| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So an argument about 10 point buy started on THIS THREAD and totally derailed it. I thought I'd start a new thread so people can continue their discussion and we can get back to helping out a newer player over there.
So what are your thoughts on characters with a 10 point buy?
Positives, you don't actually HAVE TO start with sub average attributes
Negatives, this is definitely insufficient to make an efficient character, even a SAD, let alone a well rounded character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It allows for different themes/tropes. Instead of "destined heroes," "legends in the making," etc. typical of most campaigns (or even just "elite" potential; 15-point buy being functionally equivalent, more or less, to the NPC "elite array"), 10-point buy is better suited for gritty campaigns, horror, or "ordinary folks thrust into extraordinary circumstances," etc.
Theres that, a 10 point buy definitely lets the PCs feel like they have vulnerabilities and gaps in their capabilities. Oddly enough it pushes the PCs into stereotypes, fighter have to be dumb to be big, wizards have to be slow and frail to be geniuses etc. Oddly enough, you can still make a powerful SAD class on 10 points,
STR 8 DEX 12 CON 12 INT 16 (before racial) WIS 10 CHA 8
That there is still a highly effective wizard.
I agree with this analysis. 10 point buy effectively kills certain classes for this reason. It's my opinion that this becomes a poor play experience as a result - i.e. "Monk would be a better fit for this character concept, but it's so terrible that I have to settle for Brawler."
The other thing this does, for weal or woe, is put a LOT more focus on gear and wealth. Higher initial stats provide a cushion of effectiveness without the Big 6 items. Low initial point buy means characters are significantly less effective until they have a baseline of gear that makes up for the point buy deficit. Later in the game (levels 10+), stats become slightly less relevant as scaling measures come online. You'll still feel the difference, but between typical wealth and typical available daily resources (buff spells, class features), you sort of level out.
If I were to run a game with a 10 point buy, I would increase expected WBL by at least 25%.
@Serisan, another option may be the Automatic Bonus Progression system from PF Unchained without cutting WBL.
What is positive or negative will depend on the preferred style of play and what you are trying to accomplish. Classes that are not full casters will have to do the most adjusting. If the goal is to just make the game more gritty I would go to using tactics that are less player friendly such as focusing fire on a PC and targeting holy symbols and spell component pouches.
For reasons stated above it is generally not a good idea, and I would honest go directly to a full caster in such a game.
@Serisan, another option may be the Automatic Bonus Progression system from PF Unchained without cutting WBL.
I disagree. Because you're using the wealth to compensate for stat challenges, you actually lose out with ABP due to the specific pacing. Not receiving your +4 mental until 11 and +4 phys until 12 is HUGE - if you look at the PFS environment, +4s are typically targeted around 7-8 for aggressive purchasing builds, with +6s on SAD characters targeted closer to 10 or 11. That's in a 20 pt buy environment with explicit limitations on purchasing. MAD characters may delay this slightly, but those are dramatically delayed. Weapon +2 comes online at 9, meaning critical enchantments like Holy aren't available until then and preclude all other options.
There are a lot of things to be concerned about with ABP, and I say this as someone who is currently running an AP using ABP no-magic, which advances the chart faster. It's not the right solution to this problem, though.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It hurts in ways which are multiplied.
The monster beats the party Wizard's enchantment save DC so the fight lasts another round. The monster hits the Fighter again and because of his middling Con he goes unconscious. He would have had more hp earlier, but he doesn't because the Cleric ran out of spells due to weak Wis bonuses. The party would have had the drop on the monster in the first place if the Rogue had succeeded in her Disable Device and Stealth to get into the monster's chamber.
10 point buy is not as simple as just having -2 to hit and damage, it's at least 10% here and there and it compounds.
Sensible PCs - 10 point PCs are not as smart as 20 point ones, but still not foolish - know when they are underpowered so the same thing to do is overlevel to take on challenges. The only way to win at 10 point is to grind XP and gold which is asking for the dullest part of video games.
With 10 points it is on the one hand a boring grind in order to survive and as others point out, only a very few classes can make a go of it. If I was invited to a 10 point game I would play a Wizard, and so would my fellow gamers and the fault is on the GM.
It reminds me of attempts to run PF as a low-Magic game. The player solution is to use as much magic as possible. Be an Illusionist, use Still Spell, anything - the more restrictive the game is, the more important squeezing out the power is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what are your thoughts on characters with a 10 point buy?
Why?
What possible reason would you have to do that to yourself as GM or to your players?It's just cruel.
So what are your thoughts on characters with a 10 point buy?Why?
What possible reason would you have to do that to yourself as GM or to your players?It's just cruel.
