PossibleCabbage, you just pointed out the issue right there. "this stuff is easy for the GM to adjust for if it's too much or too little".
Instead of putting the onus on the player, you have put it on the GM. Sure, it is 'easy' but it is also CONSTANT. Every single encounter has to be adjusted for. Over the course of a campaign that is a lot of work to account for a 5-10% increase that a PC really didn't need to begin with.
Frankly, you are putting extra work on the GM by wanting your high point buy. Isn't it just easier to go with the standard point buy (15) and plan accordingly?
Every single encounter has to be adjusted for.
Why?
Do you feel compelled to "adjust" for encounters they talk their way past, or sneak by, or teleport around?
Just punch up the important ones. The odd one-sided shellacking isn't going to break anything.
I understand folks have their preferences, but sometimes it can be interesting to work inside a box. Though some boxes are too small. I don't think a 15 PB would be for me, but I cant say until I am at the table. This could just be the first in many playstyle differences. Remember to be cool, and its ok not to like a playstyle, but don't be a jerk about it.
I preferred 15 point buys because I don't like starting 18s and I detest 20s. I also don't like 7s (but I do like 8s, so I guess I'm weird).
Even though I still saw a fair share of 18s with a 15 point buy, I preferred it to a 20 point where I was pretty much guaranteed to see no less than two characters with a 20.
Eventually, I decided to change to a 20 point buy, limiting stats between 8 and 15 before modifiers (later amended to no higher than 15 in the case of a penalty) and it's worked out well. I still allow players to use a 15 point buy if they absolutely need a starting 18.
If I ever were to run a lower point buy again, I'd probably just use the elite array to put all characters on equal footing.
I guess(?) I fall in this category. I give my players a choice between:
(A) 15 PB, with no bonus points for scores below 10,
or
(B) 25 PB, with no bonus points for scores below 10, and no racial stat adjustments.
These turn out to be roughly the same, point-buy-wise, because people generally choose classes whose stat adjustments boost their highest scores. (I actually prefer it when they choose the second option, because this often leads to unusual race-class combinations, like Dwarven Sorcerers.)
Anyway, to answer the question in the thread's title: I like these point-buys for several reasons: (1) because I'm less likely to have to adjust an AP's difficulty-level, (2) because it puts a hard cap on how high stats can get (19 via the first route, 18 via the second), so things don't get too ridiculous, and (3) it lessens the gap at low levels in various arenas between specialists and non-specialists, keeping those parts of the game more interesting for a wider pool of players. (E.g., if the 1st level Fighter's attack line is [+3 attack, 2d6+7 damage] instead of [+5 attack, 2d6+10 damage], they're a little less likely to end up being *so* much better in combat than (say) the 1st level Bard that the Bard feels they might as well not be fighting at all.)
That said, this is all small stuff. I don't think things would be that different if I ran with a 20/30 PB or a 25/35 PB. But, for the reasons given above, I have a mild preference for the 15/25 PB option.
|
15PB is interesting. Our group tends to use it a lot, and while I find it initially frustrating for genning, once I get past that funk it's usually fine. Only a problem if I want a particularly mad build.
Part of the issue is a lot of players are going to feel like they must dex-cap their armour, or have 18 in a primary stat, or have a positive Wis AND Con AND Dex mod (Protection from Evil is a pretty easy cure to a lot of mind control anyway and it's fairly widely available). Personally, I've learned to welcome a little vulnerability and reliance on others.
One 15PB party I've been in was a Cleric, Warpriest and Awakened Fox, for a while. We were missing a ton of skills and it made a lot of normally mundane scenarios pretty interesting. The party face was a 7-charisma bungler with one point in diplomacy for a long while and even though the group has expanded that hasn't really changed much.
I will say power level doesn't change *that* much with point buy after the first couple levels. Especially if the party has access to stuff like haste, heroism or bardic performance. Buffs will rack up real fast and heavy and can turn anyone into a combat monster.
Now, I don't think 15PB is the only way or a better way, but I do think it has its own appeal and I've thoroughly enjoyed the campaigns I've been in that use it. On the topic of which point buys encourage fairness while keeping power under control, a split 25-point buy where 15 points must be allocated to physical stats, and 10 to mental stats is a neat balance, if restrictive for some.
