As a GM I use 20 point buy, as a player I love 15 point buy.
Last time I rolled was before I started GMing and the point buy value spread was somewhere between 32 - 47 in a 5 player group. It made monsters so non-consequential or impossible to hit it was ridiculous. Personally, I don't like the randomness of rolling as there's always someone that feels inferior to the others (even if they're not necessarily the lowest stat-wise).
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're a GM, and your player(s) insists on die-rolling, tell them straight up that if they roll low, they're stuck with that character with his stats in the order they were rolled ("What's the point of random if it's not random?"), and if it dies, they're out of your campaign for one year minimum from the date of death. Oh, and the biggest monsters always go after the guy with more than one stat above 16 at creation, because, you know, more meat on the carcass.
You will see those recalcitrant players leap into point-buy with considerably renewed enthusiasm.
I INSIST MY PLAYERS ROLL ALL STATS IN ORDER, 4D6, DROP HIGHEST, THEN RANDOMISE FOR RACE AND CLASS.
IF THEY COMPLAIN I TELL THEM THEY CAN USE ANOTHER METHOD BUT IN EXCHANGE I WILL TAKE BOTH THEIR EYES.
AT THIS POINT THEY USUALLY TRY TO LEAVE, ONLY TO DISCOVER THAT THE DOORS ARE ALREADY LOCKED.
ONLY THEN DO THEY ACCEPT THE MERITS OF MY PREFERRED METHOD.
|
Chose two main stats, two normal stats, and two sub stats.
Main and normal stats start at 10, sub stats start at 14
For your main stats roll and add 2d4.
For your Normal stats +1d6.
for your Sub stats - Subtract 1d6.
So in example Our Heroine Dharkhantia chooses as her main stats DEX and STR Her Normal stats as CON and WIS, and her Sub stats as INT and CHR
so
Str: 10 + 2d4 ⇒ 10 + (4, 1) = 15
Dex: 10 + 2d4 ⇒ 10 + (3, 1) = 14
Con: 10 + 1d6 ⇒ 10 + (6) = 16
Int: 14 - 1d6 ⇒ 14 - (4) = 10
Wis: 10 + 1d6 ⇒ 10 + (3) = 13
Chr: 14 - 1d6 ⇒ 14 - (2) = 12
Then add your racials. If for whatever reason you absolutely hate your rolls you may try a second time and keep the one you like.
As a GM I use 20 point buy, as a player I love 15 point buy.
Last time I rolled was before I started GMing and the point buy value spread was somewhere between 32 - 47 in a 5 player group. It made monsters so non-consequential or impossible to hit it was ridiculous. Personally, I don't like the randomness of rolling as there's always someone that feels inferior to the others (even if they're not necessarily the lowest stat-wise).
Yeah, I know that, last D&D5 campaign I played, 2 of us (I, a drow warlock and my Matron, a drow priestess of Eilistraee) had enjoyed high rolls, according to the DM's guidelines, then, at the last moment, the DM grafts another player, a bard, who had rolled comparatively low... that guy starts whining and acting up until the DM caves in and tells us to all rebuild our characters on the standard array... let's say I was less than happy, as that lowered my main characteristic from 18 to 16, not to mention my constitution, dexterity and intelligence which all got a lowered bonus.
I was fairly happy when that fun killer later had a major dispute with the DM and got booted out. but the harm had been done, and I never had as much fun as I might have during that campaign, especially since the DM deliberately sabotaged parts of it.
I prefer to give an array that is something like 17, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8
Or 16, 15, 13, 10, 10, 8
Force them to take one below average Stat but also do away with characters with multiple dumped hard stats.
...that guy starts whining and acting up until the DM caves in and tells us to all rebuild our characters on the standard array... let's say I was less than happy, as that lowered my main characteristic from 18 to 16, not to mention my constitution, dexterity and intelligence which all got a lowered bonus.
