I would choose neither, I would convince the GM to have 15 or 20 point buy. I've played campaigns like this before and did not enjoy them.
If you had to choose it would really depend on the class you picked. Single stat classes could use the point buy where multi-stat classes would need the array.
I would take the stat array, and avoid any MAD classes.
Let's take a look at what you're really proposing.
- Use the heroic NPC array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 before modifiers) that works out to a 15 point buy.
- Have a 10 point buy you can assign in any legal combination, including dumping if you desire.
The first is a set of modifiers of +2 +2 +1 +1 +0 -1. Sure, you've got some odd numbers in there that help qualify for some things like Combat Expertise, but really, the array might as well be 14, 14, 12, 12, 10, 8, which is a 10-point buy. Yes, yes, "at 4th you can" blah blah, but playing the game of "some day you can X" is identical to "right now you cannot X".
The second set is explicitly 10-point buy.
So that's the choice you're giving. 10 or 10.
Now, imagine I set out to build a wizard. I drop one of my +2 modifiers into Intelligence, and literally don't care where any other ability score goes. If I build an inquisitor, I'll need some Str, some Dex, some Con, some Int, some Wis and some... oh, right... Cha. I have great signature abilities, like adding my Wis to my Init along with Dex, but, well, I won't have either of them any good. I have this great monster-identifying schtick, but I won't have enough skill points (or Int score) to know more than a couple types and I'll fail most of the time. I have some abilities that boost my social skills, but mine will suck because I have to dump something. My martial ability is okay, I guess. So why didn't I just play a fighter?
See, it's my opinion that ability score starvation is zero hindrance to people who want to max/min, and hurts badly anyone who wants to build a flexible, multitalented character.
10 in my opinion isn't "gritty", it's just mean.
I'd like to suggest an alternative if you're trying to avoid munchkin/cheese/max-min...
25-point buy.
No more than one ability score at 16 before racial adjustments.
No ability score below 0 after racial adjustments.
That gets you arrays like 16, 14, 14, 14, 0, 0, 0 at the cheesiest, which suits fighter types well and broadens but doesn't overpower single-attribute classes. I see 16, 14, 14, 13, 12, 0 and 16, 14, 13, 13, 12, 12 as well. That inquisitor mentioned above... can actually use his/her abilities with that array, without them all sucking.
Anyway, food for thought.
*This is where I find out you're not the DM, and literally only have the choice you've presented, and I just sigh.*
I'd try to convince everyone to take the array and create identical brothers or sisters.
As in 4 identical siblings, a set of quadruplets.
Physical ability scores must be the same for everyone, everyone goes human, takes the +2 to their casting stat (along with the 14), and then does what they wish for the other two mental stats.
Str 8
Dex 15
Con 12
This leaves the 13 and 10 available for whichever mental stats they want.
Party of a magus, an inquisitor, a bard, and a warpriest.
The inquistor and bard focus on ranged combat, the magus and warpriest go for dervish dance melee.
GM my own game, with blackjack and a 25 point buy.
Also, it's 12, not 10.
I've run at least one campaign with the default array (15,14 as above) and it worked just fine, monks and all. It is after all, the assumption of the game. In fact, the default array is *better* for MAD, since there's no super-high stats to compete with.
Anguish, you might want to include an answer to the OP's question in your wall of text... Also, by your restricted rule, I'd still see 16/15/15/11/10/10 more than anything else. Or with a dual-talented human wizard, 11/17/15/18/10/10.
"Signature abilities" like Wis to initiative don't need to be more than a 10% adjustment to be noticeable. A 14 stat *is* exceptional.
|
Theoretically,I'd use the Heroic NPC array, because in what I consider to be a "normal" game (meaning not much optimization AND a GM not outrightly trying to kill the PCs) you can build any character you want with those stats.
10 on the other hand, would, in my opinion, be too punishing for players who want to play an MAD character and therefore direct them exactly into the kind of optimization thinking I'd rather avoid them to do.
In reality, I still prefer rolling dice or at least some kind of randomized point buy (I loved the article in old Dragon where the Three Dragon Ante Deck was used to create characters in kind of a Tarot seance; didn't only get you a partly randomized set of attributes but also an idea of how those values came to be).