I've posted about this before, but here I combine info from multiple things I posted:
Summary: 4d6 drop lowest works out to about 18-19 points if you don't allow rerolls and instead assign points to low numbers (3-6) so that it's possible to score very low rolls. If you were to allow rerolls (of the entire rolled array), the point value would probably be higher.
Detail:
Point costs are based on the modifier of the next score, plus 0 if negative, plus 1 if non-negative. If you are going from a 10 to an 11, the modifier for 11 is 0, add 1, so an 11 costs 1 point. This is step-based, so buying a 14 costs an 11, plus a 12, plus a 13, plus a 14, plus 1, resulting in 0 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 = 5. But we actually don't need all this: the point values for 9 down to 3 are the same as 12 up to 18, minus one, then made negative. So: 6 -> -6, 5 -> -9, 4 -> -12, 3 -> -16. The more laborious "adding up the modifiers" approach confirms this simplification.
Anyway, with these point values, it is possible to roll 4d6 drop 1 and score the resulting array, and I wrote a little Python script to do so. It was pseudorandom, admittedly, but probably good enough for this. The result was 18-19 points (18 if flooring the average, 19 if rounding to the nearest integer). And keep in mind, this includes the possibility of rolls lower than you are "allowed" to buy using points, which brings the average point cost down. So if you reroll arrays that can't be point-bought, the average score probably goes up noticeably, at least a little bit.
Now, this was probably known when the rules were written. You can roll with greater risk for greater reward, or you can select the exact values you want, and this is tempered by having fewer points to work with.
That said, I don't think there are many major differences between 15 point buy and 20 point buy, other than planning flexibility for feat requirements and such. This is certainly affected by my view that increasing your high stat even further is non-optimal because that suffers from diminishing returns and your points are stronger a little more spread out. Depends on the class and goal for the character, of course.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
See, this seems all to be going the wrong way to look at this. The dice gods know I love me some high stats (it's why I don't like rolling - the dice gods also have a perverse sense of humour). I like 20PB because it strikes a happy medium for me. If I go to a new game and GM says "ok it's 15pb" I'm not going to quibble, I'm going to shrug and work out what I can get to work on my terms within that restriction. Who knows I might even enjoy it...
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Disclaimer: there is a bit of get off ma lawn in the following statements.
I find most PF player's attitudes about stats to be a bit like a modern kid complaining that his iphone 5 is out of date.
We didn't have cell phones when I was a kid and we didn't often have high character stats either when we rolled 3d6 six times. Yet we still had fun and memorable characters.
Times have changed and the game mechanics are much better now. But even with a more intuitive game system, the concepts of character stat allocation aren't that much different. I prefer my characters with both ups and downs. Having weaknesses along with your strengths makes for a much more interesting character. 15-point buy is a sweet spot where one can start off with a really decent score (16 or 17 after racial bonuses) and have one or two "dump stats".
Side note - I don't think I heard the term "dump stat" until I started on these forums a couple/few years ago; previously a low score was a "weakness", which provided ample opportunity for laughs and interesting RP. It wasn't a burden to me and my friends. It was part of the fun.
Bottom line is - each to their own. I don't enjoy playing characters with an array of high stats at level 1, but that is just my opinion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your average PF player seems to want higher and higher point-buys, and at some point I wonder why most of those players don't just do away with the pretense of picking stats at all and just go with straight 18s across the board. Heck, why not 20s?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My group, which is between 5-9 particular players who alternate between different games, but who usually play 2 in a given week and between 4-6 in a particular month, had used 20 point buys to start.
We moved to a 25 point buy, and played a few APs, and then we added Mythic to the 25 point buy.
After that last time, and we all sat around saying "this was stupid" and "we killed a God in 2 rounds" and "nobody died more than 1 round before the cleric brought them back" and we were quiet for a bit.
Then we agreed to a 15 point buy "to see what it was like".
We are playing Jade Regent, and loving it. The characters are a lot more flavorful and well thought out. Our party is a lot more balanced, and we rely far more on party dynamics and tactics than just soloblasting/whacking/chopping thru encounters. Before, it was often a matter of initiative...the higher you got, the more likely you were to have something fun to do.
