Lowering point buy is only going to reduce the PCs' hp by, like, 1 point per level unless they're foolish enough to take the entire hit to their con. For dex users, it'll also reduce their AC and init by a whopping 1. Even on 10 point buy, the PCs are still PCs. The primary PC advantages are numbers, cooperation, superior equipment, and reliable casting. It is not superior point buy (though it never hurts). They're not going to "turn into minions". They'll just feel worse about their characters since even SAD characters will have a hard time covering their bases.
No, I don't think that having 5 less point buy points will counteract 2 extra bodies taking full turns per round. If you have 6 PCs, you generally need more foes, not better foes, which means yes, even bigger, clunkier combats. Sorry.
Keep the point buy at one of the conventional values, and let your players know that since you will be adjusting parts of the game over the course of the campaign. I think it is important that the players are allowed to feel bigger than life, and a 10 point isn't going to help that out. Start out the campaign with some encounters that won't be fatal. Tests their capabilities and then begin to test their limits. I don't really care for games with so many players, but with some practice you will learn how to balance out the battles, etc. If one of the character builds is throwing things off, talk to the player about it.
|
I'm mainly following on advice of "If you have 20 point buy with six players on AP designed for four players and 15 points, don't complain on forum that its too easy for players" and I don't trust my balancing skills since I have never run long campaign before :p
Stuff like adding two goblins to encounter with 4 identical goblins isn't very hard(and something I'm planning to do anyway so that dividing exp for 6 players isn't hard), but then there are encounters build around single creature or other boss encounters that I'm not sure what to do about <_<
Just to note since someone asked, I'm planning to allow pretty much any first party resource.
And to note on player amount, I'm not sure yet that there will be six players, but I'd be preferring that because I'm planning to run this thing online and people tend to be busy so eventually someone will not be able to come. So I'd rather have two players missing than not running game at all for several weeks because of bad luck.
|
In general, it's better to simply increase the numbers of monsters. On low and mid levels, you can improve the challenge decently like this. Your "enemy" is action economy against single or too few number of monsters, not the players. The only problem might be if you are too inexperienced in handling such large number of monsters and player's in general.
Adam
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The real problem with extremely low point buys is that it's basically going to limit the players to either picking SAD classes or to being not very good at whatever it is. I mean, if someone really wants to play a monk because they have a concept they like that works with that class, you're basically saying "play something else or be terrible." It's not like the monk was likely to unbalance the table by being too powerful otherwise.
More and better opponents is a better solution than restricting the PCs at character generation. You can always feel this out initially, give them a variety of challenges in order to feel out what the right adjustments are, and if you end up making something too hard allow them to slink away with little more than a narrative setback until you've figured out what the right adjustment is. "Too easy at first" is fine, after all.
You might consider to scaling back the phat loot that the players acquire through successes. It's probably better to have them (comparatively) weaker at 6th level because they've been splitting the loot six ways instead of four or five than to have them be (objectively) weaker at first level.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
While low PB isn't as bad as many people think, I wouldn't force it on a group that didn't want the extra challenge. The last thing you want are players that resent their character right from moment 1. (10 PB is still somewhat heroic considering the NPC array is 3 PB, I feel the need to point out.)
Others are correct is that it's action economy you need to worry about, not individual power level. For bosses give them minions, unless that's inappropriate to the situation in which case you can give them simple templates but they will likely still get stomped.
So yeah, turn 4 goblins into 6 goblins, 2 ogres into 3, and so forth. When they get to the goblin leaders add 2-3 goblins in there too.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It really makes animal companions the best heroes in the party
Multiple enemies is the better way to scale an encounter up, but it's a double edged option. Adding more NPCs to balance having more PCs will make long combats even longer.
Adding advanced simple template to most things is quicker and dirtier and more likely to kill a party member.
The simplest solution would be to keep your players at one level lower than the suggested level. That's it. It's quick, easy, and effective.
Your players may hate having to wait so long for their second level, but that should work pretty well.
Ideas:
1) Advance the encountets. I usually multiply the mooks by about 1.5 or so, and I give important enemies the "advanced" template, which is super easy to use. This does make combats a little longer and more complex.
2) Make them split XP, aka keep them a level lower. Probably the simplest approach.
3) Maybe try a 15 point buy and don't give them any special wealth by level.
