Different point buys for MAD vs SAD


Advice

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Wanted to get opinions on having characters to be built with 15-point buy for SAD characters and 20-point buy for MAD characters? Will this create too much of a disparity between the builds? Will players lean more towards building MAD characters? Has anyone found a good balance with the point buy between SAD and MAD? Thanks for any input you can provide.


I know what MAD stands for but what does SAD stand for?


How do you know if a class is MAD or SAD? Consider a cleric built for save-or-suck effects vs a battle cleric. Or one that transitions from one to the other over the campaign.

Generally sad vs mad is balanced by point buy costs scaling up. You can make 17s cost more and give more total points if you want to help mad builds.


Single Attribute Dependence.

It should be fine, though you might run into issues of people taking a level of, say, Ranger (MAD) and then focusing on Wizard (SAD) with a free 5 points. It's not a good build, of course, but the principle stands.

Alternatively, base it on class tiers. Tier 1 classes (eg Wizard) get 15; class 4 (fighter, rogue) get 20. And so on. I can foresee arguments here, of course.

Alternatively alternatively (as the difference between classes is lower at low levels) you might change the rate at which they gain attribute points, dependent on class, rather than 1 every 4 levels. You might give out attribute build points rather than attribute points, which helps MAD classes more than SAD.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Rather than giving SAD's a handicap, I would implement a limit of 16 before racial modifiers as the highest stat(s) you can achieve at character creation. This would force casters into spreading their points more evenly.

Edit: A limit of 18 as the maximum ability score (before items\spells) could also be used as a way to nerf SAD classes. Since 18 in a stat means you represent the pinnacle of your race, I often feel as if there are too many characters with exaggerated stats. As if they were all the product of controlled evolution.

Yeah, 18 as a cap even with racial modifiers and the attribute points. That would definitely prevent SADs from investing too much into their casting stat.


I second the "put a cap at 16 before modifiers" suggestion. The biggest issue I have with SAD vs. MAD in PB is when SAD casters start with 20 in their casting stat.

One thing you might want to try is to provide arrays that you've generated, which need not be the same point value, and let players pick which array they want. The Wizard isn't going to jump at the 15/14/14/13/12/8 but the Monk probably would, the Wizard will gladly take the 16/13/12/12/10/8 instead.


I recommend separate buy styles, that your players can choose among. At the extreme, 15 point buy using the normal point buy rules. At the other extreme, 25 point buy, but no score can be bought above 15. 20 point buy would have a max of 17.


ckdragons wrote:

Wanted to get opinions on having characters to be built with 15-point buy for SAD characters and 20-point buy for MAD characters? Will this create too much of a disparity between the builds? Will players lean more towards building MAD characters? Has anyone found a good balance with the point buy between SAD and MAD? Thanks for any input you can provide.

Bad idea. How do you stop someone from being a rogue at level 1 and a sorcerer the rest of the way?


ckdragons wrote:

Wanted to get opinions on having characters to be built with 15-point buy for SAD characters and 20-point buy for MAD characters? Will this create too much of a disparity between the builds? Will players lean more towards building MAD characters? Has anyone found a good balance with the point buy between SAD and MAD? Thanks for any input you can provide.

That won't matter. The skill of the player will be the factor here. Basically you would have to handicap the player in a few ways, but most people would feel like that was unfair.

Depending on the classes and skill level of the player along with the style of GMing someone could take a 10 point buy and outplay a 25 point buy.


wraithstrike wrote:
ckdragons wrote:

Wanted to get opinions on having characters to be built with 15-point buy for SAD characters and 20-point buy for MAD characters? Will this create too much of a disparity between the builds? Will players lean more towards building MAD characters? Has anyone found a good balance with the point buy between SAD and MAD? Thanks for any input you can provide.

That won't matter. The skill of the player will be the factor here. Basically you would have to handicap the player in a few ways, but most people would feel like that was unfair.

Depending on the classes and skill level of the player along with the style of GMing someone could take a 0 point buy and outplay a 25 point buy.

Fixed that for you

Proof:
Ratfolk Wizard
Str:7-2=5(-4)
Dex:10+2=12 (0)
Con:12 (2)
Int:16+2=18(10)
Wis:7(-4)
Cha:7(-4)

Yup, wizards are scary like that.

Liberty's Edge

I prefer using the same point-buy and simply capping max starting scores. Not allowing point-buy to buy stats over 16 (meaning you max at 18 with racial bonus), while also giving 20 or 25 point-buy does this idea pretty well without requiring different point-buys.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I will second that you should keep yours players in mind.