Now? Now it's just good old fashioned "hope we can handle this" and buff n' stuff. Often the difference in encounters isn't apparent until round 4 or 5, once the bard song kicks in, the wizards stone skin has been cut through while the cleric and the druid or the paladin has passed out bless and haste and bulls strength or divine favor.
I'm also playing a barbarian/oracle in that one. Combat has started to be a bit more assured for a party victory now that we all hit 12th lvl, but from lvls 1-8, we had a lot of very hairy situations.
MY CHARACTER ALMOST DIED. That hasn't happened in nearly a decade.
Also, the GM had a lot less prep and could often throw badguys at us right out of the book again.
Now. We have started an alternate week group with some of the same characters. We are playing Hell's Vengeance.
We have moved back to a 20 point buy. There are more MAD characters, some more esoteric choices.
I like the 15 point buy, very much. I do not like the 25 point buy. That kind of game is "too easy, too cheesy".
But, that's my opinion.
Your goal is to have fun.
15 Points means lost of Single Attribute Dependent characters. It lends itself to a "classic" gaming feel. You're going to see a lot of frail wizards, two-handed Barbarians, non-combat Clerics, and people trying (and failing) to play Rogues, Monks, two-weapon characters, and other builds that require more than one good stat.
Every single encounter has to be adjusted for.
Not really, it's okay for some encounters to be easy and some to be hard (every published adventure is like this.) That way you can just feel these things out by how the last fight went. It also depends on the group, some groups don't have fun unless combat is super intense and difficult, and some groups just want to win and feel like heroes and they don't care whether the baddies stood a chance, most people are somewhere in the middle.
But being able to adjust things on the fly is more or less the most essential skill to good GMing, I feel.
|
|
...My group, which is between 5-9 particular players who alternate between different games, but who usually play 2 in a given week and between 4-6 in a particular month, had used 20 point buys to start.
We moved to a 25 point buy, and played a few APs, and then we added Mythic to the 25 point buy.
After that last time, and we all sat around saying "this was stupid" and "we killed a God in 2 rounds" and "nobody died more than 1 round before the cleric brought them back" and we were quiet for a bit.
Then we agreed to a 15 point buy "to see what it was like".
We are playing Jade Regent, and loving it. The characters are a lot more flavorful and well thought out. Our party is a lot more balanced, and we rely far more on party dynamics and tactics than just soloblasting/whacking/chopping thru encounters. Before, it was often a matter of initiative...the higher you got, the more likely you were to have something fun to do.
Now? Now it's just good old fashioned "hope we can handle this" and buff n' stuff. Often the difference in encounters isn't apparent until round 4 or 5, once the bard song kicks in, the wizards stone skin has been cut through while the cleric and the druid or the paladin has passed out bless and haste and bulls strength or divine favor.
I'm also playing a barbarian/oracle in that one. Combat has started to be a bit more assured for a party victory now that we all hit 12th lvl, but from lvls 1-8, we had a lot of very hairy situations.
MY CHARACTER ALMOST DIED. That hasn't happened in nearly a decade.
Also, the GM had a lot less prep and could often throw badguys at us right out of the book again.
Now. We have started an alternate week group with some of the same characters. We are playing Hell's Vengeance.
We have moved back to a 20 point buy. There are more MAD characters, some more esoteric choices.
I like the 15 point buy, very much. I do not like the 25 point buy. That kind of game is "too easy, too
I'm probably not being clear.
We host Mondays and Fridays, and we have games every week. We never sit more than 6 at a table, and we are running 4 different APs. Some players double up, some only play on alternating weeks. Meaning that we have like 9 guys/gals that are part of the groups, but we never sit mroe than 6 at a table.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your average PF player seems to want higher and higher point-buys, and at some point I wonder why most of those players don't just do away with the pretense of picking stats at all and just go with straight 18s across the board. Heck, why not 20s?
Eh...there is a wild difference between "I want all 18's" and "I want to play a monk with higher than 14 starting ac that can still land a hit."
There's also a difference between "I want all 18's" and "I want to play a race that doesn't necessarily get a bonus to the class i chooses main stat without feeling like ive been directly kneecapped on saves/hp/attacking"
There are MAD classes and 15 point buy makes them kind of a poor mechanical choice. IME the lower you force players stats to be, the more likely you are to simply not see certain classes ever, and the harder people will have to optimize to feel successful.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
we didn't often have high character stats either when we rolled 3d6 six times. Yet we still had fun and memorable characters
Our group has played a LOT of games over the last two decades. Almost paradoxically, we had one 2E game in particular that produced a strange abundance of memorable and most-loved characters. Just, an unusually high number of them.