That is quite a bit of bizarre spin to try to make fifteen be the same as ten.
"If you ignore all the differences between them then fifteen is the same as ten" basically.
Functionally it is the same. Except in niche cases (qualifying for specific feats), odd-numbered ability scores have no benefit over even-numbered ability scores. If you're not taking one of those very limited feats, there is no functional difference between a 13 and 12.
Again, yes, at 4th you can opt to increase an odd score to become an even score. Granted. But if the viewpoint is "odd scores are just as valuable as even scores", then adding one to an even score at 4th to make it odd is equally awesome, mooting the "but at 4th you can..."
Point is that using either system results in massive player restrictions on viable builds. And yes, sure, we could play an all-sixes array character and yes, for non-casters you could even call it viable. But it'd not be a game worth playing, IMHO. Somewhere there's a reasonable floor to lame ability scores, and I think 10-point (or 12), and the elite array is below that floor, personally.
Also, it's 12, not 10.
Completely correct.
Somewhere there's a reasonable floor to lame ability scores, and I think 10-point (or 12), and the elite array is below that floor, personally.
And I'd rather have a party where the wizard doesn't *start* three times smarter than the ranger.
It depends on the character, but normally I'd take the array.
15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 works fairly well with most characters. You may not be quite able to do everything you may want at 1st level, but with intelligent selection of race/placement of racial bonuses the character should be capable of most of what you want; adding a +1 at 4th and/or at 8th to meet requirements isn't a "total fail" either.
The 10-point buy would be reserved for extremely focused characters that also have built-in weaknesses/limitations. Such as an elf with 10 Str, 17 Dex (7 pts, +2 race), 10 Con (2 pts, -2 race), 17 Int (7 pts, +2 race), 8 Wis (-2 pts), 7 Cha (-4 pts) that's very arrogant and "book-smart," but slightly gullible (literal-minded), and will likely advance as a fighter 1/wizard 6/eldritch knight 2/arcane archer 3 (or wizard 3/fighter 1/wizard +3/eldritch knight 2/arcane archer 3).
Somewhere there's a reasonable floor to lame ability scores, and I think 10-point (or 12), and the elite array is below that floor, personally.And I'd rather have a party where the wizard doesn't *start* three times smarter than the ranger.
I'm curious what the thought process is with that statement (I'm running a gritty, low magic campaign right now, so no judgement from me).
If we use the heroic array, player A makes a ranger and player B makes a wizard. The ranger starts with 6 skill ranks per level, so his player puts 10 in his Intelligence (probably the 8, really). The wizard puts the 15 and his racial in intelligence for 17. So, even with the array, the wizard is 3 (or 4) times smarter than the ranger at level 1.
I'd offer pay everyone in the group $5 each if they'd let me roll my stats.
4d6, drop the lowest & I'll roll 'em straight down the line and gladly play whatever results.
Why? Because I LIKE the randomness. It doesn't really matter to me if the resulting stats are high/low/in-between - as long as the randomness and the chance for spectacular & awfull is there.
I dislike fiddling around with PB, & I dislike being guaranteed to start with the same #s as everyone else.
A general problem with restrictions is: If the restricted person isn't convinced of the point of the restriction in place, they will try to circumvent it. The more you put a cap on the highest score, the more will people use racial modifiers (and other means, on the long run). So it pushes players even more into the 'as a wizard, take a race with +2 on Int' corner. Meaning less diversity and therefore less fun. I'd miss my gnome wizard...
Personally, I am happy with 15 PB as written. It means tough choice - you can go for an 18, but you pay a steep price for it. The same with dumping scores - temptation will be there, but it usually has consequences.
|
Which one do you pick? Why that choice? And how do you feel about the two options as a comparison?
Having played the 10 point buy on my first character, a 3.5 monk, thanks to my rolls, I'll go with the stat array. I can arrange that to something worthwhile, even with the 8. While I could make choices with the 10 point buy, I wouldn't be willing to make real sacrifices with it and be very limited in character options.
I would thank the GM for the heads up.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would thank the GM for the heads up.
Then politely decline.
Take the point buy and play a full caster probably.