As long as they agree to it , then i think it should work , but personally since i hate the whole disparity arguments and probably would just feel the GM is f##+ing me over unless i got something else worth said 5 points , i would just thank the invite and leave your table.


The majority of MAD classes have some sort of class ability that balances out its weaknesses due to requiring multiple attributes. A wizard is deadly with a maxed out attribute, but a magus can be a far more dangerous combatant both from a defensive and offensive perspective.

MAD classes are fine the way they are. One option is to ban full casters, prioritizing war-priests and magi for arcane and divine spellcasting with the rest of the PCs operating with different sticks.

The idea of capping point buy at 15 or 16 is a good idea. Allow people to take the Middle Aged age template, but not older if they want to get up to 18 in a mental statistic.

Most of the time you'll end up with an Alchemist, Magus, Unchained Rogue and Warpriest. The Alchemist is likely to be the "tanking" character who soaks damage, the magus, unchained rogue and war priest are the major damage dealers / spell casters. Depending on how the magus and war priest are built, they could act as secondary or tertiary front-liners as well.

You don't need to adjust point buy to compensate for MAD classes, the reality is that MAD classes have to choose what they want to specialize into. SAD classes tend to be 1-trick ponies that have a single shtick they can do, but MAD classes can be more versatile in what they could do: you could have a hunter, two different magi (Eldritch Archer, Eldritch Scion) and a war priest (Forgepriest with Healing Blessing most likely to let the other characters focus on combat feats).

My point is that Mad Classes have to choose if they want to be great fighters with O.K. spell casting or great spell casters with supplementary spell casting. With a MAD class, the class is not intended to be fantastic at everything the class can do because they have a larger berth of options and play styles available to them.

If you're playing a wizard and an enemy runs up to you, your options are somewhat limited. Sure you could do something, but unless you disable it in some major way if not kill it, you're either dead, grappled into submission or in some way taken out of the fight unless you get some help.
If you're playing a Magus and the same scenario happens as above, your build decides what happens in the scenario. Maybe you hack it to pieces, blow it up, disable it in some way or in some other way deal with it. It probably wont kill you outright, if it grapples you, you'll probably be able to fight it in some way. You aren't out of the fight because your class is designed to fight enemies.

If you give MAD classes higher point buy because you want them to be able to do everything, you'll end up making them stronger than SAD classes with the same point buy. Sure a Wizard is extremely powerful, but if he's getting jumped by a Magus who cast Anti-magic field on himself or any plethora of anti-magic spells on himself, then the fight becomes one sided almost instantly.

You may or may not see my point, but the classes are designed around average statistics.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:

\

I can't believe you just said that Wizards are limited or 1 trick ponies.


Hey now, "control reality" is only 1 trick.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I second the "put a cap at 16 before modifiers" suggestion. The biggest issue I have with SAD vs. MAD in PB is when SAD casters start with 20 in their casting stat.

One thing you might want to try is to provide arrays that you've generated, which need not be the same point value, and let players pick which array they want. The Wizard isn't going to jump at the 15/14/14/13/12/8 but the Monk probably would, the Wizard will gladly take the 16/13/12/12/10/8 instead.

Is there any reason not to do it as 18 after racial modifiers? This has the same effect of preventing races with good attribute modifiers from getting up to 20 but also makes unconventional choices a bit more possible (if you REALLY wanted to play a Halfling Barbarian you only have a -1 to your primary stat next to the comparable Half-Orc, and a Dwarf Wizard maxed out for intelligence is going to be just as smart as an Elf).


I think I've said it before in a similar thread about the same idea, but I'd say just use a higher point buy across the board. MAD classes will really benefit, and SAD classes don't gain much that's meaningful/were going to be good anyway.

A rising tide lifts all boats, basically.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Letric wrote:
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
I can't believe you just said that Wizards are limited or 1 trick ponies.

At level 17 - 20, they're broken. Thing is, an extremely small bunch of groups actually play at that level. Hell, at level 17 - 20 I'd say that if you're not playing a full caster then you're hurting your group by being there when you could just kill your character to bring one in. At 17 - 20 there is nothing deadlier than 4 wizards who all took True Name constantly. A single spellsage with Blood Money you're effectively immortal (along with any of his allies) since he could just cast contingency and reincarnate to come back from death even caused by old age.

