Everyone, even casters need dex for initiative, so that point is moot.
Str damage on a ZAM amounts to usually one point a hit, maybe two. It's not really needed .
As I said, everyone needs Con, so another moot point, unless you think there are no SAD casters, because they need Dex for initiative and Con for HP too.
I think it's the extra room for decisions, not the added math, that slows some of us down. It's a trade off. If you like the build game, it's probably a good thing. If not, rolling may have the advantage.Yeah, you need a table because it is so convoluted.
If it were a one to one ratio point buy then that would be simpler.It's certainly more complicated than just rolling three dice and adding them up.
More complicated than adding 3 numbers does not make it convoluted. That table is there because it is faster than reading words, and if you play enough games it is definitely not needed since memorizing how it works without trying is not hard.
To say it is the reason characters take a long time to make is a stretch. I am sure most of us are not having a hard time with it.
Hybrid methods that combine the control of point buy with the diversity of rolling are often criticized as being convoluted, while point buy is often touted as being simple.
This is true if, as Wraithstrike wrote, "you play enough games," but that is also true of any system including hybrid systems.
Point buy is not simple. I think we who are experienced with the system and have the purchase costs memorized overlook this about it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone, even casters need dex for initiative, so that point is moot.
Str damage on a ZAM amounts to usually one point a hit, maybe two. It's not really needed .
As I said, everyone needs Con, so another moot point, unless you think there are no SAD casters, because they need Dex for initiative and Con for HP too.
Bah. My wizard was just fine with his 7 Str, dex, and con. And he was a good character too, right up until his death when he tripped over that rock and skinned his knee.
Everyone, even casters need dex for initiative, so that point is moot.
I think point buy can be pretty simple in that there's a chart for it. The only player I know who doesn't have a smart phone has an iPad (and that's just because she refuses to have a cell phone). This is something you hopefully only do once or twice per campaign, and there are even web based calculators for it like this one I found after several seconds of searching.
Con - I play with at least one guy who seems to feel that he has busted the "you need a good Con" myth. You generally only need a good Con if you care whether your PC survives anyhow, but dumping Con can actually help make you better at killing other stuff, potentially even killing it before it gets a chance to inflict damage or use a Fort save power. I can't remember the last time I bought less than a 13 Con, but I've definitely seen folks go with a 10.
Dex - Winning initiative is important, but there are enough other potential initiative boosters that you could probably do pretty well even with a pretty average Dex. Of course that will lower your touch AC, but attacks against that are likely to succeed either way. Depending on what you intend to play, Dex might not be a big deal.
Everyone, even casters need dex for initiative, so that point is moot.
I disagree, because it's not binary.
Let's look at Mr. Wizard.
Now let's look at Mr. Monk.
As they get higher in level, the problem is exacerbated in several ways. Fist, Mr. wizard can take that +1/4 levels for free, and also his headband of whatever, and continue to max out Int very efficiently. In addition, he starts getting access to spells that end fights instantly by targeting a variety of saves, and a higher Int boosts the effectiveness of ALL of those spells. Meanwhile, Mr. Monk needs a multi-attribute belt and a headband of Wisdom, and his +1/4 levels is getting spread all over the place. But his attacks can only target AC, so he needs to keep up Str, but his stunning fails if he fails to keep up Wis, and if he uses any ranged attacks he'll need to scale up his Dex as well. By the time they're, say, 12th level, the wizard probably has at least 27 Int (+8 to save DCs), whereas the monk is lucky to be looking at a 17 Str and Wis (+3 to attacks and stunning DC). So their "effectiveness gap," only +3 at 1st level, has actually widened to +5.
That's why I likened attributes to salary, because their discrepancy continues to scale throughout the adventurer's career, and the dividends they pay also scale.
A higher point-buy mitigates this by allowing the monk to have much higher starting values in Str, Dex, Con, and Wis. But to make them high enough to fully bridge the gap, you pretty much need all of the PCs strutting around with godlike stats, in comparison to every NPC in the game world being built from the elite or non-elite stat arrays. And if that's really the game you want to play, Amber Diceless might be a better bet.
Well, you could just build NPC's to be competitive with PC's. I've been rebuilding the boss characters in Way of the Wicked as I go along with 20-point buy stats to be more of a challenge to the PC's who were built with 25 points.
Well, you could just build NPC's to be competitive with PC's.
You could, just like you could make all town watchmen 10th level fighters if you wanted. But there comes a point at which all that gets to be a bit absurd.
