| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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
cha14That'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?)
Following your example, I decided to roll out a couple blocks to see if statistics come into play as I suspect. Note: I'm typing the post while I roll. I am using the same rules for rolling as you: 5d6 reroll 1s drop 2 lowest.
1st set: 13, 15, 12, 15, 11, 17 (33 pt buy)
2nd set: 15, 12, 11, 17, 18, 16 (50 pt buy)
3rd set: 14, 10, 16, 13, 9, 12 (19 pt buy)
There was no fudging here. Let's go ahead and put those in with the one you rolled (30 pt buy). The average of those point buys is 33. Can you tell me, with a straight face, that the owner of my set 3 is going to feel like they're playing the same game as the owner of set 2? Your set and my set 1 are roughly equivalent and I doubt there would be any complaints there (other than the HUGE volume of odd numbers), but set 2 is an order of magnitude more powerful than set 3. Set 2 is amazing for so many different builds, even in the order rolled, that it can and will overshadow virtually anything else at the table until wealth distribution comes into play and potentially provides uplift to the character with set 3 (probably bloodrager, paladin or barbarian?).
When people talk about rolls vs point buy, it's largely about creating table parity and removing the sense of unfairness that comes from significant variation in luck. Some players might enjoy that difference - they might be drawn to the type of story you could tell with that. Many players likely won't enjoy the feeling of outright inferiority.
A MUCH more optimized and min-maxed PC, with hardly any dumping even.
I wonder how much of this is a cultural divide. Back in my day "min-maxed" was a pejorative we would apply to characters we viewed poorly in order to deride them. That it encourages min-maxing is specifically why I dislike how point buy is set up in Pathfinder.
|
A MUCH more optimized and min-maxed PC, with hardly any dumping even.I wonder how much of this is a cultural divide. Back in my day "min-maxed" was a pejorative we would apply to characters we viewed poorly in order to deride them. That it encourages min-maxing is specifically why I dislike how point buy is set up in Pathfinder.
Doesn't rolling do that too? If I roll 18, 16, 17, 15, 14, 3, isn't putting that 3 in the position where it matters the least min maxing? Isn't that optimizing; it's placing your stats in the optimal position. Really, only rolling down the line 'prevents' optimization, but even that pigeon holes you into the characters you can play without being at a large disadvantage (sure you can play an 11 int wizard, but would it be enjoyable aside from the roleplaying you could do without factoring stats into it?)
Point buy just makes it so you can make the character in the way that you want, so you can create the character which you envision better. Rolling's fine, some people like it, but some people like having more control over their character. It's the same reason I don't make people roll for feats, skill points, or anything else like that; those are important character choices that people should be able to choose to make sure they're playing the character they want.
There's a significant difference, IMO, between putting the low number in a stat you don't have any use for because you have to put the low number somewhere, and "I'm going to reduce my charisma so I can have more points in constitution."
If you want your character to have flaws, roleplay them, but you shouldn't expect tradeoffs from the GM to the extent of "you get higher useful stats." If people want to play deeply flawed characters, I'd rather massively expand the drawback system rather than "give better stats in exchange for how bad you are at everything else."
Point buy is fine, *if*, you don't give bonus points for low stats. I play a lot of games where character generation is "distribute certain numbers between choices", but PF is the only one where "you get bonuses for being severely below average" is baked into the system to this extent.
It's totally possible to build lower tier classes. Here's a 10 point
CHA: 5any 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.
Stat dumping is an entirely seperate issue.
I just came up with came up with a viable tier 3/4 character with a 10 point buy and your problem with it is: "I don't like that character". Honestly a 10 point buy is supposed to represent people who have weaknesses. I think the problem here isn't the point buy, it's your expectations (Not trying to be rude, sorry if it sounds rude =P )
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.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
cha14That's 30pts!
Following your example, I decided to roll out a couple blocks to see if statistics come into play as I suspect. Note: I'm typing the post while I roll. I am using the same rules for rolling as you: 5d6 reroll 1s drop 2 lowest.