The vast majority of games I've been in have stuck to level 1 - 4, and in that level range wizards are terrible: they're either 1-trick ponies that are taking advantage of stacking traits and feats to make a single spell game breakingly powerful, or they're save or suck—there is almost no in-between that is anywhere near good.

Some of these games make it to 5 - 9, which is where the 2/3 casters start to pull ahead. Full casters are still somewhat behind them since while they're getting more powerful they're still made of paper. Groups that don't end by 4, tend to end by 9. Still, the sweeping majority of games end sub 10 unless they start at higher levels.

Anything from level 10 - 13 is where the full casters start taking over. The full martial classes are essentially meat shields by now. The 2/3 casters are starting to be left behind and the 1/3 casters are cute with their meager attempts at magic. Very few groups make it past lvl 13 unless they started there.

From 14 on, its all full caster. At this point, expect to run into enemies that are just magic immune to make the less caster based characters relevant.

My point is, regardless of how elitist you want to be or however badly your level 20 blinders are, there is a part of the game—a large part at that—where wizards ~are~ limited and 1 trick ponies.

If the OP wants to fix his problem with SAD classes, then play in the level ranges where they are not (im)mortal gods of the machine.

If you don't believe me, go and make a completely viable level 1 wizard that is badass and can reliably stand on his own with the other classes. You'll only prove me correct if this build relies on Save or Suck spells or if it stacks the deck with traits or feats to increase a spell's effective spell level. Go on, I'll wait.


Rather than altering the point-buy points given for SAD or MAD classes, its a bit simpler/fairer to simply alter the point buy system itself. I found that using a quadratic rather than linear increase did a decent enough job of favoring MAD classes. Basically instead of -2 -1 -1 (10) 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4... its -2(or remove the -2) -1 -1 (10) 1 1 2 2 4 4 8 8 and use something like a 30 point buy for a midrange power level (20 pt buy equivalent). Dumping all 30 into one stat gives you an equivalent of about a 17 point normal buy. Or you go 16 14 14 12 12 10 which is a 24 point normal buy.

Liberty's Edge

Arachnofiend wrote:
Is there any reason not to do it as 18 after racial modifiers? This has the same effect of preventing races with good attribute modifiers from getting up to 20 but also makes unconventional choices a bit more possible (if you REALLY wanted to play a Halfling Barbarian you only have a -1 to your primary stat next to the comparable Half-Orc, and a Dwarf Wizard maxed out for intelligence is going to be just as smart as an Elf).

For me, I was explicitly trying to avoid too much stat dumping as much as restrain casters, and I let people take alternate racial penalties (Wis rather than Str for Gnomes and the like)...but if you're just trying to restrain casters, yeah, that works fine.


A wizard/sorcerer/arcansist that is played well is hard to get to AND kill. A GM could contrive something, but between just staying away, flying, mirror image, and so on it is not easy. <-----I see these in real games so this is not theorycrafting. It is not like most NPC's have a way to get past the rest of the party and conveniently place themselves right in front of the caster.

I have also never seen a caster played as a one trick pony. I often see them played as problem solvers. As they go up in level they solve more problems.

edit: Add casting focused druid, clerics, and any other 9th level spell getting class to the list of classes that can do several things well with spells and class abilities, that dont involve "I hit things".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My advice to the OP is to only fix what is a problem at your table. If you dont have a problem then don't worry about it. If you do have a problem list the problem in detail. It could be a player problem more than a class problem.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I second the "put a cap at 16 before modifiers" suggestion. The biggest issue I have with SAD vs. MAD in PB is when SAD casters start with 20 in their casting stat.

.

I never have had much of a problem. The 20 stat min-maxers are more likely to croak in the first couple of levels.


Honestly, I think the issue is less to differentiate MAD and SAD (since, let's face it Unchained Rogues and Swashbucklers are fairly SAD, and they're not really going to pose a problem for the table) and more just the issue with Wizards/Sorcerers/Arcanists(/Witches/Shamans/Psychics?)

So probably a better idea is just to not allow the 9th level casters (maybe just the 9th level non-divine casters)? Everybody else is going to want to fight with a weapon/unarmed strike/kinetic blast at least some of the time, which is going to make a lot more attributes relevant.

Honestly, some of the best parties I've been in were made up entirely of 6th and 4th level casters.


...Swashbucklers are SAD? They need dexterity, wisdom, constitution, and charisma (at least if you build them the way they are intended). It's pretty much impossible to be SAD if you have a poor will save.