Ideally, I'd like to start with something equivalent to a 15 PB, but that doesn't overwhelmingly favor SAD classes. So far, the only thing I've found that does that is to use a set array. So when I'm DM, I let players try and shoot for the moon if they want (4d6-drop-lowest), and take the elite stat array if they prefer it to the results. A lot of them end up with the elite array.
Well, you could just build NPC's to be competitive with PC's.You could, just like you could make all town watchmen 10th level fighters if you wanted. But there comes a point at which all that gets to be a bit absurd.
Or you could recognize that Pathfinder is a high magic and very dangerous world, so of course the average person in a Pathfinder setting is going to be stronger than the average person in modern America.
You don't have to make all the town guards 10th level fighters, and I was honestly under the impression that you were above using a ridiculous strawman such as that. What you can do is make the town guards 1st level Urban Rangers, giving them an appropriate skill set for their training and the sort of hazards they expect to face. Expertly trained city guards (medieval SWAT team equivalents or whatever) would be much higher level so that they have the appropriate skill set for their training and the sort of hazards they expect to face.
Nobody is stronger than the average American! Go USA!
I wonder if the nearly constant advice to have monsters target spellcasters in older adventures was supposed to help even things out a bit.
I also just had an idea for a different style of game where the PCs aren't particularly exceptional in terms of their combat ability. They'd be special because of who they were, what they knew, or the situation they found themselves in. That seems tough to mesh with Pathfinder's level based system in a lot of ways though...maybe I miss Call of Cthulhu...
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't like point buy because of a lack of fairness, can you try to explain again? Maybe try a different approach to explain it? I'm just really baffled here.
Point-buy is fair right up until everyone picks classes. Then suddenly the monk has to take out loans to afford basic necessities while the wizard gets all that covered by his parents.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody is stronger than the average American! Go USA!
I like the cut of this man's jib.
MURCIA!
*climbs in Rascal Scooter, chugs 64oz Mt.Dew, and fires a few rounds into the air to celebrate*
If you don't like point buy because of a lack of fairness, can you try to explain again? Maybe try a different approach to explain it? I'm just really baffled here.Point-buy is fair right up until everyone picks classes. Then suddenly the monk has to take out loans to afford basic necessities while the wizard gets all that covered by his parents.
Considering that the topic of this thread is point buy vs dice rolls, how do dice rolls fix this problem?
If an array fixes this problem, than a sufficient enough point buy would also fix this problem.
Considering that the topic of this thread is point buy vs dice rolls, how do dice rolls fix this problem?They don't.
Then what's the answer for a fair starting point?
Then what's the answer for a fair starting point?Whatever the group can agree on. Some don't really care about fair distribution of ability scores.
Ok. What's your opinion on the fair starting point?
If you don't like point buy because of a lack of fairness, can you try to explain again? Maybe try a different approach to explain it? I'm just really baffled here.Point-buy is fair right up until everyone picks classes. Then suddenly the monk has to take out loans to afford basic necessities while the wizard gets all that covered by his parents.Considering that the topic of this thread is point buy vs dice rolls, how do dice rolls fix this problem?
If an array fixes this problem, than a sufficient enough point buy would also fix this problem.
That's the theory, many of these same people handing out arrays want some specific result. Some don't want characters having a stat over 18 [an easy limitation to set with Point Buy, forbidding racial bonuses from being applied to a stat above 16]
Others, such as myself, want to hand out the equivalent of a TON of points in a given pattern. [In my case, my last campaign was 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8, in times past it has been 18, 16, 14, 14, 12, 10 among other layouts.]
Just out of curiosity, why no odd numbers? You know, to make that 4th level increase feel like it's worth something.
Ok. What's your opinion on the fair starting point?Depends on what the group looks like.
You're really not going to give a straight answer, are you?
Or are you just hiding behind a shield of uncertainty. :)
I'm not asking so I can tear down your argument. I'm genuinely curious. I want to hear other's opinions and judge them to my own; maybe I'll learn something. I'm already strongly considering using arrays because of what people have said in this thread.
If there was a one-size-fits-all answer, I'd give you one.You're really not going to give a straight answer, are you?Ok. What's your opinion on the fair starting point?Depends on what the group looks like.
So basically, you don't know what works, but you definitely know what doesn't work - point buy and dice rolling.
A Barbarian who rolls acorrection, their ability to rage does boost their ability to take feats.128 Str can't take Power Attack!
Temporary boost to scores dont count unless maintained for 24 hours. Do you a citation for rage qualifying for feats?
I think it's the extra room for decisions, not the added math, that slows some of us down. It's a trade off. If you like the build game, it's probably a good thing. If not, rolling may have the advantage.Yeah, you need a table because it is so convoluted.