Yeah, that's a crappy things for a GM to do... "Oh, you're enjoying your character as they are but this other person isn't? Okay, everyone remake your character so that two of you aren't happy but this one person is."
That really sucks. That's also a great example as to why I don't like rolling. (I don't mind if I roll poorly, but whenever I've been in a group that rolled stats someone thought their character sucked simply because someone else had rolled higher stats.)
well, at least, when I roll, bad rolls are mine to own (and I often roll several character until I get an array I can live with), but for some reason, let's say I hate weak abilities, point buys never have enough points for my taste... granted, I like my main characteristic to be high, and it took d&d5 with its stat rises every 4 levels to make 16 a (barely) acceptable starting score... and I still grumble about the 8 atthe other end of the array, whatever ability it affects, it's never welcome...
and let's face it, a 25 point buy is barely enough to make a SAD character without having to dump multiple stats, it'sstill not enough if you're dumb enough to want to play a MAD character class.(and I love me a nice monk)
simple, it makes the character weak, possibly cripplingly so in the wrong circumstances, and some adventures are made to make such circumstances happen.
I myself don't mind not being the leader/most powerful/shiniest character in the group, but I hate feeling useless.
I don't get the hate for dump stats.
From a mechanical perspective, it can lend itself to minmaxed characters- characters who aren't just less than stellar at areas outside of their specialty, but who are actually outright incompetent at them.
If the dumping is done with an eye solely to optimizing class features, it can leave the character a useless paperweight in certain situations... which, sure, may give the guy who maxed out his social skills a chance to shine while Maximized Exploiter McFaceMelt twiddles his thumbs, but... I've found that characters who can't contribute for long stretches of time tend have bored players who become inattentive when they're waiting to be able to contribute a single positive action (this gets REALLY bad with genuinely MinMaxed characters).
However, dump stats aren't the exclusive province of any one method of character creation- I like rolling, for example, but unless you do freakishly well, you typically end up with one or more stats that do you no favors, and you generally stick 'em in places you aren't going to focus on.
Arrays are the only way to really control these... and that's a price I'm personally not willing to pay.
I don't get the hate for dump stats.
Tucking a lower stat somewhere it hurts the vision of the character least doesn't bother me. That's making do with what you've got the best you can.
What I detest is dumping a stat to use the value released in order to boost another stat. That's not "making do", that's "asking for it".This is why, for home games, I make my players roll. 4d6, drop lowest - roll two arrays of 6, and pick the one you prefer.
I play with a regular group of people who I trust are after more "compelling" or "interesting" than "powerful" characters, so I like "come up with a character idea, then write down whatever stats best describe that person". Alternatively, come up with a character and describe that person to someone else and they write down your stats.
I play with a regular group of people who I trust are after more "compelling" or "interesting" than "powerful" characters, so I like "come up with a character idea, then write down whatever stats best describe that person". Alternatively, come up with a character and describe that person to someone else and they write down your stats.
I could probably trust my group with this, but a lot of them like their numbers first to inform their concepts... still, not a bad call.
In the "works well for my group, but wouldn't for everybody" category -- we've been doing 4d6, drop lowest, 6 times, in order.
We're fine with somebody reordering, rerolling, or deciding to point buying if they don't like what they get, but folks are taking the first array rolled as it lays more often than not.
The reason it works for us is that half of my players don't come to the table with a burning desire to play any particular character, so having a randomized stat array to seed the decision is a welcome step--the other half come to the table happy to try any of a bunch of different concepts, and use the stats to help narrow it down.
well, one of my favorite methods is to cast 4d6 drop weakest one 36 times and to put the scores so generation into a square matrix, they you look horizontally, vertically or diagonally if you find an array you like.
When it comes to rolling stats, I've not practiced the rolling in order method for years, because I often have a type of char I want to play before I start rolling... rolling in order requires you be ready to accept the kind of character random chance drops upon you... and that can make for a very imbalanced party (like 3 fighting men [fighter, ranger, paladin, barbarian...] and no cleric or major spellcaster)... but if you're open minded and ready to play with the random array, it can be fun...
