Why should you never start with an ability score of 17 at level one? Or can you?


Advice


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

A guy on social media just doesn't understand, or maybe I don't. Please either help him understand my meaning, or me understand his.

Ravingdork wrote:
A 17? That was a mistake.
Tripp wrote:
No, every character should have an odd stat at creation.
Ravingdork wrote:
But NEVER a 17 at level 1. That's like shooting yourself in the foot. You can put a 16 in a stat, then up it to 18 at level 5. If you put a 17 in a stat, you have the same modifier as a 16, but can still only up it to 18 at level 5. You literally wasted one point of your point buy. It's like the one rule of Starfinder ability score generation: NEVER TAKE A 17.
Tripp wrote:
Why not a 17 at level 1? It makes no mechanical difference from making something else an 11 and leaving that stat as a 16.
Ravingdork wrote:
It wastes a point of your point buy pool. That's why you should never take a 17 at level one.
Tripp wrote:
It doesn’t waste a point of your point buy pool. Either way, the sum total of all your stats will be 73. If you put the 17 to an 18, then now your 14 somewhere else has to be a 13. Or your 12 is now an 11.
Tripp wrote:
Or maybe that hard fought 10 is back to 9.
Ravingdork wrote:
I'm not talking about making your 17 an 18 at level 1. I'm talking about making it an 18 at level 5. You could have started with a 16, rather than a 17 at level 1, put your 1 point somewhere else, then at level 5, increase that 16 to an 18 with your level up bonus. There is literally no reason to ever start with a 17 under the current system (except for maybe having a slightly better encumbrance limit with strength, but only until 5th-level when you lose it).
Tripp wrote:
And I’m telling you it makes no difference either way. Instead of having the 17, you could make a 12 into a 13. Then at 5th you can make the 13 into 15. Which is the same as making the 12 into 14. So, choosing to go with a 12 and a 17 does the same thing as having a 13 and a 16.
Ravingdork wrote:
If you're not ever going to increase the 17, why raise it so high in the first place? And if you are going to raise it, why didn't you start with a 16 or an 18?

...and so on...


Why shouldn't you? You start with a 17, raise it to 18 at level 5.

Sure, you've got the same modifier from 1-4, but you've got an extra +1 from 5-9, compared to starting with a 16.


Depends whether the odd number somewhere else lets you qualify for a feat you want, or lets you carry more gear. If not, then it probably doesn't matter.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Why shouldn't you? You start with a 17, raise it to 18 at level 5.

Doesn't that effectively waste one point of your point buy allotment? You could have started with a 16 and raised it to an 18 at five, and put your one point elsewhere.

Starting with a 17 is kind of like saying "I'll play with 9-point-buy instead of 10." What am I missing?


Where would you end up putting that point you save?

Taking into account the theme, this really works out to be an 11 point buy. Since that extra point really won't count for boosting stat bonuses, it either is used for Mercenaries to get more carrying capacity, feat prerequisites, or just flavor.

I made a Shirren Mystic Empath, and I wanted him to be really sociable. Maybe just a bit awkward but makes it up with understanding and genuine kindness. I had one point left over that wouldn't really make a difference anywhere, so I just boosted his Charisma from 8 to 9. Functionally no difference, but I'm happier with that.

I've seen a good house-rule fix where point buy actually is 11 points, and then the theme pretty much makes it 12.


I would agree that a 17 is not going to gain you much , but if you were going to raise the stat to 16 with your point buy and that background point then raises it to 17 you have not lost much. Unless you needed that 1 extra point to qualify for a feat or carry all your gear it has not lost you anything.
You are stuck with an odd number somewhere after all


Ravingdork wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Why shouldn't you? You start with a 17, raise it to 18 at level 5.

Doesn't that effectively waste one point of your point buy allotment? You could have started with a 16 and raised it to an 18 at five, and put your one point elsewhere.

Starting with a 17 is kind of like saying "I'll play with 9-point-buy instead of 10." What am I missing?