1st set: 13, 15, 12, 15, 11, 17 (33 pt buy)
2nd set: 15, 12, 11, 17, 18, 16 (50 pt buy)
3rd set: 14, 10, 16, 13, 9, 12 (19 pt buy)There was no fudging here. Let's go ahead and put those in with the one you rolled (30 pt buy). The average of those point buys is 33. Can you tell me, with a straight face, that the owner of my set 3 is going to feel like they're playing the same game as the owner of set 2? Your set and my set 1 are roughly equivalent and I doubt there would be any complaints there (other than the HUGE volume of odd numbers), but set 2 is an order of magnitude...
This is actually an enormous part of what finally got our group to embrace point buy. We'd been rolling for a decade, played dozens and dozens of games. Well one of those random die sets finally managed to generate a result of 18, 18, 18, 18, 17, 17 for one of the players in our party (using communal dice, rolled through a dice tower in view of the group - highly unlikely, but totally possible.) By point buy, that's a 94 point buy array. Everyone else averaged somewhere in the 20 point buy range. The DM let the player keep it and use it; encounters ended up being far more challenging for the group as a result, and the one character outshined everyone else in the group. That was the last time we rolled stats.
For quite a long time after, we instead generated stats using the Three Dragon Ante stat generation method as described in Dragon# 346 (August 2006), which is a randomized point buy generation, in addition to being a ton of fun (it read like a tarot reading, with different cards representing events in your characters past that led to their stats becoming what they were.)
I'd actually just forgotten about it entirely until just now.
I suddenly have the desire to rebuild the stat generation method using the Harrow deck. (Just checked, and it actually contained recommendations on what to replace for the various Dragon cards if you wanted to use a standard Tarot deck - pretty excited.)
*10 cents on main question* I've generally seen that lower point buy games (at least in my experience) have actually created more teamwork in the party then higher ones.
I came from older systems, the first one being a game called hackmaster. I know that this is akin to doing the "Back in my day" But that system really did teach us how to work together, as well as that a balanced party needed a fighter (no matter how dumb) as well as the caster, the rogue, and a healer. But I was always stuck playing lower point-buy.
So admittedly, my first time taking the reigns of a gaming group (one that had never gamed before) I did the opposite, and instead made them all close to gods with nobody having less then a 12 in a stat, and most having 2+ 18s. This turned out bad. Not because they were too overpowered for the adventure path, but rather because it became more of a competition for who could do more. the wizard saving her spells by running into melee with a sword. The rogue not even bothering to gain flanking because he didn't need it, and the fighter diplomacizing the big ugly monster. Each character in turn became so focused on making their character a jack-of-all because they did, that they actually fell to lower lvl'ed monsters, due to none taking sides.
This is just one example, but another descent one is the flack character who want to make pure healers get (the heal bot) Yeah, when everybody has high dmg and the goblin needs a 15+ to hit the healer is a little worthless, but that goblin suddenly having a 50% chance to hit your fighter, and an 80-90% chance to hit any of your other players, and suddenly that 'heal-bot' looks a heck of a lot better then the guy that dumped extra healing for a weapon focus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm with Mr. Pitt on this one. I have no love of rolling for attributes or hit points for that matter. Low point buys also are not fun for me.
I prefer 25 point builds. If other people like low point builds or whatever that's fine if everyone in the group likes that then go play that way.
However, 25 point builds in my opinion make the MAD classes more viable while low point builds punish MAD classes and most martial classes very harshly.
Not too mention I want to play a hero instead of a schmuck. That and I like to play unconventional builds and I find that the 25 point build really allows me to have the flexibility to play most things I can dream up. For example I really like characters like Thanos and Darkseid or the huge Dragon Lord magic guy from Dragon Lance so I often build high strength arcane casters(yes you could argue they could be build with any number of other classes). With a 25 point build I can do that and make it work.