That's why my favorite random method is the one I mentioned: You can swap one of the ability scores with another one, allowing the character to at least come close to the general concept, but still having some variance (such as having a high roll in a tertiary ability score). The option to re-roll one score also helps protect against having to deal with a terrible ability score; the "re-roll all ones" also sets the worst result at 6 (2-2-2-2, drop lowest).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
For a more communal generation method, that will still probably result in some differences between characters in the party, I came up with a method based on Texas Hold'em:
1) Each player rolls two ability scores using 4d6 drop lowest
2) The GM rolls five "common" ability scores using 4d6 drop lowest
3) Each player selects six scores from the ability scores they rolled and the "common" ability scores rolled by the GM, arranged as desired
Basically, each player has seven scores to choose six from, but they aren't entirely the same seven scores. The five scores rolled by the GM keep most of the scores similar (PCs must have at least four scores from the "common" pool), but each PC will most likely still have at least one score that's different from the other PCs (since there are only five "common" scores).
The issues with rolling for stats are 1) wide disparities between ability scores, 2) wide disparities between players, and 3) flat arrays that score high in a point buy system but aren't really playable.
I made up a random stat generator (with an online roller) that avoids all three of these. It creates random scores within narrow point buy ranges, and breaks up ability scores into top, middle, and low tiers. So you get a playable array while avoiding extreme min-maxing.
It's not for everyone, but it's a good middle ground between random and point-buy.
For a more communal generation method, that will still probably result in some differences between characters in the party, I came up with a method based on Texas Hold'em:
1) Each player rolls two ability scores using 4d6 drop lowest
2) The GM rolls five "common" ability scores using 4d6 drop lowest
3) Each player selects six scores from the ability scores they rolled and the "common" ability scores rolled by the GM, arranged as desiredBasically, each player has seven scores to choose six from, but they aren't entirely the same seven scores. The five scores rolled by the GM keep most of the scores similar (PCs must have at least four scores from the "common" pool), but each PC will most likely still have at least one score that's different from the other PCs (since there are only five "common" scores).
Neat idea.
In the game I'm running, the system I had my players use was pretty simple: The sum total of your stats is 78, before racial modifiers. Max in any one stat is 18 like normal, minimum is 8. I use pretty much the same system for generating NPCs, though depending on the role of the NPC I may go with 76 or 74 points.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't get the hate for dump stats.
Most people aren't good enough at math to realize that the difference between and 8 and a 10 is essentially invisible in play, and even the difference between a 6 and a 10 barely matters if it's in a stat that the character won't end up rolling with that often.
It's extremely hard to break out of the mental lock that somehow the difference between 8 and 10 is vastly larger than the difference between 10 and 12. Because 10 is presented as "average," humans default to thinking of 10 as a "safe" value for their character to have, in event that they do need to roll against that stat, while anything lower than that represents some kind of weakness. In reality, of course, in any game where charisma checks are SO IMPORTANT for your character that you'd really rather have a 10 than an 8, it's equally important for you to go from 10 to 12. There is nothing magical about the number 10 except for the way it is presented as a baseline.
People get stuck in a mental rut of thinking that a character with Charisma score of 8 is going to auto-fail every charmisa-based check while one with a score of 10 will be more or less fine. But it's +1. +1 to a type of roll that you don't intend to make that often is almost meaningless.
Extremely low stats do represent an actual vulnerability, but for reasons that have nothing at all to do with rolls based on them. Once a character is running around with a stat of 3 or something, they become meaningfully more susceptible to being taken out by ability damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not that some people are hung up on the difference between 8 and 10 (or even 8 and 12), but rather that they are hung up on any score less than 14 being seen as "weak" (i.e., hardly different than the average commoner).