I called it the Bloodbath Campaign. I called it this before the very first session - it was going to be a departure from my usual happy-go-lucky, high fantasy adventures. It was going to be dark and gritty. A world at war with extraplanar forces with common men stuck in the middle.
Our stat generation was roll 3d6 for stats - in order.
We joked a lot that if anyone happened to roll a paladin (2E had minimum stat requirements for certain classes, and the paladin's were unusually extreme), they would HAVE to play a paladin, just out of the sheer unlikelihood that anyone would manage it. My (now ex-) wife looked at her dice sadly before rolling - she loved playing rogues and characters with ill intent - and said something along the lines of, "You're going to roll me a paladin, aren't you?" They did.
You would think that no one would get attached to these characters. They were deeply flawed, poorly rolled, player agency was removed in their creation. People were forced into classes and roles that they'd never played before.
And yet. Everyone *LOVED* their characters. When characters died - often heroically - it SADDENED the whole group (even me, as I'd land the finishing blows.) And then they'd fall in love with their next character and all of its flaws.
It was the most interesting thing. I'm almost tempted to try it in PF one of these days.
Every single encounter has to be adjusted for.Why?
Do you feel compelled to "adjust" for encounters they talk their way past, or sneak by, or teleport around?
Just punch up the important ones. The odd one-sided shellacking isn't going to break anything.
It isn't the "odd one-sided shellacking". When I first started running PF I allowed the players 25PB in a PF AP and nothing was a challenge for them. I had to adjust everything to bring it up to the challenge level it was supposed to be at. Could I have left it in easy mode? Sure, but then my group wouldn't have had a challenge.
Allow me to quote myself.
The very last time I ran PF I handed out 16, 16, 16, 16, 13, 10 as an array, WITHOUT adjusting encounters and tons of fun was had by all.No extra work. LESS WORK, in fact, because I refuse to carefully judge and weigh how an enemy's abilities match up against the players.
Now, that's not saying 15 PB can't be made to work with the right frame of mind and the right class selection. But I find it far more work as a GM because I have to babysit a party with saves in the dumpster.
Why would you have to babysit a party with normal saves? 15 PB is normal. 43 PB (your array) is not.
Your solution is to basically give them a cakewalk adventure. Fine, you don't want to challenge them in any way that is your prerogative but that is not how Pathfinder AP's are designed. Pathfinder APs are easy enough without giving the PCs a higher PB.
|
As a potential tool to reduce the effectiveness of full casters by giving them a smaller point buy.I'd just like to point out that that's exactly what it doesn't do. My sorcerer can still have a 20 charisma, even if she needs to dump every other stat to do so.
On the other hand, you've completely crippled the ranger and the paladin that she relies on to keep the bad guys from eating her face.
Why does a wizard's 15 point buy cripple a paladin's 20 point buy? Never said i was considering reducing the point buy for other classes. If the full casters super specialize, it actually shows in their character.
we didn't often have high character stats either when we rolled 3d6 six times. Yet we still had fun and memorable charactersOur group has played a LOT of games over the last two decades. Almost paradoxically, we had one 2E game in particular that produced a strange abundance of memorable and most-loved characters. Just, an unusually high number of them.
I called it the Bloodbath Campaign. I called it this before the very first session - it was going to be a departure from my usual happy-go-lucky, high fantasy adventures. It was going to be dark and gritty. A world at war with extraplanar forces with common men stuck in the middle.
Our stat generation was roll 3d6 for stats - in order.
We joked a lot that if anyone happened to roll a paladin (2E had minimum stat requirements for certain classes, and the paladin's were unusually extreme), they would HAVE to play a paladin, just out of the sheer unlikelihood that anyone would manage it. My (now ex-) wife looked at her dice sadly before rolling - she loved playing rogues and characters with ill intent - and said something along the lines of, "You're going to roll me a paladin, aren't you?" They did.
You would think that no one would get attached to these characters. They were deeply flawed, poorly rolled, player agency was removed in their creation. People were forced into classes and roles that they'd never played before.