With low point builds you pretty much have to drop all your points into your core stat or stats and that's it. In my opinion it kills creativity not enhances it. It sure as heck limits your options so you see a lot of similar builds.
Also, less points mean you qualify for less feats etc.
If the game is too easy at a point level then the DM can crank it up by applying various templates, adding monsters or just being plain nasty.
I think the real issue here is that people are trying to argue some moral superiority or system mastery skill angle. "Well my group completed the Mummy's Mask with a 10 point build and none of us died." Or "Real role players roll for their attributes." Or "25 point builds are for power gamers who don't know how to roleplay."
Guess again. The groups I played in mostly used 25 point builds and all the regular players had great concepts thematically and mechanically and were good roleplayers.
So to sum it up. Play the game however you and your group want to play it. If you're having fun that way great if not try something else.
25 point build is for me and I have no shame in saying that. :)
The biggest problems with low point buy games is that it is very hard for the GM not to effectively belittle the characters, Run well, such a campaign is a lot of extra work to GM, and I mean really a lot of work. Not run well, it is torture to the players. The honor of the victory of the underdog does pale after a bit, unless your sole goal is wargaming maximum results with minimum resources.
I have played in a couple of "Average Man" campaigns, one was one of the best I played in, on very nearly the worst. I only GM'd one like it. It was popular, but after 6 months of 3 games per month, I was done with it. One of the players took over, but gave up after a couple months.
There really are better games than D&D and Pathfinder to explore the heroism of the Average.
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.
The issue there is 'chance'. Your roll could end up as 16 14 14 14 11 9. Or 14 14 13 12 12 10.
Both systems have, at their core, one key 'problem', and that's that all stats are treated equally. Points in Charisma are the same cost as in Strength regardless if you're preparing a barbarian, bard, or barkeep. And it's hard to think of a way to really make them otherwise.
Both systems have, at their core, one key 'problem', and that's that all stats are treated equally. Points in Charisma are the same cost as in Strength regardless if you're preparing a barbarian, bard, or barkeep. And it's hard to think of a way to really make them otherwise.
There are systems, such as Cypher System, that solve the attribute problem by not assigning bonus values to attributes. It's an interesting, elegant solution, but it's completely contrary to the design principles of Pathfinder and the OGL it's based upon.
The issue there is 'chance'. Your roll could end up as 16 14 14 14 11 9. Or 14 14 13 12 12 10.
Sure, but this is easy to fix. We always clear character sheets and backstories at least a week before the campaign starts (more so the GM can work backstories into the plot, but people usually do charsheets at the same time) and if you roll stats and there's a disparity, the GM can fix it by giving people better ones.
One thing we've done in the past is in a 4-person party, give the person with the best stats one pip to put wherever they want, the person with the 2nd best stats 2 pips, and so on until the person with the worst stats gets 4 pips.
I came from older systems, the first one being a game called hackmaster. I know that this is akin to doing the "Back in my day" But that system really did teach us how to work together, as well as that a balanced party needed a fighter (no matter how dumb) as well as the caster, the rogue, and a healer. But I was always stuck playing lower point-buy.
As someone who came from AD&D, I have a counterpoint to offer. Your experience almost certainly differs, but the two best experience I've had in D&D adjacent games in terms of "quality of roleplaying" were in one campaign where the stat generation was "Write down whatever you think is right for your character" (I still believe that this is the best method if you've got the right group), and the other was in a game where we rolled 2d6+10 for stats and then the GM pulled a templates out of a hat and one to each character (I ended up as a half-celestial rogue whose INT and DEX were 22 at level 1). In both of these games I found that players focused more on who their characters were as people thus "what would she say or do here?" and less on "what can I do" and people had more fun as a result and they worked together exactly as much as this group normally does with much less powerful characters.
So I think that none of these things are universal. It's going to depend a lot on who the players are and what sort of game you're trying to run.
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.
Is there some magical invocation that prevents players from min-maxing with rolling? If there is, the players I knew baok in the day seem to have been immune to it.