Some of this mindset is a legacy of 1st/2nd Ed AD&D, where a character pretty much needed a 15+ in an ability score to gain any bonus. However, it's mostly driven by two factors, from what I've seen:
1) Some players want their character to be "the best ever" and that means having the biggest bonuses possible and/or being superior to that average commoner even in their "dump stat(s)" and even if that is the commoner's best stat.
2) Some groups consider any character that doesn't start with an 18 (before racial modifiers) in their primary ability score and at least two other scores of 14-16 as "gimped," because of things like bonuses to various rolls, feat requirements, etc.
|
Gaming is supposed to be cooperative. If one player rolls well, and another doesn't, the DM should (though many will not) try to balance things out another way so both characters can be heroic in their own ways.
That's why I always do point buy. Let the players start out on an even keel. Otherwise it's not the DM who's being cheated, it's the player who was unlucky with one set of dice rolls which define their future.
As to how much of a point buy, that's really up to the DM and players. What sort of campaign do they want? I do 20pt buys, and find that's plenty heroic, but I can see the arguments for more, and less.
I prefer rolling, but I don't have a problem with point buy systems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Point buy only, either as player or DM. This gives everyone a fair chance and makes it easier to balance the game as a DM.I tend to use point buy in my games, but random methods have been growing on me lately. What about the rest of you guys? How do you balance the thrill of rolling for stats with the need for balanced gameplay?
And it means you can build the character you WANT to play, that you envision. I once rolled a character with such stupid high stats (in front of the GM, who said after we were done, he wanted me to buy him a lottery ticket), that I said I was just going to lower some of them, because 'prissy non-adventuring noblewoman who never did anything herself suddenly out of the manorhouse for the first time' wasn't going to have a 14 STR and CON (yes, everything I rolled was 14 or higher).
As far as min-maxing/dump stats/whatever goes, I find characters with distinct strengths and weaknesses more memorable than jack-of-all-trades-no-particular-strengths-or-weaknesses.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer pointbuy, specifically 20 point buy, since it allows for a greater degree of control over your character’s starting statistics, is less detrimental to classes who need a lot of ability scores to work (monk), and means the player can choose what compromises they make early on in the game.
I don’t like rolling and a I like 15 point buy even less. I don’t remember the last time I saw a monk who wasn’t one I played in games where either of that sort of thing went on. I’ve also seen my fair share of dead weight characters too as a result of rolling.
Point buy only, either as player or DM. This gives everyone a fair chance and makes it easier to balance the game as a DM.I tend to use point buy in my games, but random methods have been growing on me lately. What about the rest of you guys? How do you balance the thrill of rolling for stats with the need for balanced gameplay?
And it means you can build the character you WANT to play, that you envision. I once rolled a character with such stupid high stats (in front of the GM, who said after we were done, he wanted me to buy him a lottery ticket), that I said I was just going to lower some of them, because 'prissy non-adventuring noblewoman who never did anything herself suddenly out of the manorhouse for the first time' wasn't going to have a 14 STR and CON (yes, everything I rolled was 14 or higher).
As far as min-maxing/dump stats/whatever goes, I find characters with distinct strengths and weaknesses more memorable than jack-of-all-trades-no-particular-strengths-or-weaknesses.
I don't really agree with that, sure, I envision generally strong heroes who are exceptional in their main attribute, and have no serious weaknesses... but most point buys, even 25 pt, generally are not enough and force me to dump some stats, which bothers me... basically I can't dump INT because skill points, especially with low SkPt/lvl classes, i Can't dump wisdom v*because will saves, I can't dump Con because hit points and Fort saves I can't dump Dx because AC and will saves.... and even strength or charisma depend on character concept... it's not because I'm playing a wizard who despises physical exertion or a guy who's not a born diplomat or seducer that I want to dump the stat and make them subaverage.
Forgot to mention:
A method I have used in the past when rolling is to have the group as a whole roll several arrays, then allow each player to select which array they like (dupes allowed). Most of the time there was an obvious winner that everybody used--this method allowed score assignment as well--but occasionally a player would take an array with a lot of decent scores over an array with one or two excellent scores and one or two terrible ones. I also informed the group that major NPCs would use the same arrays. : )
That's the method I use and the other GM has moved to it as well.