And yet. Everyone *LOVED* their characters. When characters died - often heroically - it SADDENED the whole group (even me, as I'd land the finishing blows.) And then they'd fall in love with their next character and all of its flaws.
It was the most interesting thing. I'm almost tempted to try it in PF one of these days.
That really is not a big deal when you do not start to get bonuses until you have a 15 or 16 stat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would you have to babysit them? TPKs is why.
Dominate Person, Blasphemy, Flesh to Stone, freaking Color Spray.
I run enemies with ruthless tactics and pragmatism without concern for the PCs. 15 pointbuy results in TPKs without handholding. Admittedly the APs are rife with bad tactics, playing them as written 15 point is definitely fine for SAD characters.
43 points is far morw than necessary, but I like that array for providing a strong base under character without 18's preracial while still allowing a few flaws.
Bolding mine.
I think this is the main point here. Many of us are probably talking past each other because some are talking AP while others are not.APs are written for 15 pointbuy. If you use more, then yes, you will need to alter it.
With that said, I think most of the spells you listed are not as bad for a prepared group regardless of PB.
Dominate Person is ridiculously easy to avoid or negate. Protection from Evil blocks it and Suppress Charms and Compulsions should be on everyone's list of 'must have' scrolls.
Blasphemy is level 7, not something that is going to be common until the final module in an AP.
Flesh to Stone is a thing yes, but so is Stone Salve.
Color Spray is relevant early but decent tactics and proper equipment help (smoked goggles). Frankly, if a spellcaster is using Color Spray then they are really close to the enemy. Seems like a priority target to kill. Because of this I have never been fond of Color Spray, great spell, difficult execution to use effectively.
Why does a wizard's 15 point buy cripple a paladin's 20 point buy? Never said i was considering reducing the point buy for other classes. If the full casters super specialize, it actually shows in their character.As a potential tool to reduce the effectiveness of full casters by giving them a smaller point buy.I'd just like to point out that that's exactly what it doesn't do. My sorcerer can still have a 20 charisma, even if she needs to dump every other stat to do so.
On the other hand, you've completely crippled the ranger and the paladin that she relies on to keep the bad guys from eating her face.
In a word, multiclassing.
In a word, multiclassing.
If it's the GM's prerogative to decide how character's generate stats, the GM is fully within their rights to put limits on multiclassing. I've played in a lot of games where multiclassing simply wasn't allowed, but a more reasonable approach would be to clear your entire class plan with the GM beforehand.
Why would you have to babysit them? TPKs is why.
Dominate Person, Blasphemy, Flesh to Stone, freaking Color Spray.
I run enemies with ruthless tactics and pragmatism without concern for the PCs. 15 pointbuy results in TPKs without handholding. Admittedly the APs are rife with bad tactics, playing them as written 15 point is definitely fine for SAD characters.
43 points is far morw than necessary, but I like that array for providing a strong base under character without 18's preracial while still allowing a few flaws.
Bolding mine.
I think this is the main point here. Many of us are probably talking past each other because some are talking AP while others are not.APs are written for 15 pointbuy. If you use more, then yes, you will need to alter it.
With that said, I think most of the spells you listed are not as bad for a prepared group regardless of PB.
Dominate Person is ridiculously easy to avoid or negate. Protection from Evil blocks it and Suppress Charms and Compulsions should be on everyone's list of 'must have' scrolls.
Blasphemy is level 7, not something that is going to be common until the final module in an AP.
Flesh to Stone is a thing yes, but so is Stone Salve.
Color Spray is relevant early but decent tactics and proper equipment help (smoked goggles). Frankly, if a spellcaster is using Color Spray then they are really close to the enemy. Seems like a priority target to kill. Because of this I have never been fond of Color Spray, great spell, difficult execution to use effectively.
So your counter to poor will saves is infinite equipment.
Prot from Evil takes actions to get off in combat, and is too short a duration to be a pre combat buff. And is easy to dispel from a wand/scroll/potion.Blasphemy, so you only get TPKd in the last book. Also it might show up in the second to last book as well.
The guy casting Color Spray does not have to be near the enemy until he puts them all to sleep.