I'd much rather have the optimisation that comes with point buy than all of the rampant cheating I saw with rolling dice.
Is there some magical invocation that prevents players from min-maxing with rolling? If there is, the players I knew baok in the day seem to have been immune to it.
Putting your best scores in your most important stats and your worst scores in your least important ones, and "making your weaknesses weaker so your strengths can be stronger" are entirely different kinds of min-maxing.
If your best roll is an 16 and your worst is a 10, then no matter how much you want to you can't make your CHA less so your INT will be more.
But mostly the most effective solutions to stopping min-maxers I've seen was peer pressure. Hang out with enough inveterate storygamers who sneer at min-maxing, and who's play style might actively avoid your preferred scenarios (I once had a 3e game that went 10 sessions between fights, because the group was hardcore committed to diplomacy and the sorts of robbery capers in which no one gets hurt and as little gets broken as possible.)
Putting your best scores in your most important stats and your worst scores in your least important ones, and "making your weaknesses weaker so your strengths can be stronger" are entirely different kinds of min-maxing.
The problem I have with this (In the context of this thread) is that this is another way to unbalance the game in favour of SAD classes.
On a 10 point buy with no stats below 10 you can still make an 18 INT wizard as a Human/Elf/Half-Elf/Half-Orc/Tiefling/Probably plenty of other things. Try making a lower tier class with that and it gets really hard.
If you're allowed to dump some stats (let's say even just 1 stat) you can suddenly make more viable characters. Stat dumping literally gives you a higher point buy. According to nearly everyone on this thread a higher point buy is better, so stat dumping should be better.
I know they're not quite synonymous but you see what I'm going for here.
I don't like rolling, either. It gives me too little control over the concept I want to play. I like offering several arrays.
I personally have a liking for the Conan the Barbarian Array 18,18,18,18,18,16. :p
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
All the different PB values are valid. No group is playing "wrong" if they pick a different PB value than you.
That having been said, I'm seeing a lot of claims that 10 PB is somehow inferior or unplayable (or leads to only SAD classes) when that certainly isn't true. No amount of theorycrafting is going to convince me when I have personally seen low PB MAD characters thrive through an entire AP.
10 PB is very playable, even with a CRB monk. You may personally not enjoy playing such a character but that doesn't make the concept in general unplayable or wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If my GM said we were playing with 10 point buy, I'd shrug and roll a hunter or druid. Or cavalier, or oracle (nature), or whatever. Pet classes are relatively strong at low point buys.
I have no love for rolling for stats. Our group officially uses "4d6, drop 1", the standard for AD&D since the 70's. I am not a fan. In practice, it generates wild variability and some weird builds.
In our current game, my first die roll generated a 16, 11, 11, 10, 8 and 6. Say hello to your 6-pt build. This was not a workable character. I re-rolled (i.e., I cheated) and got 17,16,14,14,12,7. That's a 31-pt build that looks somewhat min/max-ish. The 7 is terrible, but I decided to build my whole character concept around it. In the meantime, someone else in our party has three 18's, a 16, and nothing under 11.
The point here is, die rolling for scores is just insane, even using "4d6 drop 1". The range of point buys you get is still wide. I know life isn't fair, but the potential disparities strain even that excuse. Random still produces randomly bad as often as it produces randomly great. I'd rather we adopt one of the alternatives that injects some randomness, but prevents awful distributions.
To keep this more or less on topic, a 10-pt buy feels unpleasant and restrictive. As has been pointed out, the first two levels are a crap shoot on survival as it is. A single critical hit can kill you. Combat lasting one additional round can kill you. Whether you are SAD or MAD, and no matter your class, you benefit from boosting Str, Con, or Dex in a game that is still largely about combat. Hitting more often, doing more damage, having more HP, and going earlier in initiative are small margins that add up, and at low levels these margins aren't really that small.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To me, if I wanted to play a lower power game, then I would pick a different system. There are a lot of good systems out there. Why would I want to try and force a system to do something that it is not ment to do?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here are what I feel are some options for good stat generation.