Never mind. You're right.

I'd mixed up how stat advancement worked in Starfinder.


Ravingdork, you are correct. It’s not optimal to take a stat to 17 at level 1.

Now if you had some character concept wanting to max out two stats only, it might make sense if your second highest is 17, and is strength to help out a smidge with encumbrance.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Joshua James Jordan wrote:

Ravingdork, you are correct. It’s not optimal to take a stat to 17 at level 1.

Now if you had some character concept wanting to max out two stats only, it might make sense if your second highest is 17, and is strength to help out a smidge with encumbrance.

Yeah, that's about what I gathered as well.


As has been noted, a starting 17 is suboptimal. However, the only significant value you get out of the necessary odd number at character generation is meeting feat prerequisites. If you don't care about whatever feats you might qualify for depending on where your final point goes, it doesn't really matter where that point goes. There's not really a mechanical reason to put that effectively unnecessary 1 on 16 to get a 17, but there's not really a compelling reason to put it anywhere else either. Unless you're worried about exactly where your upper limit for equipment bulk is. It's conceivable that will be relevant, but it's marginal.

Inefficient, suboptimal, and probably not worth worrying most of the time.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Hithesius wrote:
As has been noted, a starting 17 is suboptimal. However, the only significant value you get out of the necessary odd number at character generation is meeting feat prerequisites.

What feats require a 17 ability score and can be taken at 1st level?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The point is more that unless you need a 13/15 to meet a prereq it doesn't make much of a material difference.


dragonhunterq wrote:
The point is more that unless you need a 13/15 to meet a prereq it doesn't make much of a material difference.

Exactly this. Unless aiming for a specific Feat with an odd score requirement, it doesn't matter.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Arguably, if you make a stat (you intend to increase) an 11, 13, or 15 you are creating the exact same problem down the line at 20th, 15th, or 10th level because at some point it will be a 17. So really the only ways to permanently avoid the issue are either a)stop playing before the stat boost where it would go from 17 to 18, b) put your extra point in a stat you never intend to raise, or c)use it to raise a racial penalty ability score from 8 to 9.


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

By standard Starfinder rules, you generally have to have at least one odd stat -- so you should place that stat so that you qualify for a feat earlier if possible, or perhaps put it into strength otherwise for a little bit of extra carrying capacity. The extra stat point is wasted as soon as you raise the stat in question to 18, but the key is to get some benefit from the odd point before you do that.


I can't think of a situation where your odd floater point really matters. What builds are crucial to have that starting 13 in?

In all character builds I've considered, there are only two stat arrays I've considered; 14, 14, 12 with a race that has Two +2 modifiers or 16, 14 on a race with a single +2. That gets a starting 16 in the class stat and attack stat, possibly a 12 in a tertiary stat. At that point, I don't even consider the stat boost from theme. What plans would it really affect?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The real reason to not start with a 17 in an ability score? The two feats Connection Inkling and Technomantic Dabbler.

Starting with just an 11 in either Int or Wis, plus the ability increases at 5th and 10th level (since you pick four ability scores to increase), qualifies you for one of these feats without any other investment. This is on top of the normal benefits for raising those two ability scores (increased skill ranks or Will saves).

Pretty much any character can find the ability to cast two 0-level spells at will (such as mending, stabilize, psychokinetic hand, telepathic message, or transfer charge) and a 1st-level spell (such as identify, magic missile, mind link, supercharge weapon, or wisp ally) once per day for every 3 character levels useful, even at higher levels. A mystic or a technomancer can find it useful to pick up some of the spells from the other discipline. Non-casters may even find it useful to pick up both feats, although it's easier for some (like mechanics, who may be able to take Technomantic Dabbler at 1st level) than for others.


Dragonchess Player wrote:
feats, although it's easier for some (like mechanics, who may be able to take Technomantic Dabbler at 1st level) than for others.

...how can a mechanic do that? Isn't there a level 5 req on that?