Just some ideas.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One issue is that low point buy disproportionately bones martial characters. Let me add my vote for lowering everyone by a level.
The biggest problem with low point buy is that it once again punishes the weakest (just like "few magic items" does). The single-ability-dependant full casters work just fine with a 10-point-buy, but the already suffering multi-ability-dependant martials are are further hamstrung.
Caster's might not start with a 20 (unless you allow pre-change scarred witch doctor), but wizards are still gods with 19 starting int (worse yet are characters focussing on summoning). The poor monk that needs 4 high stats one the other hand? Yeah, he can probably choose between doing nothing in combat and dying twice per level.
I'd say low point buy harms hybrids more than anyone. A fighter with just high strength or a rogue with high dex will do "ok". A do-it-all class like the inquisitor or magus will feel more limited.
I'd say low point buy harms hybrids more than anyone. A fighter with just high strength or a rogue with high dex will do "ok". A do it all class like the inquisitor or magus will feel more limited.
The issue is mostly that low point buy restricts "what kinds of characters you can effectively play" as a likely unintended consequence. I mean, personally the character type I'd like to see less of is the Wizard that starts with a 20 INT, not the Inquisitor or the Magus.
If you did decide to go the lower point buy route you could cap how high they can get a single stay to keep SAD classes like wizards from feeling like gods.
But it's starting to get messy now. I'd say either advancing encounters or lowering PC level would be a better approach.
Also I've been in games where instead of doing our own stats we were given two options. A lower point buy with a higher max stat, or a higher point buy with a lower max stat.
Something like:
16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8
18, 12, 12, 10, 8, 8
As a very rough idea. I'm not suggesting to use these exact numbers, just using them as an example to explain the concept.
|
|
don't give them any special wealth by level.
._. Didn't even enter my mind. And isn't the table in core book more of a "average gear value" amount rather than "You must calculate this exactly" thing?
And decreasing the level by one doesn't really allow me to include sidequests outside the AP books (planning to start from the first AP, so if someone picks the monster hunter trait and wrote it in they came to Sandpoint to hunt Sandpoint devil, would be lame for not allow them to do that on downtime since that does exist in beginning of the AP) so that isn't really option either.
I guess I could go with increasing amount of enemies to more significant encounters while leaving some of them alone. That would make exp gain slower at least. I'm not sure what to do with templates though, but I guess I could try that with encounters where I don't add more monsters?
The other side of casters in low point but is that encounters will last longer, meaning the caster will either burn through his spells faster in an adventuring day or spend rounds doing little of importance. This problem is negated by having 6 PCs though. It's still an issue in normal size parties of low point buy.
Also I've been in games where instead of doing our own stats we were given two options. A lower point buy with a higher max stat, or a higher point buy with a lower max stat.
Something like:
16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8
18, 12, 12, 10, 8, 8As a very rough idea. I'm not suggesting to use these exact numbers, just using them as an example to explain the concept.
I had a similar idea once but it was 15-point-buy as normal or 20-point-buy but no score can be bought higher than 16 or lower than 8.
Lower point buy is going to make martial characters suck eggs.
Think about it:
The Sorcerer pumps all 10 points into Charisma and rocks a 16 or 18 with racial mods.
The fighter needs to split his 10 points between Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution in order to do his job. So, with racial mods, he's maybe rocking a 16 in one of those and a 13 high elsewhere.
Instead, as others have suggested, increase the encounters. A party of 6 is APL+1, so increase the CRs of encounters by one or two with mooks.
Alternatively, change nothing.
The experience and wealth divide will set the players back from the suggested leveling for the AP, but not so much so that it cripples them.
In a few levels, the PCs will be right were they should be, adjusted for table size.
Individuals will be behind where the book says they should be (the players are level 14 rather than 15&1/2, for instance), but as a whole they will be on par.
We did this through Way of the Wicked, and we never felt over nor under powered, and every class had a chance to shine.
The fighter really doesn't need dexterity or constitution any more than the sorceror. A sorceror with low dex won't get to go first and will be easier to hit. The sorceror with low constitution also has a small hit die and is more likely to die from a single crit. Fighters are so good at wearing armor to offset those stats being lower.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like, better way to balance would be improving encounters, but I don't trust my sense when it comes to balancing, so for next best thing, how does 10 point buy work in that regard?