1) roll once and all players use that roll, thus everyone is on equal ground for stats.
2) Point buy
3) Premade stat arrays. Have 2 or 3 stat arrays (made using point buy to equal) and let players pick one. 14/14/14/14/10/10 or 16/14/13/12/12/8. This allows the GM to control how high or low a stat could be.
I can never understand those who say they saw someone roll three 18s and a 16, as this has never been anything I have seen in all my years of playing AD*D,D&D< or Pathfinder. Heck, in most cases a player is lucky to get a single 18.
Let me give you one better.
In Palladium 2E, if you have a 3d6 attribute (and ONLY that type of attribute), a result of 16-18 "explodes," giving you an additional 1d6 to that attribute. If you roll a 6 on that die, it also explodes. As such, you can have 28-30 for an attribute all of the sudden. Attribute bonuses are also linear and start at 16. A stat under 16 is effectively worthless, while anything over 20 becomes RIDICULOUS.
I was rolling up a human (all attributes are 3d6) assassin NPC for that game and had 3 of its 8 attributes explode, all on physical attributes. If we were to make a CR comparison here, this single NPC was effectively CR+4 for his actual level, exclusively because of his base attributes. He was stronger than minotaurs at level 1 and had the equivalent DEX of a 20th level unchained rogue, along with through-the-roof CON.
Dice are wild. Sometimes, you get some huge rolls. The typical set averages out, but as you can see from my earlier post on this page, averages still contain outliers.
Seen it, believe it, dice are funny that way.
Same here.
Witnessed a guy actually rol a 18 on 2d6 for str, then get the fabled 00. Now, sure, he was gonna use him for a cohort, but that changed!
I can never understand those who say they saw someone roll three 18s and a 16, as this has never been anything I have seen in all my years of playing AD*D,D&D< or Pathfinder. Heck, in most cases a player is lucky to get a single 18.
The 18,18,16 was post-racial so I don't know what the actual roll was, but with 4d6-drop-lowest 18's are more likely. And with anything dice-based, you still get weird results. I just made 6 rolls of 4d6-drop-lowest and got: 8,9,8,16,9,6 [edit to fix a typo]
Anyone want to play that character?
This is why die rolling for stats is terrible. If you are re-rolling on results like the above, then you aren't really doing 4d6-drop-lowest anyway, and should instead do something like 10+2d4. At least you have better odds of no rejects. Or just a straight point buy. Or "15 + 2d4 point buy" if you want some randomness. Or whatever.
Anything but pure dice.
Yeah, that's what I feel. Almost all of the "pro-rollers" always say that "any sane GM" would let people reroll if their stats are too low. Which makes it like you say, less of something that is truly random but some funky way for the GM to determine your stats, if he doesn't like them he has your reroll.
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.
Summoner is generally considered T2 but yes, that was indeed my intention. It's not only the MADness, it's also that almost everything a martial does in combat depends on his strength or dexterity, while a caster has lots of things independend from his casting score (buffs, summons, battlefield control).
I can never understand those who say they saw someone roll three 18s and a 16, as this has never been anything I have seen in all my years of playing AD*D,D&D< or Pathfinder. Heck, in most cases a player is lucky to get a single 18.
No offense, but just because you don't understand or (or at least don't have an intuitive grasp of) probability doesn't make it untrue. 3+ 18s has roughly a 0.008% chance - not much, but if you ask enough people, it shows up.
Honestly a 10 point buy is supposed to represent people who have weaknesses. I think the problem here isn't the point buy, it's your expectations
You know what the CRB starts with (after a bit about the creation proicess)? "Welcome to a world where noble warriors battle mighty dragons and powerful wizards explore long-forgotten tombs. (...) In this game, your character can become a master swordsman who has never lost a duel, or a skilled thief capable of stealing the crown from atop the king’s head."