Shamans can be SAD, but the absolute best Shaman build (Lore Spirit) is also the most MAD chassis in the game since it has need of every mental stat.

Shadow Lodge

So it's on par with the Cleric, Paladin, Monk, Fighter, etc. . . with wanting 4+ stats. :P

Shadow Lodge

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I second the "put a cap at 16 before modifiers" suggestion. The biggest issue I have with SAD vs. MAD in PB is when SAD casters start with 20 in their casting stat.

One thing you might want to try is to provide arrays that you've generated, which need not be the same point value, and let players pick which array they want. The Wizard isn't going to jump at the 15/14/14/13/12/8 but the Monk probably would, the Wizard will gladly take the 16/13/12/12/10/8 instead.

Personally, I hate using Arrays, and for some classes it really even with a few options, hurts some much more than others, (just like point buy).

I for one, also hate the idea of having a stat below 10. Heck, most of the time, below 12 is pushing it, as I would rather have a little bit more of a rounded character than a focused one. Many of the more MAD classes are basically going to be forced to throw that 8 into Int, just because that tends to be the least important of all of the stats they wan-need to function. You may be able to use a stat bump to get that up to a 10, so at least you don't have a penalty to skills too badly, but that's also gong to force you to be a bit mediocre at all of the other things that your class is supposed to excel at (either Spellcasting of Channeling is going to be pretty weak, the front line warrior isn't going to be too tough, etc. . .)

It restricts SAD classes a little bit, mostly by forcing them to play the way someone else sees at the right way. But to do so it hurts the more MAD classes, and really only favors the classes right in the middle (Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Ranger, Rogue).


Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
Letric wrote:
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
I can't believe you just said that Wizards are limited or 1 trick ponies.

At level 17 - 20, they're broken. Thing is, an extremely small bunch of groups actually play at that level. Hell, at level 17 - 20 I'd say that if you're not playing a full caster then you're hurting your group by being there when you could just kill your character to bring one in. At 17 - 20 there is nothing deadlier than 4 wizards who all took True Name constantly. A single spellsage with Blood Money you're effectively immortal (along with any of his allies) since he could just cast contingency and reincarnate to come back from death even caused by old age...

My point is, regardless of how elitist you want to be or however badly your level 20 blinders are, there is a part of the game—a large part at that—where wizards ~are~ limited and 1 trick ponies....

It is against the rules to use facts and logic on the internet.


It's true that they're one trick, but that trick is pretty good: Overcoming all challenges with magic.


DM Beckett wrote:
So it's on par with the Cleric, Paladin, Monk, Fighter, etc. . . with wanting 4+ stats. :P

Paladins only need two stats. The Shaman is mainly interesting because it's the only true caster (in the sense that using a weapon isn't worth your time) that's that MAD. Only God Caster in the game that gets meaningfully better the higher the point buy goes.


Boomerang Nebula wrote:
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
Letric wrote:
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
I can't believe you just said that Wizards are limited or 1 trick ponies.

At level 17 - 20, they're broken. Thing is, an extremely small bunch of groups actually play at that level. Hell, at level 17 - 20 I'd say that if you're not playing a full caster then you're hurting your group by being there when you could just kill your character to bring one in. At 17 - 20 there is nothing deadlier than 4 wizards who all took True Name constantly. A single spellsage with Blood Money you're effectively immortal (along with any of his allies) since he could just cast contingency and reincarnate to come back from death even caused by old age...

My point is, regardless of how elitist you want to be or however badly your level 20 blinders are, there is a part of the game—a large part at that—where wizards ~are~ limited and 1 trick ponies....

It is against the rules to use facts and logic on the internet.

Yeah the facts are that what is broken is subjective, and they can take over the game before level 17.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wizards can cast Create Pit at level 3.


The whole martial/caster disparity issue is subjective , which is the reason you see some wanting fix X and others saying fix Y is better.

In the end , each GM is up to fix whatever they think needs fixing at their table , all they have to keep in mind is that they need players that agree about said subjective issue and whatever fixes the GM came up for it.

Sovereign Court

Arachnofiend wrote:
DM Beckett wrote:
So it's on par with the Cleric, Paladin, Monk, Fighter, etc. . . with wanting 4+ stats. :P
Paladins only need two stats. The Shaman is mainly interesting because it's the only true caster (in the sense that using a weapon isn't worth your time) that's that MAD. Only God Caster in the game that gets meaningfully better the higher the point buy goes.

That's not my experience with paladins.