If it were a one to one ratio point buy then that would be simpler.It's certainly more complicated than just rolling three dice and adding them up.
More complicated than adding 3 numbers does not make it convoluted. That table is there because it is faster than reading words, and if you play enough games it is definitely not needed since memorizing how it works without trying is not hard.
To say it is the reason characters take a long time to make is a stretch. I am sure most of us are not having a hard time with it.
Hybrid methods that combine the control of point buy with the diversity of rolling are often criticized as being convoluted, while point buy is often touted as being simple.
This is true if, as Wraithstrike wrote, "you play enough games," but that is also true of any system including hybrid systems.
Point buy is not simple. I think we who are experienced with the system and have the purchase costs memorized overlook this about it.
You said it was convoluted and cited it as a mean reason as to why character creation took a long time. I have never experienced this even with new players. They tend to get hung up on feats and spells.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never liked rolling for stats, mainly because I love playing MAD characters. The groups I play with tend to roll for stats, and I tend to either A) Play sad characters (Witch and oracles I the past) or B) Play a character whose value is not contingent on crazy good stats (Buffing bard).
On the rare occasion a point buy is done, I go for more MAD characters like a Drunken Master Monk or a TWF fighter or a combat-based oracle/cleric. A point buy is better in that it offers a good degree of flexibility and control when making a character.
I feel an array with relatively high stats is good (18/16, 16, 14, 14, 12/10, 10). It makes MAD characters viable and the people playing them feel good about playing them, and the SAD characters... well... who cares about them? The saddest classes/PrCs tend to be the most powerful in the game now that I think about it. They'll be fine. Let them enjoy actually being able to carry things and not being borderline misanthropic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You said it was convoluted and cited it as a mean reason as to why character creation took a long time. I have never experienced this even with new players. They tend to get hung up on feats and spells.I think it's the extra room for decisions, not the added math, that slows some of us down. It's a trade off. If you like the build game, it's probably a good thing. If not, rolling may have the advantage.Yeah, you need a table because it is so convoluted.
If it were a one to one ratio point buy then that would be simpler.It's certainly more complicated than just rolling three dice and adding them up.
More complicated than adding 3 numbers does not make it convoluted. That table is there because it is faster than reading words, and if you play enough games it is definitely not needed since memorizing how it works without trying is not hard.
To say it is the reason characters take a long time to make is a stretch. I am sure most of us are not having a hard time with it.
Hybrid methods that combine the control of point buy with the diversity of rolling are often criticized as being convoluted, while point buy is often touted as being simple.
This is true if, as Wraithstrike wrote, "you play enough games," but that is also true of any system including hybrid systems.
Point buy is not simple. I think we who are experienced with the system and have the purchase costs memorized overlook this about it.
Well then we disagree on the fundamental experience.
I have experienced this with new players. They get hung up on feats and spells after they dicker around forever purchasing their ability scores.
The Point Buy method certainly does add to character creation time, and quite a bit more so than the Standard method. But, this is beside the point.
My point is that advocates often play down the complexity of point buy in their criticism of hybrid methods. The Point Buy method is convoluted, it is certainly not intuitive that a score of 18 costs 17 points while a score of 17 costs 13.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the method because of its complexity, I think its non-intuitive structure is quite elegant, but rather I am pointing out that we who have mastered it tend to overlook its true complexity.
I like rolling for stats because I'm indecisive and can never decide how high or low I want my stats to start. Usually, when I'm in a point buy game, I'll roll for my stats anyway and tweak the results to match the point buy I need. Either that or I'll find a stated NPC to mimic.
Temporary boost to scores dont count unless maintained for 24 hours. Do you a citation for rage qualifying for feats?A Barbarian who rolls acorrection, their ability to rage does boost their ability to take feats.128 Str can't take Power Attack!
I actually looked this up a while later, it was a dev talking how how you should be able to take feats that you can easily consistently qualify for.
I've been thinking about this, and I wouldn't mind rolling to assign an array. Roll a d20 straight down the stats to "rank" them for am array. Gives a bit more consistency but still has that random edge. If someone wanted to develop it further, they could use multiple arrays and do something to both assign stats and choose array.
Why roll to assign an array? Is it a personal fun factor or something?
It's just an idea. I've never done it nor even though about it before a few minutes before that post.
The idea is to capture that old "get stats and see what you can make from it" feel that was oft traditional, but be less swingy and more reliable.