So no. It's not his expectations, it's the basic premise of this game.
Honestly a 10 point buy is supposed to represent people who have weaknesses. I think the problem here isn't the point buy, it's your expectationsYou know what the CRB starts with (after a bit about the creation proicess)? "Welcome to a world where noble warriors battle mighty dragons and powerful wizards explore long-forgotten tombs. (...) In this game, your character can become a master swordsman who has never lost a duel, or a skilled thief capable of stealing the crown from atop the king’s head."
So no. It's not his expectations, it's the basic premise of this game.
Context.
I made a character on a 10 point buy who could stand proudly in a group with 20 point buys - and someone didn't like my character for aesthetic reasons.
Also in terms of a high fantasy hero my character was a half-devil alchemist/swordsman who's probably better at "stealing the crown from atop the king’s head" than the pre-gen' character Paizo used.
On top of all that, the "basic premise of this game" assumes you have a 15 point buy, so my point still stands - This point buy is supposed to represent a weaker character.
To be honest my favourite method of generating characters is a 20 point buy with no stat higher than 18 after racials. It seems like the best way to get a balanced party.
I agree a higher point buy is better, I just don't understand the vitriolic response people have to a lower point buy. The reason I started this thread was to curb an argument about how bad 10-point buys are that completely derailed another thread. This thread is now MUCH more popular than the original thread due mostly to the fact that people HATE 10 point buys. The default response on the forums is "Don't play that game, it's terrible" without knowing anything else about the game. The next most common response is "It only works with a wizard" which shows an extraordinary lack of imagination.
Honestly a 10 point buy is supposed to represent people who have weaknesses.Implying 15, 20 or even 25 PB characters don't? Like we're just gosh darn mary sue writing powergaming dullards for not liking restrictively low PB?
Not sure what point you're trying to make here.
I think context is important again:
The part you quoted was my response to someone saying my 10 point character wasn't good enough because I had to dump 1 stat. If you're saying it's ok to dump stats (even on higher point buys) then you're agreeing with me.
I wouldn't say I was vitriolic, but I did post my concerns:
- Low point buy puts more emphasis on gear and wealth to achieve results that higher point buys can skate by without.
- Wealth can be diminished at a more rapid rate as consumables become more important to address on-level challenges.
- Low point buy favors classes that either hyperspecialize in 1-2 stats or are able to mitigate their own stats by having pets, summons, or similar as core components of their gameplay.
- The challenges of low point buy are focused on the earliest levels, before you have sufficient wealth to compensate for the initial challenge.
You've provided a few points that I think are reasonable - most notably that system mastery determines success. If that is the game that your table enjoys, then play and enjoy it. I think that a lot of people find that base requirement to be painful. Moreover, a number of people are so averse to dump stats, railing against the idea of taking a pre-racial 7, that what I deem to be a reasonable build (your swashtigator on pg 1) appears to be anathema to them, regardless of the stories you and your table are able to tell with them.
A lot of the responses on the boards descend into vitriol quite quickly. I would not expect much else with something as divisive as character creation and optimization.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding "characters who have weaknesses" I strongly prefer weaknesses to be represented through roleplaying, not "statistical bonuses/penalties". It makes a lot more sense to me to play characters with specific weaknesses ("is terrified of corporeal undead", "is overconfident when pitted against those perceived as societal inferiors", "pretends to be a lot dumber than she is") than characters with really general weaknesses ("is afraid of everything", "is overconfident 24/7 no matter what", "isn't remotely intelligent".)
I mean, give me a 60 point buy and I'll give you a character with weaknesses because I create those as part of characterization, and because "a character, no matter how good they are at things, is more interesting when flawed."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
is better, I just don't understand the vitriolic response people have to a lower point buy. The reason I started this thread was to curb an argument about how bad 10-point buys are that completely derailed another thread. This thread is now MUCH more popular than the original thread due mostly to the fact that people HATE 10 point buys. The default response on the forums is "Don't play that game, it's terrible" without knowing anything else about the game. The next most common response is "It only works with a wizard" which shows an extraordinary lack of imagination.