STR: you'll need this, unless you manage a dex to damage build, which probably requires some multiclassing.

DEX: you'll want this because AC and Reflex. Not top priority but still something you want.

CON: you need this, particularly for melee paladins. People will try to hit you back and you hit hard enough to draw some aggro. Sure, you're also good at healing while continuing to fight, but you need to worry about things that kill you in a single full attack. I play a Con 12 paladin and that was a big mistake.

INT: You get painfully few skill points and without skills, you're very limited in how much you can contribute out of combat. Many of the cool flavour things built into your class still require you to have some skill. So you probably don't want to dump Int.

WIS: This is the one you can most afford to neglect, although you're basically giving up on Perception/Surprise rounds then.

CHA: 'nuff said.

All in all it's not terrible, it's still a powerful and fun class. But there's some MADness involved.

Shadow Lodge

Almost looks like 4 stats. . . :P

Although they could probably get away with just Str, Con, and Cha moreso than the average Fighter, Cleric, or Monk, it's still going to hurt. Less on Refl and more on Init and AC.

Liberty's Edge

Needing a 12 (which is what Paladins need in Dex) or a 10 (what Paladins should have as a minimum in Int) is not meaningfully needing a stat. We're talking a minimum of 14 before you're talked about as 'needing' or 'investing' in a stat.

Now even by that metric, Paladins debatably need Con as well as Str and Cha...but that's 3 stats, not 4.

An archer Paladin is the same, only swap Dex and Str.

Shadow Lodge

Going from a 10 (or even a 8 if your race has a penalty) to a 12 does get a lot more meaningful if the class needs more other stats to work effectively.

So while not the most MAD, it's still up there.


Arachnofiend wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

I second the "put a cap at 16 before modifiers" suggestion. The biggest issue I have with SAD vs. MAD in PB is when SAD casters start with 20 in their casting stat.

One thing you might want to try is to provide arrays that you've generated, which need not be the same point value, and let players pick which array they want. The Wizard isn't going to jump at the 15/14/14/13/12/8 but the Monk probably would, the Wizard will gladly take the 16/13/12/12/10/8 instead.

Is there any reason not to do it as 18 after racial modifiers? This has the same effect of preventing races with good attribute modifiers from getting up to 20 but also makes unconventional choices a bit more possible (if you REALLY wanted to play a Halfling Barbarian you only have a -1 to your primary stat next to the comparable Half-Orc, and a Dwarf Wizard maxed out for intelligence is going to be just as smart as an Elf).

Not really. As you said, it has the same effect. I just didn't account for characters who would invest heavily into a stat in which they have a racial penalty. I mean, Halfling Barbarians should be scarce for a reason.

A more extreme rule would be that 18 is the absolute maximum you can raise any ability score without help from spells/magic items.

This would prevent everyone from investing their Ability Score Increase(s) into a single stat, and allow the Halfling Barbarians to catch up with the other Barbarians at level 8.


So what decides if a Class falls under SAD or MAD for your pointbuy-purposes?

Or even if a build in a class is SAD or MAD?

So a clasic caster-cleric is clearly SAD.

But what about a Battlecleric? Yes/No?
What if tried to balance casting and meleeing?
What about if he goes min-WIS to still cast and goes full max.STR?

You will get into a world of argue.

Simply cap buying stats at 16 pre-race and you have what you tried to do, imho. because if you lower the pointbuy-amount SAD-classes will simply loweer a tertiary or secondary stat, but not their casting stat.


I think the current system is fine. A wizard who buys an 18 pays a high price for it, when it comes to armor class, saves or using touch attacks. Yes, he can compensate with magic later, but I guess he'd still prefer built-in bonuses. Personally, I'd rather go for a 15, especially with 15 point buy.

And being dependant on multiple attributes also means you can profit from all of them. If for example a monk can get AC from both Dex and WIS, he is better off with splitting attribute points between them, resulting in a better AC boost than a character who could only use Dex.

Shadow Lodge

Actually, a Monk is generally better off maxing Wis and boosting Dex when they can. Wis to AC also applies to Touch and Flat-Footed, (if they are aware of a threat).

Both do have other benefits, such as Dex applying also to Int, Refl, etc. . ., and Wis applying to Perception, Sense Motive, and Will, but all in all, those things are pretty evened out.

So, they can get AC from both stats, but, in my opinion, they are better served focusing on Wis and keeping Str, Dex, and Con moderately good as well. Again, my opinion only, for a general Monk, both Str and Con are slightly better than Dex.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Point Buy is the devil, the fact that you had to write this thread at all proves that.