It has two advantages I like.
No one is disadvantaged through bad dice rolling.You don't get cookie cutter characters because there are optimal point buys for various character types.
For reference, I'm the other GM. Obviously I'm a supporter of this method.
I don’t like rolling and a I like 15 point buy even less.
Why the dislike for 15 point buy? Does it feel like it invalidates too many builds?
even a 25 pt b uy invalidates too many of my builds, 15 is literally a one trick pony, you have to dump all other 5 stats
even a 25 pt buy invalidates too many of my builds, 15 is literally a one trick pony, you have to dump all other 5 stats
No; you just don't have a super-apex stat; you have to settle for a merely awesome one.
20pt buy:
str+ 17 (racial bump)
dex: 14
con: 14
int: 12
wis: 14
cha: 7
...a typical PFS martial chassis using the 15,14,14,14,12,7 array. This PC will have a 20 in his prime attribute at 4th with a level bump and a belt.
20pt buy, second example
str: 7
dex+ 19 (racial bump)
con: 14
int: 12
wis: 12
cha: 12
...This was a TWF samurai with levels of urban barbarian. He was +14 to hit vs infantry at 4th level with a masterwork weapon while mounted.
Same build as above, 15pt-buy:
str: 7
dex+ 17 (racial bump)
con: 14
int: 13 (now kosher for Combat Expertise if needed, else put in wis)
wis: 12
cha: 12
...The 13pt cost starting 17 is dropped to a 7pt cost starting 15, with the spare point shunted to a 12 elsewhere (in this case INT).
This is still a very powerful character who is only -1 to attack behind the 20pt character. By the time he's 10th-level, he's going to hit most things with his primary by rolling a "2". Why? Because 15pt-buy does not preclude you from multiclassing and grabbing every feat and bonus-enhancing gismo under the sun, finances permitting. (I'm more worried about a game being cash-poor than stat-poor...provided all the characters are on an even keel, of course.)
Alternatively, you go with the first build (15,14,14,14,12,7 array) and drop one 14 to 10, saving five points. (Shifting the 12 to wisdom and having a 10 in int would tweaks the martial build for 15pt-buy, else a 10 in dex for a heavy-armor dude. Either eliminates the "two odd starting stats" thing that is an annoyance if you don't need a 13 somewhere.)
I've run 15, 20, and 25 point buy for different modules/adventure paths.
15: I found it to be a little too low for much creativity in the characters (they were very much stereotypes of their classes), MAD classes were much harder to build but didn't seem as under-powered compared to SAD classes as I expected. (Almost as if you don't need to start with 16+ in each of your main stats). Glad I did this for a short module but I think too many people would feel weak purely because "it's only 15 points".
20: Definitely preferred as it allows people to put some points into stats that don't matter for their class abilities. This will likely be my go-to point buy going forward.
25: I added the simple Advanced template to every fight and the players still found most of them too easy. SAD classes were disgusting compared to MAD classes but that may have been player choices during creation. I would consider doing this again for a combat heavy campaign but probably not. It will depend on how well my current 20 point buy campaign turns out. (As I said, players think the're weak with 15, I don't know how balanced fights would be adding the advanced template yet, but doing so for 25 point buy is easy.)
I hate point buy because it greatly rewards dumping stats. I roll 4d6 drop lowest but I wish we would use a system I invented where you roll 1d20 and 1d6. If the d20 is 15 or higher you subtract the d6 otherwise you add it.
I hate point buy because it greatly rewards dumping stats. I roll 4d6 drop lowest but I wish we would use a system I invented where you roll 1d20 and 1d6. If the d20 is 15 or higher you subtract the d6 otherwise you add it.
The most bonus-point-dense 20pt array is 14,14,13,13,12,12. --Stack this into a dwarf fighter, and it's just nuts.