Honestly, a 10 point buy has me... confused. I mean, I'm really curious as to how it would play out, and I would even jump into such a game if the GM set up a dedicated Session Zero, but I struggle to find a benefit other than curiosity's sake. Headmath places most of the concepts on my to-do list at an crippling power level.
If anything, I would be inspired to focus quite heavily on mechanics, treating my character building as "damage control". Choosing race based soley on class synergy. Dumping Charisma and/or Intelligence into the dirt. Planning out my Big Six purchases in order of gold value and keeping that spreatsheet with my character sheet. Reactionary and Indominable Faith only. Final Destination.
MrCharisma, what is your opinion of combat pet classes in a 10 PB game? An Eidolon starts with the equivalent of a 13 PB, and it only grows with levels. Considering its free armor and Evolutions, I don't see why this wouldn't be a preferable front liner over some poor 10 point Ranger or Paladin or whatever.
I love the value of teamwork PF brings, but if a frontline fighter needs to have low CON because of the 10 pt buy, the cleric is forced to be a healbot, instead of a melee cleric/summoner. Every character has to be built to function ideally with one another for a 10 pt build party to be successful. This means one player's build choice necessarily forces certain builds on other players.
I'm all for teamwork and interesting group builds. I love it, and I love interesting themed groups. But having to throw the H-word at your party Cleric might rub them the wrong way. This could sting even harder if they're stuck on "walking bandaid" duty because the front liner has low Con.
Depending on the players' perspective, it could be seen as a selfish way to play if your Fighter requires another player to mulch his own build and mechanics because "Joey Ten Con" didn't come prepared to hold the line.
I love the value of teamwork PF brings, but if a frontline fighter needs to have low CON because of the 10 pt buy, the cleric is forced to be a healbot, instead of a melee cleric/summoner. Every character has to be built to function ideally with one another for a 10 pt build party to be successful. This means one player's build choice necessarily forces certain builds...
I personally feel many tables have healbots. Not because it's necessary role, but mostly because of bad tactical decisions.
My table had a fight in RotRL last week. I wasn't there, but the slayer, who's a two weapong fighting dude with shield offhand, hit around 1/3 of the time.I mean, I've seen this dude in action, he misses so much I just don't get it.
Our Oracle is only healer Oracle, with occasional summon. His most common action is probably channeling or casting CLW.
20 CHA, 14 CON, probaly 12 DEX, 10 STR. This is with a 20 pt buy. So you can see how having bad character creation and/or poor tactical decisions make a Healbot a necessity.
Our first Ninja had 17 DEX / 17 CHA, all rest were 10s.... You can imagine my face when I learnt that.
Many people focus too much on 1 Stats and ignore everything else. Others see a spell (Fireball) and think it's super cool! Unless you have system mastery or a good strategic sense, you might fail to notice that casting fireball is not really the best course of action from a tactical point. It could be from a character point, personal preference or just why no point tough.
10 pt buy? I feel to see how this makes a party teamwork more, when the whole purpose of PF is to be a team based game.
It just penalizes poor martial classes, while giving some weaknesses to SAD classes, because of lesser CON and DEX.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Witnessed a guy actually roll a 18 on 2d6 for str
Really? Wow! Rolling a seven on a d6 is hard enough. Rolling two consecutive nines? Almost inconceivable! Are you sure those weren't upside-down sixes?
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.
Disagreed. My half orc barbarian has Cha7 and Int12. He also used his traits to get himself diplomacy as a class skill and uses Int for diplomacy.
At Lvl 2 he has +7 diplomacy and +5 intimidate (being a Half Orc gives +2 intimidate). Sure, he can't bluff or feint worth a damn...but he's a straight forward Half Orc barbarian. That goes with the territory.
Even with stat dumps, traits let you fill in the gaps.