If you are worried about point buy not being balanced, then don't use it. There are plenty of other ways to generate stats.

Personally, I am not scared of 18's. Enemies are designed to die anyway, let your players have fun and enjoy their characters.


We started with 15 point buy, I had 18 INT, then we died went to 20, I had 20 INT.
That was it, not really much difference for my Wizard. Yes +1DC, but all the other stats didn't improved at all maintaining a 12 WIS 10 CHA of course.

Higher point buy favors melee classes IMO, which they're always screwed by action economy usually.


DM Beckett wrote:
So, they can get AC from both stats, but, in my opinion, they are better served focusing on Wis and keeping Str, Dex, and Con moderately good as well. Again, my opinion only, for a general Monk, both Str and Con are slightly better than Dex.

That's a valid point.

I just wanted to point out diminishing returns for increasing an ability. Wis 18 & Dex 10 costs more than Wis 16 & Dex 14 (keeping all other stats the same), but is rather weaker for a monk.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Since an exact definition of SAD vs. MAD classes would be rather subjective (and many players would be looking for ways to make SAD builds of purportedly MAD classes), maybe you could simply link the point buy value to the value of the highest stat you are buying. For example -- suppose you gave 30 points for a maximum of 14 (which is effectively 14 in all stats), 25 points for a maximum of 16, and 20 points for a maximum of 18? You would be effectively double charging for higher stats, but now you would have an in-game reason for really high stats to be relatively rare anyway. If you are willing to take a lower point buy for it, you obviously really want that stat of 17 or 18.


Agreed with the previous posters: (1) some classes are definitely more MAD/SAD than others, (2) only fix it if it affects your table, and (3) limiting point-buys to 16 pre-racial is a simple and effective solution.

The following is a rant that goes to explain SADness, and some more complex solutions to the SADness problem. It may devolve into martial-caster discussion. Acknowledging the risks, I'll say it anyway...

I think that SADness is an inherent problem in the d20 system, D&D / Pathfinder being no different. In a game of magic, 3 physical stats and 3 mental stats just isn't a balanced mix in the current state of the game. Martials need good scores in at least 3 different abilities, so why should other classes be any different? Say, for example, that spellcasters used their Intelligence to determine the highest level of spell they can cast, Wisdom to determine their bonus spells per day, and Charisma to determine the spell DCs. This would make the selection of ability scores meaningful again for casters, as opposed to "make your casting score as high as possible, then put some points in Constitution and dump one or two ability scores."

Now that I think about it, what even causes the mental stats to correlate with magical abilities? For example, clerics get their powers from faith. So, what, people with poor judgment (ie. low Wisdom) are less faithful? Another example: sorcerers get their powers from their bloodline, but for whatever reason every sorcerer in the world is super charismatic: apparently bloodline abilities only manifest in hot people. Wouldn't it make more sense to distance the ability scores from magical prowess completely, and use something else to measure the casting potential? Like feats. I mean martials use feats to determine almost everything whereas casters could manage just ok with 0 feats.


The times we dont roll for stats (its about 50/50) we use a stat set of 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11 placed as desired then add racial modifiers. It works out perfectly and you dont end up with super min/maxed characters that have two 18's and three 7's.


SAD isn't really a martial vs caster issue. The uRogue can do a lot with maxed Dex and tanked everything else. A wizard needs Con more than a fighter, because they have so few hit points and a poor fort save. A caster needs good dex as much as any non-dex based class, because they are so dependent on getting their spells off before their opponents get to act.


Guru-Meditation wrote:

So what decides if a Class falls under SAD or MAD for your pointbuy-purposes?

Or even if a build in a class is SAD or MAD?

So a clasic caster-cleric is clearly SAD.

But what about a Battlecleric? Yes/No?
What if tried to balance casting and meleeing?
What about if he goes min-WIS to still cast and goes full max.STR?

You will get into a world of argue.

Simply cap buying stats at 16 pre-race and you have what you tried to do, imho. because if you lower the pointbuy-amount SAD-classes will simply loweer a tertiary or secondary stat, but not their casting stat.

All full casters are considered SAD for the purposes of this rule, even if they obviously aren't.

Not for any particular reason, full casters just need somebody to be a jerk to them and I would be happy to volunteer.


As a player, I'd much rather have a lower point buy if I want to play a full caster class than be told I can't play a full caster class at all.

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Different point buys for MAD vs SAD All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.