That's rather my thought as well. Phrase perhaps more constructively, what is the problem you are trying to solve by reducing point buy?
I wouldn't run or play a 10 point buy campaign for exactly the same reason that I wouldn't play a campaign with 3d6 strict stat generation (which, on average, would generate stats better than 10 pb). Would you want to play in a game with 3d6 strict stats?
If the GM wants to pregenerate characters with low stats for use in a one shot or short campaign, assuming that GM has good sense in terms of party balance, then I'd go with it but I'm not going to build a character with 10pb. It's just too much work for too little for me to build a character that has a good chance of not making out of the 1st session.
If I wanted a gritty low-fantasy game, I wouldn't try to run it in Pathfinder. PF just isn't built for that, and there are other systems that manage it better. This isn't a fault of PF really, it's just an issue of how a game can't be all things to all people.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's rather my thought as well. Phrase perhaps more constructively, what is the problem you are trying to solve by reducing point buy?So what are your thoughts on characters with a 10 point buy?Why?
What possible reason would you have to do that to yourself as GM or to your players?It's just cruel.
We had another thread get completely derailed by people arguing about why a 10 point buy was bad rather than actually answering the OP's question (which was a rules question about how the point buy system actually works). I made this thread purely so that we could get that thread back on track and people could bring their argument over here.
|
I once read that the 55% success rule was something to follow in order to have happy players. The players win, at least 55% of the time.
Now in my experience, playing D&D since 1977, D&D 3.0 since 2000, a four star PFS GM, 100s of tables of Living Campaigns (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms) and Pathfinder since it came out, I'd have to say that a 20+ point build will move the needle to 60% and upwards player success. For 25 point, I'd say 75% success.
As a GM, I'm currently running a gritty 10-point initial build, and ability enhancing items don't exist (thus freeing those slots for other items); but I also built in a primary/secondary stat progression that is faster than the Core Rulebook.
So far it is working pretty well to preserve a grittier campaign.
10-point Starting Array
1 +1 Primary *
2 +1 Secondary**
3
4 +1 Primary *
5 +1 Secondary**
6
7 +1 Primary *
8 +1 Secondary**
9
10 +1 Primary *
11 +1 Secondary**
12
13 +1 Primary *
14 +1 Secondary**
15
16 +1 Primary *
17 +1 Secondary**
18
19 +1 Primary *
20 +1 Secondary**
Total
14
I once read that the 55% success rule was something to follow in order to have happy players. The players win, at least 55% of the time.
Now in my experience, playing D&D since 1977, D&D 3.0 since 2000, a four star PFS GM, 100s of tables of Living Campaigns (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms) and Pathfinder since it came out, I'd have to say that a 20+ point build will move the needle to 60% and upwards player success. For 25 point, I'd say 75% success.
As a player, if I specialize in something, I expect closer to 75%-85% success, even within a 20 pt buy. There are certainly things that I think shouldn't work like this (lololol grapple builds, where a tiny fox kitsune can successfully grapple huge creatures and completely shut them down because grapple does not have a size restriction), but if I'm investing significant wealth and character resources (feats, pt buy, etc.) into a single task, then 75% success is my minimum acceptable rate. If I feel as though I'm closer to a coin flip, I find the play experience to be erratic and unfulfilling. That said, if I'm not specialized in something, or have actively avoided something, I'm far more forgiving about failure. If we're talking about averaging out success rates, where high success activities are countered by low success activities, then I can believe that 55% figure. This is a similar attitude that I see from most players in my region within PFS.
I've been playing and GMing for ~15 years across a number of systems, myself, including designing and co-authoring a system.
going from 20 to 25 PB is at best going to give you a couple +1s to a couple secondary stats. How the hell does that translate into a 15% higher success rate?
going from 20 to 25 PB is at best going to give you a couple +1s to a couple secondary stats. How the hell does that translate into a 15% higher success rate?
As I touched on in my post, the big question is we're looking at the composite of all possible actions or focusing on specializations. If I'm playing a character with negative CHA and no diplomacy ranks, I could elect not to attempt a check and refer to it as a "soft" failure - I didn't try, so I couldn't succeed. The difference between 20 and 25, then, is the possibility of having either more INT for skill ranks or more CHA to offset prior penalties, I could start to see minor improvements, pushing up the average results of my diplomacy checks, or other checks that I might have invested more into.
going from 20 to 25 PB is at best going to give you a couple +1s to a couple secondary stats. How the hell does that translate into a 15% higher success rate?
Combat is cumulative.
If I have a 70% chance of hitting, I have a 34% chance of hitting three times in a row.