No, it is not.
Instead, I strongly urge you to instead include more enemies and/or hazards (traps and such) in the encounters. Use no enemies that are a higher CR than whatever creatures are included in the published encounters, but add +50% more XP worth of creatures to the CR (+25% XP/treasure budget per additional PC).
For example, if the AP has a CR 1 encounter (400 XP), include 200 XP worth of additional enemies and/or hazards. For example, instead of three orcs (405 XP) you include 4 orcs or 3 orcs + 1 dog (540 XP).
Don't increase the top-end of individual CRs because you may push creatures out of the bounds of the RNG with particularly large parties doing so. Instead, stay within the indicated bounds of the standard encounter and just add more equal or lower CR things.
For example, a CR 8 encounter is worth 4,800 XP. Increasing the budget by +50% gives us a total encounter value of 7,200 XP. Don't replace the encounter with a CR 9 creature, instead stick to CR 8 and below creatures to fill out the difference. If your CR encounter typical consists of an ogre mage, add a few allies or traps to the encounter worth a total of 2400 XP.
This also helps deal with the treasure issues since more enemies = more treasure values. Everyone gets to play. Adjusting the point buy up or down from 15 rarely has any real effect on the game's overall difficulty and will alter the ease in which certain classes are pushed to their limits.
Some great advice so far! Yay Paizo messageboards!
I would avoid the 10 point buy, just because players will piss and moan, and it won't really balance things much. Let them have the 15 point buy, but limit starting stats to 16 AFTER racial adjustment. This will really help create a stable party where most PCs will be able to participate in various situations.
Keep the party a level or half a level behind where they would normally be in the AP.
Keep the party a level or so behind the their suggested WBL.
Mooks, mooks, and more mooks! Equipped with lots of low value equipment (potions, alchemical items, good armor) . Remember, if it has to be sold, PCs will only be getting half value!
Things like the advanced simple template are great, or giving many monsters the toughness feat, and +1 on saves. Just be careful with the boss battles. The bosses in the APs can be real killers, so throw in mooks, don't make the bosses tougher (OK, maybe a small defensive bonus)!
Did I mention mooks? You can never have too many mooks!
EDIT: Oh yeah, one more important thing - Ask the players to avoid adding pets, summons, cohorts, etc. It might not be as much of in issue in PbP, but those things can really slow down the game, which should really be avoided.
Limiting stats to their after racial values feels bad to me. A race that's good at a thing should be good at a thing. You may as well limit stats to 14 before racial adjustments.
Limiting stats to their after racial values feels bad to me. A race that's good at a thing should be good at a thing. You may as well limit stats to 14 before racial adjustments.
Well, given that half the races have floating +2, I don't feel like it matters much anymore. I also like that PCs have the option to have two 16's if they want to without dropping anything below 10.
14 Before, or 16 after, doesn't really matter much, but I think there would be less whining from players if you avoid using the word 14 when talking about maximum stats!
|
|
I'll put in another vote for making them a level behind.
However - be careful not to make them too far behind until they hit 3-4 as the first couple levels can be pretty deadly when they're up against higher CR stuff, even with the edge on action economy. Nothing sucks worse than being near full HP and a lucky crit putting you all the way to dead. (not just negative hp - but dead as a coffin nail... take that Dickens!)
|
|
Nobody listened me when I said one level behind isn't really option for me, huh xD
Your explanation is only valid if you use EXP. Many groups don't - especially those who use APs. If my group knows that a particular AP is levels 5-7. So - we start it at level 5, and at points where the GM thinks we've gone through 1/3 or so of the adventure and it's a the end of a game night - we get a level. Done.
Actually keeping track of EXP when going through APs tends to be more hassle than its worth. (Though - if you are splitting the same EXP 6 ways instead of the usual 4-5, I suppose that eventually they'll fall behind a bit in EXP eventually.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nobody listened me when I said one level behind isn't really option for me, huh xD
Anyway, thanks for advice, I guess I just go with adding few more enemies now and then or get less lazy and start using templates sometimes
I strongly urge you to not use templates, especially to beef up encounters. Most templates are poorly balanced.
|
|
Geez, people disagreeing with different advice just makes me confused. And then there are people who are like "Higher point buy the better" xD Blargh, I just do whatever seems like best option once I see whatever people have created for campaign.