If somebody wants the group to roll scores for reasons like "I'm indecisive" it can be a little disappointing to those who know exactly what they want to play but fail to roll the right stats for it. On the other hand, rolled stats usually end up being better than the recommended point buys, especially if "reroll 1's" or other stat boosting methods are in play.
@Lakesidefantasy - As I pointed out earlier, there are point buy charts and online point buy calculators. Barring exceptional circumstances there's no reason why point buy should have to be complicated or confusing. I suppose it could still prove to be a delay for very indecisive players, but even then it should be a delay which occurs infrequently, unlike the potential delays each time an indecisive player levels a PC or decides on actions in combat.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the thing about stats in Pathfinder: The math is balanced against the elite array(or 15 point buy)*; anything that deviates from that starts throwing the game into unbalance.
The OP likes a lot of high stats.
I used to like giving my players a lot of point buy or a lot of high stats, until I realized that it was making the game more work and less fun.
As some people have pointed out, MAD characters suffer a lot more from point buy than SAD characters. When using a die rolling method (particularly 4d6-L with either multiple arrays or 7 rolls dropping the lowest) you tend to allow more potential concepts, because you have a better shot at getting multiple mid-to high rolls than with a low point buy. One solution is to increase the point buy. This is popular because it lets everyone build more powerful characters, but doesn't really help the MAD classes, rather giving SAD characters more candy to sprinkle on their cake after they've frosted it. Low point buy can be just as bad, because SAD characters will sell their grandmother's wheelchair to get a little more octane in their Ferrari.
The solution, for me, as a GM, is to deal with a capped array or point buy. So, I could say "You have a 30 point buy but cannot have any stat above a 16 or below an 8 before racial mods." or give a 16/15/14/13/12/10 array or something similar... the point being that beginning with 20s and 4s in stats is a lot more crippling to game balance than a character with three sixteens.
*EDIT: No claims as to how well balanced it is against that mark intended. The further from that point, the more unbalanced, however.
Regarding survival, in a point buy or array game you're pretty much sure what you'll get with a new PC, so early level deaths might not discourage players determined to optimize for the long run.
That's why I likened attributes to salary, because their discrepancy continues to scale throughout the adventurer's career, and the dividends they pay also scale.
Would ability score caps (a la 5th Edition) make it more fair?
Everyone starts out with the same point buy. The SAD classes get to put all their +1/4 into their main stat until they don't, at which point they're cramming their remaining +1/4s into whatever secondary stats they feel like (doing the same with stat-boosting items). In the meantime, the MAD classes have to spread their starting bonuses around, and take longer to cap out the important stats, and might have an important stat being assisted by a stat-boosting item, but don't they end up mostly the same?
SAD start: 18 (important), 14, 12, 10, 10, 8
MAD start: 16 (important), 14 (important), 14 (important), 10, 10, 8
SAD mid: 20 (important), 16, 12, 12, 10, 8
MAD mid: 18 (important), 16 (important), 16 (important), 10, 10, 8
SAD end: 20 (important), 20, 16, 14, 10, 8
MAD end: 20 (important), 20 (important), 18 (important), 12, 10, 8
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
rolling and point buy are both flawed. rolling is completely random which makes the party unbalanced and thus unfair. point buys problem is that most of the time. people min max to get the most optimal character they can, which results in the same old characters. you hardly ever see a charismatic or intelligent barbarian. which is a shame.
I would love to play in a game in which everyone agrees not to play the most optimal of characters, but if one person does it everyone has to do it otherwise there character seems ridiculously op by comparison.
so yeah. both are flawed and I don't have a decent alternative.
Well then we disagree on the fundamental experience.
I have experienced this with new players. They get hung up on feats and spells after they dicker around forever purchasing their ability scores.
The Point Buy method certainly does add to character creation time, and quite a bit more so than the Standard method. But, this is beside the point.
My point is that advocates often play down the complexity of point buy in their criticism of hybrid methods. The Point Buy method is convoluted, it is certainly not intuitive that a score of 18 costs 17 points while a score of 17 costs 13.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the method because of its complexity, I think its non-intuitive structure is quite elegant, but rather I am pointing out that we who have mastered it tend to overlook its true complexity.
So its anecdotal evidence then, and I pointed out new players because I figured you would say our experience has made it less of an issue for us.
I actually looked this up a while later, it was a dev talking how how you should be able to take feats that you can easily consistently qualify for.Temporary boost to scores dont count unless maintained for 24 hours. Do you a citation for rage qualifying for feats?A Barbarian who rolls acorrection, their ability to rage does boost their ability to take feats.128 Str can't take Power Attack!