If I have a 65% chance of hitting, I have a 27% chance of hitting three times is a row, which is approximately 4/5 the chance (a 20% reduction) I had a moment ago. Small percentages add up over the course of even a single combat.
Combat is cumulative.
You're correct, but your numbers are also assuming an improvement to the character's primary attribute, which isn't likely when just going up 5 PB, you're more often going to see a small increase to secondary stats or a moderate increase to tertiary stats instead.
Combat is cumulative.You're correct, but your numbers are also assuming an improvement to the character's primary attribute, which isn't likely when just going up 5 PB, you're more often going to see a small increase to secondary stats or a moderate increase to tertiary stats instead.
So maybe that 5% change was actually a change to my odds of being hit, and thus a small increase in my dexterity gave me a 20% better chance of still being alive after three rounds of combat.
|
|
Ugh, 10 point buy is not grittier, it's just barely functional. If you want to keep your campaign "gritty" have tougher combats, play E6-E10, but 10 point buy isn't gritty, you end up with fewer places and fatally flawed characters. Survival from level 1-3 is already random; now it's even more arbitrary. There's better way to get grit and realism.
Bottomless Pitt the Younger is correct, toning down the magical chaos is not done with penny-pinching stat restrictions but with the enjoyable and proven E6 or E8 (better for PF).
At the very top level they become Lord of the Rings superheroes, Street Fighter II superheroes. They can't be touched meaningfully by the plebs, but a dragon is still terrifying to them. A Fighter is a mighty warrior while his Wizard friend has a few amazing powers, but not many and not often.
E6/8 is a great version of the game. It also gives everyone plenty of options as the strongest classes in that game are people like Hunters and Bards and Magi - massively competent in several areas, versatile yet strong at the thing they like.
I honestly hate all Point Buy—it's just too unbalanced, too clunky. If I did use Point Buy, though, I'd likely go with 20 or even 25 Point Buy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly hate all Point Buy—it's just too unbalanced, too clunky. If I did use Point Buy, though, I'd likely go with 20 or even 25 Point Buy.
Point Buy is better than cheating at d6 rolling, which is pretty much what the alternatives to straight 3d6 are.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
With 10 points it is on the one hand a boring grind in order to survive and as others point out, only a very few classes can make a go of it. If I was invited to a 10 point game I would play a Wizard, and so would my fellow gamers and the fault is on the GM.
I want to circle back to this point, as I think it's one of the most instructive about the OP's original question. I think it's is a very elegant way to discuss the problem overall.
In a 10 point buy, PCs are still struggling with encounters that are CR = APL-1. Enemy NPCs are built with 15 points, meaning EVERY foe has an advantage. This leads to situations where, until mid-high levels, PCs are caught in a cycle of repetitive content. If you cannot progress normally along the CR chart without significant cost (daily resources or wealth), you get stuck in what is referred to in video games as ELO hell - you are held back from where you should be by circumstances that are generally beyond your control. You end up in a near death-spiral of progress as the wealth you need to progress up the CR chain is instead used to hover around current challenges.
The reason that 20 point buy is the baseline for PFS and relatively popular for home games is that you can punch slightly above your APL weight. This allows for the "unlocking" of more interesting and varied encounter types. Once you get to 2nd or 3rd level, 3 skeletons should not be a significant challenge, but at 10 point buy, they still could be.
Gritty =/= just "dark and grim themes."
Gritty also includes the assumption that even basic combat is dangerous. If you're running a "gritty" campaign with the PCs already noticeably more capable than almost all NPCs of equivalent level, then that's not "gritty," IMO.
Note that 10-point buy can be combined with E6, E10, etc., but that's a separate discussion as to the maximum power in the campaign instead of the minimum.
I honestly hate all Point Buy—it's just too unbalanced, too clunky. If I did use Point Buy, though, I'd likely go with 20 or even 25 Point Buy.
What is balanced?
I honestly hate all Point Buy—it's just too unbalanced, too clunky. If I did use Point Buy, though, I'd likely go with 20 or even 25 Point Buy.
The problem I have with point buy is that it's inherently min-maxey, so if you want your fighter to be affable and good-natured, putting a 12 in their charisma puts you at a severe disadvantage compared to the fighter who put a 7 in their charisma, getting them six more points to spend on something else.
Whereas if you just randomly generate stats, you have a chance for a spare 12 to devote to some stat that isn't actually mechanically useful for your build (Swole Wizards!) but still helps represent your conception of your character. One of the best things about random stats is that they're hard to really min-max, if you roll a 12, 14, 13, 12, 16, 16 you can have that fighter who's got the 12 charisma and 13 intelligence.