Heck, I'd rather just use stat rolling(mainly because I like old school feeling of that and I like rolling anything at character creation xD) if not for the fact that stat rolling prevents people from creating the characters before applying for the game <_< Unless I roll stats for them first I guess. At least I don't really see a way around that
Anyway, I do agree that just giving people levels when they reach story points is easier way to do it(and lets you remove filler encounters if they feel pointless), but I'd rather keep EXP for several different reasons.
Plus I'd rather not do "At level 1 for most of the start until you reach the point where they'd be level 3" since I feel like being stuck in level 1 that long would be frustrating. I'd be frustrated at least, level 1 in this game doesn't tend to have most of fun toys you get on higher levels.
Unless you're using milestone leveling (i.e. not tracking XP), you'll need about 50% more XP per encounter to have the party keep pace with the expected level progression, and about +50% more loot to hit the expected Wealth By Level.
So an encounter with 6 goblins becomes an encounter with 9, 2 trolls become 3, and so on and so forth.
As a general policy: Although slapping the Advanced template is a quick way to boost CR's by 1 and thus account for the extra XP needed, I'd strongly suggest adding more monsters, as the mileage the template gives will vary dramatically depending on what it is applied to. Additionally, having more PCs doesn't make them any more durable, and putting the Advanced template on a big combat beast is likely to kill PCs a lot easier than you may be intending.
Point buys are a bad way to balance a game. I have come to the opinion that a 25 point buy is actually better because it actualizes more builds, while not making any class significantly over powered (maybe cleric or druid, but it doesn't help wizard that much). The extra points usually go into secondary stats to make the characters more versatile.
Seconded.
20 and 25 point buy are often hailed as "overpowered", but mostly they only result in a minor increase PC power a little early on... but given the scaling of the point buy system, trying to min-max it really doesn't actually give that much. While I don't hunt through guides overly much, most I've seen generally don't have a big difference in primary stats between 15 and 25pt gen. After not too long the PCs will be so decked out in magic items and buffs that whether their base stats are 2 points higher or not is really not very relevant.
If you want to control PC power, you need to do it with the loot.
The players may light up like it's Christmas when they open the chest full of platinum or pick up their shiny +3 keen spellstoring flaming burst greatclub... but it will get dragged to the market and converted directly into PC combat effectiveness. As a GM, self-restraint is the most important skill you can learn.
|
|
Okay, just to ask, why should I increase loot just to hit Wealth by level average? <_< Is that something expected in normal situations?
Like I'm not adding loot to enemies if players ignore sidequests written in APs, why would I add loot just so everyone has equal amount of money? Heck, players might not even bother with looting things to sell things. In my experience, people get really bored with writing down all loot, so they only take interesting or useful stuff along with golds in pockets.
And I'm kinda trying to avoid the "If you have six players and 25 point buy, maybe that reason why AP designed for 4 players and 15 points is too easy" thing that designers keep getting annoyed about in threads complaining about AP difficulty :'D Like if I'm trying to keep things balanced, I kinda feel like going directly against that means I'm doing something wrong
If you want to up the difficulty in the laziest way, then just double everything's hit points, which is about the same thing as giving everything max hit points. A boss fight may still need some extra minions running around, because a single target can go down fast no matter how many hit points it has.
Wealth by level is a tool for calculating how much magical gear a character is expected to have at a specific level so a 10th level character with WBL is as capable as a 10th level character is expected to be. A character with half the Wealth by level is less capable than a 10th level character is expected to be.
Of course different point buys, difference in power level between classes and how the wealth is spent means it is a very rough guide.
With any AP and any character design rules the GM is going to have to change things around , react to weird stuff the players do and improvise . That's what makes GM'ing fun
Wealth by level is a tool for calculating how much magical gear a character is expected to have at a specific level so a 10th level character with WBL is as capable as a 10th level character is expected to be. A character with half the Wealth by level is less capable than a 10th level character is expected to be.
Just to amplify this, if you look at the Character Advancement table, you'll actually see a column for PC wealth and for "NPC weath." An NPC is assumed to have less money than a PC (possibly because the NPC has a lot of money tied up in a house, a farm, and a retirement account instead of being in an easily-transportable magic sword), but this also means that he lacks the magic toys such as ring of Stat Improvement and a sword of Lots of Plusses.
