not subject to fickle die rolls. I've actually been in rolled-stats game where I had to lower my stats because they didn't fit my concept, or I just felt they were too good in general.
|
|
It depends on the game. If I want a lower power game I do 20 point buy (I don't like 15 point it feels to low to me). If I want a super powerful game I do 4d6 roll 7 (8 or 9 depending on the rolls and players) times and take the best 6.
The game I am DMing we are using the 4d6 method, but 3 of the players are between the ages of 3 1/2 and 7 1/2 so I wanted a super powerful character build for their first game.
For the other game I am a player in we decided a 20 point buy was a more fair method of getting characters that were the right power level for the AP we are going to play.
Yeah, I think if I ever roll stats in a game I GM, I'd go for something close to that: 4d6, drop the lowest, roll it 8 times, take the best 6 and apply as desired.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Am I the only one who has a lot of fun playing characters with those one or two abysmally low ability scores? Characters who are naturally good at everything seem a bit boring to me.
I'm playing an archivist bard with a Wisdom of 5. I rolled 4f6 dropping the lowest die. Despite (or because of) the low score, playing her is hilarious.
|
|
Am I the only one who has a lot of fun playing characters with those one or two abysmally low ability scores?
I'm playing an archivist bard with a Wisdom of 5 and playing her is hilarious.
I've theorycrafted a summoner with abysmal intelligence whose eidolon is genuinely smarter than they are, haven't had a good opportunity to try it out though.
I use point buy myself for my home game, but put restrictions on it. One score 8+ all others 10+ after racial adjustments.
The reason for the restrictions is that I saw, really, a Society Character that was Str 20, Dex 14, Con 16, Int, Wis, cHa 7. He played a barbarian.
Also, I use point buy because of what Protoman said above, although it would be Richie rolling that low, but then we have Pete who would roll nothing less than a 15........
-- david
What's the point of rolling randomly if you'll give rerolls for bad rolls? Do you want people to have unique statblocks? Or do you want them to have good ones?
Both. Unique and good, like heroes ought to be.
The whole "fudging/cheating" that you talk about sound like you take it as a competition between players and not a co-op type play. I have never ran into "cheating/fudging" with in the groups i have played in due to it being a co-op atmosphere and not a competitive one, and if there was any that happened that i was unaware of it never affected anything due to the co-op nature of the group.I prefer point buy. And when compairing builds, it's really the best (arguably) method for cross class/race comparison.
I never liked the random rolls, partly for how it was presented to me at first:
1) you roll stats because not everything is about choice.
2) now, choose race, gender, and age. And background.It also prevents fudging/cheating stats in organized play.
I'm not talking about any 'whole' fudging/cheating, or that I care about it in any way. Your question was about which methods and why? If I was supposed to limit my answer to personal experience rather than reasoning, then I misunderstood you.
To me, it's about fun. Whether it's co-op or competitive, or I'm GM'ing. So ease up on the assumptions about me or groups I play in.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
best
fair
honest
unique
good
actual results may vary based on player personalities, common sense, intelligence, system mastery, game composition and other variables
|
The reason for the restrictions is that I saw, really, a Society Character that was Str 20, Dex 14, Con 16, Int, Wis, cHa 7. He played a barbarian.
I've seen this in PFS, too. Unfortunately for the players, I was the GM, and it was in the context of a baddie trying to choose the best target for mind control.
The outcome of building this way is generally bad for the player's allies. If they are dumb enough to travel with such a loose cannon, that's their problem. Thus, I have no problem with it.
One of the ideas I really like from 5th Edition is the stat cap of 20. It's too bad you can't just tack that onto Pathfinder without changing a lot of other things.
|
|
The reason for the restrictions is that I saw, really, a Society Character that was Str 20, Dex 14, Con 16, Int, Wis, cHa 7. He played a barbarian.I've seen this in PFS, too. Unfortunately for the players, I was the GM, and it was in the context of a baddie trying to choose the best target for mind control.
The outcome of building this way is generally bad for the player's allies. If they are dumb enough to travel with such a loose cannon, that's their problem. Thus, I have no problem with it.