They are useful feats but not something I'd consider mandatory for any builds... and you still don't qualify until level 10, meaning you pick up the feat at level 11, meaning it's super late/end game stuff and that is more of a bonus round if it happens than something to really plan and prepare for from level 1.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Zwordsman wrote:
Dragonchess Player wrote:
feats, although it's easier for some (like mechanics, who may be able to take Technomantic Dabbler at 1st level) than for others.
...how can a mechanic do that? Isn't there a level 5 req on that?

I didn't double check my wording. "Qualify for" at 1st level (at least the ability score requirement).


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Torbyne wrote:
They are useful feats but not something I'd consider mandatory for any builds... and you still don't qualify until level 10, meaning you pick up the feat at level 11, meaning it's super late/end game stuff and that is more of a bonus round if it happens than something to really plan and prepare for from level 1.

By the time you reach 11th level, it's not like there are a ton of "good" feats that probably haven't been already taken at 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, and 9th. Also, the example was to show that even with no additional investment beyond the 1 point at 1st level and one of the four increases at both 5th and 10th level, there is a tangible benefit. Starting with a 13 instead of a 12 in Int or Wis allows selection of Connection Inkling or Technomantic Dabbler at 5th level (with one of the four ability score increases).


Yeah, both those feats can provide you with a ton of utility (at least on paper) at higher levels. Most of my builds so far have included one or the other at 5, 7, 9, or 11. Psychokinetic Hand at will alone is probably worth it in my group with the way we typically end up doing traps and cursed items.


The wis version, with the mystic spell list. is the one I'd be pretty happy to incidentally gain access to on my Mechanic. The mystic heal is a great little addendum to the Medicine skill and putting points into Wis is plenty good idea.

and the TK hand thing? Is great for stealthfully placing explosives in places. Or stealthfully placing "trapped" weapons.


Yep, if you're not planning to grab Spellbane, there's definitely very little reason not to take one of the minor spellcasting feat. The amount of utility you get out of that one feat slot is impressive.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Valfen wrote:
Yep, if you're not planning to grab Spellbane, there's definitely very little reason not to take one of the minor spellcasting feat. The amount of utility you get out of that one feat slot is impressive.

Really? It doesn't strike me as being any better than most any other feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's the progression of every legal starting stat, as you advance them:

Placeholder
Placeholder
Placeholder
Placeholder

8, 10, 12, 14, 16
9, 11, 13, 15, 17
10, 12, 14, 16, 18
11, 13, 15, 17, 18
12, 14, 16, 18, 19
13, 15, 17, 18, 19
14, 16, 18, 19, 20
15, 17, 18, 19, 20
16, 18, 19, 20, 21
17, 18, 19, 20, 21
18, 19, 20, 21, 22

As you can see, starting at 17 is garbage compared to starting at 16 - there is never any benefit, ever. 17 is the only starting row above with this problem, where it is identical to starting at a point less at every advancement opportunity. Any build you can come up with with 17 in a stat would be better with 16 in that stat and the same point somewhere else, full stop, unless you somehow came up with a way to need the extra carrying capacity versus 16 strength, but never intended to advance strength at all (as carrying capacity is easily solved other ways).


quindraco wrote:

Here's the progression of every legal starting stat, as you advance them:

Placeholder
Placeholder
Placeholder
Placeholder

8, 10, 12, 14, 16
9, 11, 13, 15, 17
10, 12, 14, 16, 18
11, 13, 15, 17, 18
12, 14, 16, 18, 19
13, 15, 17, 18, 19
14, 16, 18, 19, 20
15, 17, 18, 19, 20
16, 18, 19, 20, 21
17, 18, 19, 20, 21
18, 19, 20, 21, 22

As you can see, starting at 17 is garbage compared to starting at 16 - there is never any benefit, ever. 17 is the only starting row above with this problem, where it is identical to starting at a point less at every advancement opportunity. Any build you can come up with with 17 in a stat would be better with 16 in that stat and the same point somewhere else, full stop, unless you somehow came up with a way to need the extra carrying capacity versus 16 strength, but never intended to advance strength at all (as carrying capacity is easily solved other ways).