I don't like rolling, either. It gives me too little control over the concept I want to play. I like offering several arrays.
So what are your thoughts on characters with a 10 point buy?
Character capability is not absolute, it's relative to the challenges. So a GM could totally offer 10 point buy, decrease CR for each challenge by 1 or 2, but put the party on fast XP track. Over time they could slowly move toward normal challenges and medium XP track.
Ok, the question is rather about 10pb with otherwise unchanged conditions. I'd assume race choice would become more important - Core races with two +2 and one -2 would become stronger if you really need both +2 or weaker if you just pick up one +2 because it was part of the package.
And while I understand the reasoning why 10pb is good for a wizard (more precisely: less harmful than for other classes), I'd still consider this class' first level play quite wonky. Sleep and Color Spray are powerful, but not reliable - think about good save rolls, vermin, undead or running out of spells per day. And that other party members can accomplish less will be more than just their problem, it will become yours too.
I think 10 point buy works well with the mythic rules.
It's pretty rough otherwise. I like 15 for more "gritty" campaigns, 20 for heroic games.
After seeing a 17 DEX/CHA Ninja with 10 on everything else with a 15 pt buy, I'm leaning towards a 25 pt build with max 16 no racial included.
If you're SAD you get too tempted to just put everything into that main stat, and albeit the best choice, it's not really needed. An 18 is more than enough.
25pt equals to 16 16 14, rest 10. That's barely good enough for a MAD with STR DEX CON.
Wizards can get the luxury of dumping both STR and CHA, I mean, they could also dump WIS if they wished.
If you control MAX stat allocation, I think 25pt build makes things more balanced.
^so much this should be 20(low fantasy), 25(fantasy), 30(high fantasy), 35(epic fantasy) and then 45 (legendary fantasy)
low/high/epic fantasy have nothing to do with point buy. The "level" of fantasy is defined by two things: How unreal the world is, and the impact the characters have on the world.
That means a low point buy high magic campaign where the fate of the world is at stake is high fantasy, while a high point buy low magic campaign that only deals with treasue hunting is low fantasy.
In a 10 point buy, PCs are still struggling with encounters that are CR = APL-1.
Wrong. Some PCs are struggling with CR-1 encounters. Imagine for instance a party consisting of a Druid with pet, a Summoner, a Wizard, and a Herald Caller Cleric. Those a party can easily steamroll CR+3 encounter even with a 10-point-buy. You think a cMonk, cRogue, Samurai + Swashbuckler party on 25-point-buy will have an easier time in combat?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a 10 point buy, PCs are still struggling with encounters that are CR = APL-1.Wrong. Some PCs are struggling with CR-1 encounters. Imagine for instance a party consisting of a Druid with pet, a Summoner, a Wizard, and a Herald Caller Cleric. Those a party can easily steamroll CR+3 encounter even with a 10-point-buy. You think a cMonk, cRogue, Samurai + Swashbuckler party on 25-point-buy will have an easier time in combat?
So, I see you're illustrating the point that only T1 SAD classes that do everything they can to ignore their own stats may apply to play 10 point buy. Excellent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I once read that the 55% success rule was something to follow in order to have happy players. The players win, at least 55% of the time.
Now in my experience, playing D&D since 1977, D&D 3.0 since 2000, a four star PFS GM, 100s of tables of Living Campaigns (Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms) and Pathfinder since it came out, I'd have to say that a 20+ point build will move the needle to 60% and upwards player success. For 25 point, I'd say 75% success.
As a GM, I'm currently running a gritty 10-point initial build, and ability enhancing items don't exist (thus freeing those slots for other items); but I also built in a primary/secondary stat progression that is faster than the Core Rulebook.
So far it is working pretty well to preserve a grittier campaign.
1
The players should win almost always, but the combats should be a real challenge about half the time. At least that's what Gygax and Arneson thought...
I have been DMing even longer, and I dont think the "buy" is what does it. It's the DM and player tactics more than anything.
Being a sucky peasant doesnt make the game "gritty" "You keep using that word, I do not think that work means what you think it does." ;-)
The SETTING is what makes the game gritty. I am running a Pulp Heroes type game, and they wanted powerful heroes so they got them. They have been on the edge of the seats at least once a nite, and one of the players complained I was giving her nitemares....
A imaginative DM doesn't have to rely upon handicapping the PCs to make his/her game more down to earth and dangerous.
I honestly hate all Point Buy—it's just too unbalanced, too clunky. If I did use Point Buy, though, I'd likely go with 20 or even 25 Point Buy.Point Buy is better than cheating at d6 rolling, which is pretty much what the alternatives to straight 3d6 are.