In a word, multiclassing.If it's the GM's prerogative to decide how character's generate stats, the GM is fully within their rights to put limits on multiclassing. I've played in a lot of games where multiclassing simply wasn't allowed, but a more reasonable approach would be to clear your entire class plan with the GM beforehand.
Not everyone plans out their entire character before playing the first session. Since the demise of PRCs it is no longer necessary.
Me personally when I run a game I run a game I want to play in myself. the super low point buys just don't interest me that much. I would do a 15 pb if I had a weird game and knew it would add to it. (maybe a horror adventure)
I prefer playing more heroic characters (not that point buy really expresses that perfectly mind you) So I run games for more heroic characters. I've never had any trouble adjusting a encounter for it If i want it challenging i can usually figure out what my group is capable of and if i mess up or they surprise me good for them. Ill learn from it. so the point buy doesn't effect my game I want to run as much
One idea I've seen that I have to agree with is helping out the MAD characters giving a 20-25 point buy to everyone (not restricting it to one class cause that seems unfair) Changing point buy for different classes seems bothersome and complicated i would probably suggest putting a lower roof on stats before I would make up a list of different point buys per class.
Everyone has their own way of playing I recognize and respect this do what works for you.
(also did the title of this thread change at some point I don't remember typing that but I might just be going crazy.)
we didn't often have high character stats either when we rolled 3d6 six times. Yet we still had fun and memorable charactersOur stat generation was roll 3d6 for stats - in order.
Second edition did not tie saving throws, skills, initiative checks, saving throw DC's, spell progession, as well as attack and damage to stats nearly as much as 3.0-pathfinder does. The stat requirements for classes in 2nd edition are just guidelines of "you might as well not bother" in PF. They're different games and the 3d6 rolling system working in one does not carry over to the other.
Your average PF player seems to want higher and higher point-buys, and at some point I wonder why most of those players don't just do away with the pretense of picking stats at all and just go with straight 18s across the board. Heck, why not 20s?
Do you have quotes to support your claims. Not liking 15 point buy does not equate to a desire for all 20's. Post like yours which take things to extremes that the other side has not expressed do not help.
I think Gauss is saying if you run the AP's as written the party will be ok. If you step things up by using more lethal tactics or otherwise not running the AP as written the party may need a higher point buy.
I thought about running a game with characters with all 18's Something of a destiny has defied the odds to create these 4-6 perfect beings. make it start out very sandbox then roll into some great event they are involved in. but that is definitely a digression from the topic *slaps own wrist* bad llama bad!
It isn't the "odd one-sided shellacking". When I first started running PF I allowed the players 25PB in a PF AP and nothing was a challenge for them. I had to adjust everything to bring it up to the challenge level it was supposed to be at. Could I have left it in easy mode? Sure, but then my group wouldn't have had a challenge.Every single encounter has to be adjusted for.Why?
Do you feel compelled to "adjust" for encounters they talk their way past, or sneak by, or teleport around?
Just punch up the important ones. The odd one-sided shellacking isn't going to break anything.
So where I say "punch up the important encounters," you somehow read "leave them all as-is."
There's your problem right there.
Let 'em have a walkover if they just bump into a guard patrol or some goblins hiding in the sewers. Save your effort for the encounters that are actually crucial to the story you're trying to tell.
You know, the ones you should be giving extra attention anyway, regardless of party power level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your average PF player seems to want higher and higher point-buys, and at some point I wonder why most of those players don't just do away with the pretense of picking stats at all and just go with straight 18s across the board. Heck, why not 20s?
I think it's worth considering that what's really changed over the past 25+ years of tabletop games is that there are a lot more games than there used to be, and with more games you get more specialized games. So while it's certainly possible to run Pathfinder as a comedy, a horror game, or simply a tragic tale about vulnerable flawed people, there are other games out there that do this sort of thing better (no one game can be all things to all people). So when people who know about those other games that hit those other emotional notes choose to play Pathfinder instead of one of those other games, it's because of what Pathfinder offers that some of those other games don't do as well.
Specifically, the opportunity to be a big darn hero who saves the kingdom and feels appreciated for it. Hopefully we all aim for more emotional depth in our games, but the basic aesthetic appeal of Pathfinder (and all forms of D&D) is that you get to be a hero and the thing about heroes (particularly in genre fiction, which often pulls double duty as competence porn), is that they're good at things, generally several things. So when people play Pathfinder characters they see as heroes (even flawed ones) they want their characters to be good at stuff too. Sure, I want my fighter to be strong and tough, but it's annoying that in order to be real strong and real tough it's best she also be stupid and repellent.