For this reason, a character with PC wealth has a CR one higher than a character with NPC wealth, who in turn has one higher than a character with nothing at all except maybe a pair of Hulk-style ripped trousers to keep the PG rating. (You can formalize and justify this by noting how much it costs to give the Advanced Simple template via magic items.)
If you're running an AP by-the-book, this will handle itself because the treasure will be split six ways instead of four, and so everyone will get a smaller share. They'll also get a smaller share of experience, and so everyone will be a half-level lower (or so) than they should. But this is also something you should bear in mine if you're doing milestone leveling -- if the AP reads "the characters should be sixth level before entering the Hall of Infinite Orcs," then yours should probably be about 5th level (and with wealth appropriate to 5th level characters) because there are so many of them.
I, personally, am a fan of milestone leveling, because I don't think accountancy is a particularly good spectator sport, or even necessarily a participatory one. But it imposes an additional burden on the GM to make sure that things stay balanced.
Is it really that hard though? ._. I mean, APs do list exp for all encounters, all you need to do is to divide total with player amount after each session.
Well, you need to track per-encounter XP, divide by the number of players involved in each encounter (which might vary), and keep a running total. If it's a free-form or sandbox module, you also need to make sure that they encounter enough things to keep them on track, but aren't so completist that they gather every little thing and kill every songbird in the forest and end up overXPed.
Or you could just say "the hell with it, they'll level up when they get to the village of Anthrax."
It's not that the first is hard, it's that the second is even easier.
In my experience game balance is more about the players than the characters. What I mean by that is that the effectiveness of the same character can different widely depending on the player controlling them. Someone who has never played a game before playing a wizard will often be less powerful then someone who is an experienced veteran gamer who knows the system completely playing a rogue. Even amount equally experienced players with the same level of expertise in the system some simply have a better tactical sense than others.
Another thing that can be important is the types of characters the party is playing. A party full of nothing but fighters and rogues is a lot different than a party of witches and wizards. Some encounters the first party will curb stomp will actually be a lot harder challenge to the second party. Many people on the forums will find this hard to believe, but it is true. The party of witches and wizards will have a lot more difficulty vs a golem than the more mundane party.
So when you are looking to balance the game is to first look at the players and figure out what kind of players they are. If your players are casual gamers with no mastery of the system and tactics you may not need to do anything to balance the extra party members. If on the other hand your party is a group of veterans who not only build optimized characters but build them as a team you may need to adjust your encounters if there are only three of them.
|
|
I'm not sure its that bad if they are underleveled for any reason ._. If they are facing a boss one level lower than what they are supposed to be, more awesome when they win xD At least thats my experience from sandbox campaign were our party kept wandering to high level locations all the time.
But yeah, I guess(hopefully for final time xD) that I'll check out whether people applying to campaign have experience in playing the system or not before making further decisions about what I do <_< Case by case and all that stuff. Dunno whether I still would dare to raise point buy amount, but I guess I'll consider keeping it same at least.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to up the difficulty in the laziest way, then just double everything's hit points, which is about the same thing as giving everything max hit points. A boss fight may still need some extra minions running around, because a single target can go down fast no matter how many hit points it has.
That can work okay for the first couple levels - but it shifts the game's balance to making Save/suck & Save/death even more dominant.
I'm not sure its that bad if they are underleveled for any reason ._.
Aside from the minor issue of a TPK by the boss, you mean?
|
|
They aren't probably going to TPK just because they have one level lower than recommended. Especially if there are six players.
Speaking from experience, if our party can survive a "deadly" encounter despite our tactics sucking and with 4 player party on scene, I don't see problem with six players. And if there are four players then "Yay, I don't even need to change anything" xD
|
Having the appropriate wealth means you have the appropriate stat boosting items at the correct levels. If you unbalance it eventually the saving throws of a PC might not be enough and death comes about due to lack of gear.
This is why I like Automatic Bonus Progression. It gives the player the big 6 items needed to survive a campaign.
It also frees up all the magic item slots. Now players can save up and buy flavor items. Instead of always rushing to buy the same boring ass big 6 items.
Lastly even with a group of 6 you do not need to increase wealth for every fight. With ABP they get the bonuses at the assumed time and extra treasure/gold is just gravy. Less effort on both player and DM.