20 isn't even that good of a number for strength, because for 2-handing, the static bonus damage is +7 as opposed to the +6 of STR 18, or the +9 of STR 22.
Now getting a casting stat to 20 I can understand, even though I've never done it, because if you plan on casting spells with saving throws, the fact that you have a limited number of times to try and get it to stick means that Pathfinder (some would say negatively) reinforces a player to search for that 20 as early as possible.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
sometimes you build scissors and the GM has nothing but rocks
Because it is not cool when Joe rolls 18, 17, 17, 17, 17, 15 while Jim is stuck with 14, 13, 10, 8, 6, 5.
Players like to see that their PCs are *capable* and when you have huge differences in stats, between PCs, one of the players is gunna feel left out.
But, at the end of the day, it is personal preference except in the case of organized play. :) I didn't come to Point Buy until I got into DDO a few years back.
+1
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hate rolling for stats, someone always "rolls" an exceptionally good set of stats when no one was present to observe. I dislike the immediate advantage the rolled stats tend to give. No one likes to play sidekick because they happened to roll poorly relative to someone else.
I like point buy better, because it is more fair at character generation. Sure, some classes are easier or harder to play based on point buy, but the player gets to decide how to arrange his stats and what choice of class to play. If a player has poor system mastery this can still give bad results, but is more fair than rolling.
I like stat arrays the most, and when I GM that is what I provide. I give an array of 16/16/15/14/13/11. It's very generous, but also stops casters from getting a very high stat from the beginning of the game. Instead capping them at 18 in their casting stat. This also prevent melee types from starting with 20 either, which can be more damaging at low levels. This particular stat array also makes MAD character viable, and perhaps even thrive because you've got 4 decent stats to start with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't done stat rolling in a long time; but the last method we used before switching to point buy wirjed really well. The whole table rolls 4d6 drop low and records the array. Then any player can choose any array to build their character. That method gave a fairly high array set at times.
Just reading these comments, I'm starting to think that everyone allows a stat array higher (sometimes much higher) than a 15-point buy. Why is that?
I remember reading that 15 point buy was supposed to generate near the same bonuses as 4d6 drop the lowest, but there was a math error. Not sure if that's true or if that was from original D20.
At any rate, most people do like to have higher than lower scores. A higher point buy is more likely to allow you to build the character you are envisioning in your head.
And PFS uses 20 point buy and that's a bit of the standard around here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hate to put more pressure on GMs, since their plate is already full, but the characters stat arrays shouldn't matter a lot if the GM is doing a good job managing the spot light of the game.
PF is a d20 system. If two melee characters are fighting side by side, one has an additional +1 STR over the other, it wouldn't even be noticeable in a short fight. We're talking about a difference of 5% of attacks that will miss for one character will hit for the other. An observer would see no difference in fighting skill.
Even expanding on that experiment, with one character having an additional +1 in every ability modifier, you couldn't easily tell. It's all psychological to the players but the characters themselves would barely notice.
Now if you're straight up rolling and one person get's a 40 point buy equivalent and another gets a 5 point buy, you will notice the difference. But if both players are mature then you have an interesting party dynamic that we don't normally get to play with.
Again, if the GM is managing the spotlight and the players are respectful of each other then the game should still be fun with random stats.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just reading these comments, I'm starting to think that everyone allows a stat array higher (sometimes much higher) than a 15-point buy. Why is that?
More fun, generally.
One of the "features" of D&D and its descendants are that first-level characters are very weak and very boring. There's a lot of level grinding before you hit the "golden zone" (which is generally considered to run from about level 5 to level 12 or thereabouts). Higher point buy gives you more effective characters at the start, when the gameplay is the least fun.
Of course, this also overpowers characters at the high end, but the effect is minimal since starting statistics are generally overtaken by magic items anyway.
A lot of character concepts generally require a decent point buy to be effective. If you want to play a monk, for example, you need reasonable levels of all of the physical stats, and the concept sort of demands a high wisdom. With low point buy, this means you either need to completely tank intelligence and charisma to give you the other points you need, or you need to have low stats across the board which means that the SAD fighter will generally make you feel useless. It's very hard to build Bruce Lee (who was both intelligent and charismatic, in addition to being a brilliant martial artist) on 15 points.