4D6 drop 1 is "cheating"? Not since the late 1970's.
I mean, the goal of rolling for stats is to generate six numbers between 3 and 18. No matter what algorithm you use, as long as you're generating six numbers between 3 and 18 (and everybody is using the same algorithm, and not lying about what they rolled) you're not cheating.
3d6 strict, 4d6 drop low, 4d6 drop low reroll 1s, 2d4+10, etc. are all equally valid just like how 15, 20, 25, etc. point buys are all equally valid.
I've found from my GMing experience that games with characters who have good stats go better than ones with characters with low stats. More builds are viable, people can just play what they like and have it work, and the class power curve is smoothed out slightly leading to less friction at the table. Other people might have a different experience, so if you want to try a 10 point game, go ahead but expect everybody to play full casters and/or pet classes (and everybody who isn't to have a bad time.)
I mean, the goal of rolling for stats is to generate six numbers between 3 and 18. No matter what algorithm you use, as long as you're generating six numbers between 3 and 18 (and everybody is using the same algorithm, and not lying about what they rolled) you're not cheating.
3d6 strict, 4d6 drop low, 4d6 drop low reroll 1s, 2d4+10, etc. are all equally valid just like how 15, 20, 25, etc. point buys are all equally valid.
It is interesting how much better pt buy is that rolling and rolling and keep in order is the worst (but can be fun!)
I rolled 5d6 drop 2, reroll ones. Got
str 15,
Dex12
Con15
Int 15
wis13
cha14
That's 30pts! And any class is a decent choice, except maybe a full spellcaster. (and with racial adjustments, any class works- but a cleric will have a bit of a challenge, however certainly doable)
But let us say you spent 30 pts and built a fighter
str18
dx14
con14
Int12
wis12
Cha 9
A MUCH more optimized and min-maxed PC, with hardly any dumping even.
Now me, I'd rather play the first one, and certainly so if it was those rolls OR a 25 pt buy. (hard to turn down a 30 pt buy, eh?)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's totally possible to build lower tier classes. Here's a 10 point TIEFLING Swastigator:
(For those who don't know a Swashtigator is an INSPIRED BLADE SWASHBUCKLER 1 / EMPIRICIST INVESTIGATOR X)
STR: 9
DEX: 16
CON: 14
INT: 16
WIS: 10
CHA: 5
This is a Tier 3/4 class (I can't remember exactly where people put these on the tier list). I'd be happy to play this in a PFS game (along side 20 point builds).
The problem isn't that it doesn't have enough points, it's that so many of the choices here seem mandatory for it to function with so few points. I have to go Tiefling to get the stats I want. I have to take a level of Inspired Blade Swashbuckler to get DEX to Damage (Without going DEX my Attack/Damage stat would be 14 & my DEX would be woeful for both skills and AC) and I really need Empiricst on my Investigator to make up for my other low stats (9 STR, 10 WIS, 5 CHA). I'd rather go Half Orc Barbarian/Investigator, but I can't make it work nearly as well.
System-mastery becomes MUCH more important. That means that a lower point buy is harder for newer players. If you have an experience gap between your players then a lower point buy is the more likely to see the experienced players take all the spotlight (and the new players get bored and never come back).
The main time I think a lower point buy can be really useful is to handicap some of your players. If you have an experienced player in a group of new players it might be a good idea to give the experienced player a lower point buy.
Imagine you're the experienced player with a bunch of newbies. Would you rather be told: "You're more experienced so I'm choosing your Race & Class for you" or "You're more experienced so you have less points & you can't play a full caster, but otherwise go nuts". Both of these serve to balance the party, but the lower point buy lets the player be more creative (It also lets the experienced player show off a bit, which they'll like & will help the newer players see what can be achieved).
|
What I'd like to see more often, and I may even try my hand at a little homebrewing for such, is the character creation "playbooks" from games like Over the Wall and Apocalypse World.
Where instead of a player rolling for their stats they will instead roll a background for their character which gives them different stat bonuses and skills. These rolled backgrounds having the added benefit of tying together the characters in the party, making it so that they are not simply strangers who met up but comrades and friends who grew up together.
This I feel this is all around better than point buy or simply rolling for stats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's totally possible to build lower tier classes. Here's a 10 point
CHA: 5
any time you have to dump to 5 is- at least in my opinion- a failure.
Now build him again without dumping, eh? ;-)
See, that's another problem with 10 pt buy, it forces dumping.
My ROTRL DM gave us 25 pt buy, but no pts back from dumping. Worked nicely.