Cap'n Fireplug.
I hate point buy because it greatly rewards dumping stats. I roll 4d6 drop lowest but I wish we would use a system I invented where you roll 1d20 and 1d6. If the d20 is 15 or higher you subtract the d6 otherwise you add it.
Do you allow 19s and 2s?
My preferred method these days: Take a deck of cards and remove 4 through 9 in two suits. Shuffle the removed cards. Draw two cards and add their values. Repeat 5 more times. Assign the values to stats as you like.
It's got the randomness of dice with the balance of point buy.
Point Buy assumes symmetrical game design, which 3.x and PF1 do not have, thus the premise that it balances the characters/classes/players is 100% unsubstantiated mathematically.
Because certain classes and feats have specific thresholds to gain access ([ability score] 13; [ability score] must be at least 10+ spell level; Fighter's Armor Training requiring DEX to matter; etc.) then the draw of point-buy being that you can prioritize your stats limits the scope of character design by virtue of its existence. Options are cut off from you if you want to invest into being able to actually play your class, etc. This of course, as I must reiterate in an ostentatious enough manner to not be glanced over,
.
Given this realization, any attempts at using some point buy method became increasingly abhorrent to our table because it meant shrinking the box of possibilities, by the mechanics of the game.
You either have to sacrifice numerical competence to access and use your class abilities, or you have to forsake concepts that don't mesh with your class mechanically.
Later classes in the game were designed around this paradigm, as you'll see the Brawler, Swashbuckler, and Slayer (which ultimately also added to ranger, though not at the rangers inception) all have ways of bypassing certain feat prerequisites in their core class features that come on at early levels.
Some fixes to this problem came out, Dirty Fighting, Combat Stamina, etc. But their existence is a response to point buy being a disease that had symptoms to treat. It's a poison on the game design space of this edition, not because it's a bad idea in a vacuum, but because it was sloppily grafted onto a pre-existing mathematical architecture that it was never designed for.
Thus, point-buy is the devil.
That is not to say it can't work, the easiest fix is to either snuff all ability prerequisites for everything (in which case, why have them?) or we redesign the classes to accommodate for it.
Not wanting to re-invent the wheel, PF1 was stagnant in threads like this, it is my hope that the new game fixes this problem with point buy not being the assumption in the game's design but being the assumption in practice.
You could even get a 20 that way (14+6). Also, point-buy doesn't *greatly* reward dumping stats, because stat increases cost more the higher the stat starts.I hate point buy because it greatly rewards dumping stats. I roll 4d6 drop lowest but I wish we would use a system I invented where you roll 1d20 and 1d6. If the d20 is 15 or higher you subtract the d6 otherwise you add it.Do you allow 19s and 2s?
I do allow 20s, 19s, and 2s. Though the chance of a 20 or 2 is 1/120 and a 19 is 1/40.
I honestly don't know what that has to do with dumping stats. You get 4 (I think it might be 3) for dumping a stat to 7. This let's you raise other stats to better abilities. In the last 10 characters I've made with 4d6 drop lowest my lowest pre racial stat was a 9. I don't even reroll ones or roll an extra time and pick 6 of the 7. Also, someone said that 14,14,13,13,12,12 was the best but I would consider that terrible since you don't have any high stats.
Because rolling a sub-par array absolutely means there is no forsaking of concepts that don't mesh.
Because the sacrifice of numerical competence is out of your hands.
Because rolling a sub-par array absolutely means there is no forsaking of concepts that don't mesh.
Because the sacrifice of numerical competence is out of your hands.
I'm not sure if I feel better knowing sacrificing numerical competence is better off being something I had conscious control over and had to do anyway because of the lack of synergistic design, or if I like it better if the dice landed that way and I'm just stuck dealing with it.
As a DM, I like letting players have two different arrays, and let them trade if different arrays match their concepts better.
If stats don't meet certain thresholds (total >72) then we nix them and re-roll.