I think that was SKR saying how he wanted the game to work. As an example he would have liked the idea that if you can basically do something at will such as a druid transforming into an animal that would be enough to qualify for having proficiency with natural attacks. However that is not an actual rule.
rolling and point buy are both flawed. rolling is completely random which makes the party unbalanced and thus unfair. point buys problem is that most of the time. people min max to get the most optimal character they can, which results in the same old characters. you hardly ever see a charismatic or intelligent barbarian. which is a shame.
I would love to play in a game in which everyone agrees not to play the most optimal of characters, but if one person does it everyone has to do it otherwise there character seems ridiculously op by comparison.
so yeah. both are flawed and I don't have a decent alternative.
Both of them allow for min-maxing to get an optimal character. Rolling does nothing to stop that. I can just put my low score into intelligence or charisma after I roll. I don't know why people think rolling stops this.
I also noticed you went from optimal to "most optimal", and they are not the same. Optimal just means a good character. What I quoted means the best character possible. That allows for a large divide between them.
The best alternative would be to have a system based on class, player ability, etc etc, but that is way too complicated.
If a GM does not like buying down, but wants to avoid rolling he can always use stat arrays. If he does not want everyone having the same stats he can offer several stat arrays.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the thing about stats in Pathfinder: The math is balanced against the elite array(or 15 point buy)*; anything that deviates from that starts throwing the game into unbalance.
The OP likes a lot of high stats.
I used to like giving my players a lot of point buy or a lot of high stats, until I realized that it was making the game more work and less fun.
As some people have pointed out, MAD characters suffer a lot more from point buy than SAD characters. When using a die rolling method (particularly 4d6-L with either multiple arrays or 7 rolls dropping the lowest) you tend to allow more potential concepts, because you have a better shot at getting multiple mid-to high rolls than with a low point buy. One solution is to increase the point buy. This is popular because it lets everyone build more powerful characters, but doesn't really help the MAD classes, rather giving SAD characters more candy to sprinkle on their cake after they've frosted it. Low point buy can be just as bad, because SAD characters will sell their grandmother's wheelchair to get a little more octane in their Ferrari.
The solution, for me, as a GM, is to deal with a capped array or point buy. So, I could say "You have a 30 point buy but cannot have any stat above a 16 or below an 8 before racial mods." or give a 16/15/14/13/12/10 array or something similar... the point being that beginning with 20s and 4s in stats is a lot more crippling to game balance than a character with three sixteens.
*EDIT: No claims as to how well balanced it is against that mark intended. The further from that point, the more unbalanced, however.
I've actually had the opposite experience.
The lower PB I give, the more challenging it is for me. My players are (for all but 1 game) not nearly as good at optimizing characters as I am, so they end up either extremely specialized, or very weak.
I give them a 25 PB (in all games) because I like higher stats, and because it makes things easier for the less skilled players.
I can always adjust combat challenge, beef up enemies with fairly little effort, but balancing DOWN takes a lot of work IMO. Taking things away is harder than adding more on.
Both of them allow for min-maxing to get an optimal character. Rolling does nothing to stop that. I can just put my low score into intelligence or charisma after I roll. I don't know why people think rolling stops this.
Indeed you can put your lower score in areas you don't need as much, that is, however, not the same as buying down to boost another stat. The individual stats are independent when rolled and lower scores are uncompensated with points to devote to raise other scores.
I don't really see how giving a high enough point buy that your Monk can afford to be charismatic actually makes the game any easier. Sure, it means the Monk can participate in more stuff, but it's not like those encounters wouldn't be handled if the Monk didn't have a usable charisma score. You'd just have the Wizard with Clever Wordplay do it.
Both of them allow for min-maxing to get an optimal character. Rolling does nothing to stop that. I can just put my low score into intelligence or charisma after I roll. I don't know why people think rolling stops this.Indeed you can put your lower score in areas you don't need as much, that is, however, not the same as buying down to boost another stat. The individual stats are independent when rolled and lower scores are uncompensated with points to devote to raise other scores.
if you instead think of each set roll having a value based on it's position you definitely buy down an unneeded stat with the low roll. basically the roles are reversed. the slots have the value and your paying for the better slots or more needed slots by spending your bad rolls on the poor or unneeded slots.
I'm actually considering using the pick your own stats method someone mentioned.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*waves at Bandw2* Let me know how it turns out!
Both allow min-maxing. Point buy allows more. You have more control and thus more opportunity to optimize.
And yet I was able to play with 6 point-buy PCs today that were not min-maxed horrors. The attitude of the players still has more to do with how the PCs treat the game than how their stats were generated.