So people play games like this when they want to be heroes, people tend to play different games when they want to be monsters or victims.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, I want my fighter to be strong and tough, but it's annoying that in order to be real strong and real tough it's best she also be stupid and repellent.
Strong and tough are relevant. A DM could run a party of "Big Tough Heroes" with 60 point buys and brutally TPK them, he could also run a party using the commoner array and have the party stomp all over everything. It's all a matter of how the game is balanced.
The only difference between a score of 20 and a score of 10 is numbers, and those numbers only matter in comparison to everyone elses numbers. I think that some players have gotten used to certain numbers and are convinced that anything less than an 18 in their prime stat and 16 in all their secondary stats are "weak" and "not good enough at anything." I also think that other players have gotten used to different numbers and think that a starting 18 is "overpowered" and "unbalanced"
I think there is a lack of balance between SAD classes and MAD classes. The only way to compensate for these imbalances is to cap ability scores. The higher the cap, the higher the point buy needs to be to make sure characters can hit that cap, and the higher all the other numbers in the game need to be to maintain balance
Why would you have to babysit them? TPKs is why.
Dominate Person, Blasphemy, Flesh to Stone, freaking Color Spray.
I run enemies with ruthless tactics and pragmatism without concern for the PCs. 15 pointbuy results in TPKs without handholding. Admittedly the APs are rife with bad tactics, playing them as written 15 point is definitely fine for SAD characters.
43 points is far morw than necessary, but I like that array for providing a strong base under character without 18's preracial while still allowing a few flaws.
Bolding mine.
I think this is the main point here. Many of us are probably talking past each other because some are talking AP while others are not.APs are written for 15 pointbuy. If you use more, then yes, you will need to alter it.
With that said, I think most of the spells you listed are not as bad for a prepared group regardless of PB.
Dominate Person is ridiculously easy to avoid or negate. Protection from Evil blocks it and Suppress Charms and Compulsions should be on everyone's list of 'must have' scrolls.
Blasphemy is level 7, not something that is going to be common until the final module in an AP.
Flesh to Stone is a thing yes, but so is Stone Salve.
Color Spray is relevant early but decent tactics and proper equipment help (smoked goggles). Frankly, if a spellcaster is using Color Spray then they are really close to the enemy. Seems like a priority target to kill. Because of this I have never been fond of Color Spray, great spell, difficult execution to use effectively.
So your counter to poor will saves is infinite equipment.
Prot from Evil takes actions to get off in combat, and is too short a duration to be a pre combat buff. And is easy to dispel from a wand/scroll/potion.
Blasphemy, so you only get TPKd in the last book. Also it might show up in the second to last book as well.
The guy casting Color Spray does not have to be near the enemy until he puts them all to sleep.
I never said infinite equipment, just standard WBL or equipment rewards for the AP.
Frankly, there are a number of ways to increase will saves that do not involve starting with a higher PB. Traits for example.As for Blasphemy TPKing you? I think you are seriously overestimating it's effect. You are dazed for 1 round, maybe weakened. You are not going to be Paralyzed or Die from it (that would require CR+4 for PAralysis and CR+9 for Killed).
Some of your party should have strong Will saves and frankly, most Pathfinder AP spellcasters have poor DCs to begin with so about half of your party won't be dazed and can help defend the other half.
As for Color Spray, APs generally do not have opposition spellcasters until several levels into the AP. As a result sleep is off the table, but even the stunning effect should only hit about 1/4 of the group. Assuming your party is half-way spread out (normal deployment) then only half the group should be hit by the color spray. Only half of those should fail. DC here for a 1st level NPC wizard is only 14. Even a 1st level fighter has a decent chance of making that save. Figure the 1st level fighter has a +2 Will save (12 Wisdom, +1 from trait) then they need to roll a 12. That is a 45% chance of success. Highly doubtful your party will succumb to this.