Better in the strictly technical sense that you will have a higher number somewhere, but that higher number will be odd and thus have no effect, unless it lets you qualify for a feat or some other ability.

Note that starting at 15 (or essentially any odd number) really has the same problem. At 15 you go to 17 at your first advancement and from then on have the same problems as if you'd started at 17.

Look at the table in terms of bonuses rather than numbers:

12 -> +1,+2,+3,+4,+4
13 -> +1,+2,+3,+4,+4
14 -> +2,+3,+4,+4,+5
15 -> +2,+3,+4,+4,+5
16 -> +3,+4,+4,+5,+5
17 -> +3,+4,+4,+5,+5
18 -> +4,+4,+5,+5,+6

You've got one odd stat and you have to put it somewhere. If you're not putting it somewhere that it will qualify you for feat (or something) earlier, then it will have no mechanical effect - even if you leave it in a low stat or one you're not going to raise, so that it stays on your character sheet.


thejeff wrote:
Better in the strictly technical sense that you will have a higher number somewhere, but that higher number will be odd and thus have no effect, unless it lets you qualify for a feat or some other ability.

Right, but that's not germane to OP's question, because maybe you are going for a feat. OP was asking why 17 specifically was the worst starting point, and it's clearly worse than 15, 13, 11, or 9. Obviously builds exist where the odd stat has no bearing at all, but if it has a way to matter, it shouldn't be 17.


So it comes down to, "not a mortal sin but it could lock you out of some feats around level 10 if you start with a 17 in a primary stat instead of an 11 in a tertiary stat." ?


That and if nothing else looks interesting put it into strength for a slight increase in carry capacity.


Putting a stray point into strength (for an 11) and then being able to get heavy armor proficiency at 5th level also works. But yes, 17 looks entirely pointless.


avr wrote:
Putting a stray point into strength (for an 11) and then being able to get heavy armor proficiency at 5th level also works. But yes, 17 looks entirely pointless.

While technically possible, I can't see a path where you'd go light armor for 5 levels and then switch, if your starting strength isn't enough to qualify than you probably have higher Dex and can get about the same AC as heavy anyways.


This is exactly why I told the PCs in my campaign that their theme would be +2 to the relevant stat instead of +1. House rule, I know, but inefficiency bugs me.


My reasoning for putting that odd point into a low stat instead of a 17 is there are creatures that cause stat damage. That one point in a stat you're planning on not ever raising can keep you on your feet longer if you do face a creature that causes that stat damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
Valfen wrote:
Yep, if you're not planning to grab Spellbane, there's definitely very little reason not to take one of the minor spellcasting feat. The amount of utility you get out of that one feat slot is impressive.
Really? It doesn't strike me as being any better than most any other feat.

For a combatant, Connection Inkling with wisp ally is a damn efficient way to gain a +2 AC vs. one attack per round or a +2 on one attack roll per round against against one opponent. It lasts 1 round per level and can be switched to a different target with a move action, as well. And getting 1 use per 3 levels makes it even better.

Then there's the two at will 0-level spell choices for utility.


I've only seen it matter for

1) meeting feat pre reqs

2) someone with the mercenary theme needs an odd strength score to use their 6th level ability

3) save yourself 10? credits getting a regular backpack instead of an industrial one.


Torbyne wrote:
avr wrote:
Putting a stray point into strength (for an 11) and then being able to get heavy armor proficiency at 5th level also works. But yes, 17 looks entirely pointless.
While technically possible, I can't see a path where you'd go light armor for 5 levels and then switch, if your starting strength isn't enough to qualify than you probably have higher Dex and can get about the same AC as heavy anyways.

For 4 levels not 5, and if you haven't seen someone build with a plan which comes together at 5th level I am surprised.

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Advice / Why should you never start with an ability score of 17 at level one? Or can you? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.