Aside from your hyperbole about the spells I also think your logic here is circular. If you buff the monsters of course your player's PCs will need buffing. If you don't buff the monsters then no, they won't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It isn't the "odd one-sided shellacking". When I first started running PF I allowed the players 25PB in a PF AP and nothing was a challenge for them. I had to adjust everything to bring it up to the challenge level it was supposed to be at. Could I have left it in easy mode? Sure, but then my group wouldn't have had a challenge.Every single encounter has to be adjusted for.Why?
Do you feel compelled to "adjust" for encounters they talk their way past, or sneak by, or teleport around?
Just punch up the important ones. The odd one-sided shellacking isn't going to break anything.
So where I say "punch up the important encounters," you somehow read "leave them all as-is."
There's your problem right there.
Let 'em have a walkover if they just bump into a guard patrol or some goblins hiding in the sewers. Save your effort for the encounters that are actually crucial to the story you're trying to tell.
You know, the ones you should be giving extra attention anyway, regardless of party power level.
If you bump only the hard encounters but not the easy ones then the PCs will have too many resources when they hit the hard encounters. You might as well switch to 1 encounter days since that has a similar effect.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here are some thoughts that aren't tied to the argument of which point buy or which rolling method is better:
1: When I DM, I Usually allow 20 point buy and I run APs as written, but because of this I'll often upgrade the bosses and big moments with double HP or an extra turn every round.
2: When I play, I DESPERATELY WANT 15 PB! I come from a mindset of grit and grime. I was taught by DM's who would infect you with filth fever (NO SAVE!!!) if you went an in game week without ever saying "I find a bathhouse" or "Does the inn provide bathing services?" So I like the lower point buy to replicate that old feel of vulnerability. A caster with 20 int won't take a hit very well, and DMs of my day would target casters if they looked like, well, a guy with a pointy hat and robes.
In the end, its what you and your players prefer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're specifically aiming to even out the martial/caster disparity via point buy, give full casters 15 PB, pure martials 25 PB, and everyone else 20 PB. Of course, you might have to rule out multiclassing out of your category.
One possibility for dealing with this (although it would take at least a 1.5th Edition of Pathfinder) would be to start everyone with the same point buy (or rolls), but then build ability score increases into the classes. If you just dip into a class you only get a slight benefit of ability score increases, or might even miss the ability score increases for it altogether.
SAD classes get a boost to their primary (usually spellcasting) ability score.
MAD classes get boosts to the various ability scores that they exercise.
Another possible redesign would be to make casters intentionally more MAD (for instance, for a redesign of Arcanist or the divine or occult equivalent, Intelligence determines how easily you learn spells, including maximum level and number known, and influences DC of finesse offensive spells; Wisdom determines how many you can keep straight at a time = how many you can prepare, and influences effectiveness of finesse defensive spells); Charisma influences how many spells of each level you can cast, and influences effectiveness of brute force spells).
Shadowrun Priority system.
Shadowrun Priority system.
For some reason, I've come to prefer the point buy used in 4e and did not adapt back to that system when they broke out 5e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another possible redesign would be to make casters intentionally more MAD (for instance, for a redesign of Arcanist or the divine or occult equivalent, Intelligence determines how easily you learn spells, including maximum level and number known, and influences DC of finesse offensive spells; Wisdom determines how many you can keep straight at a time = how many you can prepare, and influences effectiveness of finesse defensive spells); Charisma influences how many spells of each level you can cast, and influences effectiveness of brute force spells).
Looks like someone peeked inside my head or something similar happened! :)
The only time 15 point buy appeals to me is when my PCs are all starting with super high stats (we use 25 point buy normally). When people choose a race that gives them their class's bonus I start to feel like I should use 15 or 20 point buy. However, some PCs at the table might want to play race/class combinations that are poor mechanically (an orc wizard for example).
I personally hate feeling limited by my class's required stats and being punished for "choosing the wrong race." That's what I don't like about 15 point buy. If you want to make something good you have to use one of the races that gives the right stat bonuses or you're going to have to dump a bunch of stats. What if i want my elven tanky fighter to be smart/charismatic/not a brain dead idiot with a big stick? I can't because all my points have to be forced into my con and strength. With 15 point buy I can't really do that without gimping myself. 25 point buy ensures that any race/class combination is going to work just fine.
Hmmm so this turned into me talking about why 15 point buy does not appeal to me instead....Whatever, I'll post it anyway.