We use 33 points for point buy. However, you don't get any points for scores lower than 10. This is the same as a 25 point buy with two stats at 7, so it helps balance the SAD characters with the MAD characters.
If a player wants to take a stat lower than 10, they still can if it fits with their concept. No one has yet.
Except your not juust stuck dealing with anything if you re-roll sub par arrays - there is no sacrifice at all if you are doing that.
With point buy the sacrifice - the decision making - is real.
And I really don't get the people that are quite happy rocking the 6 that they rolled, but point buying down-wards is somehow eeevil. The practical result is exactly the same.
With point buy the sacrifice - the decision making - is real.
And if you enjoy balancing within clearly defined parameters, good for you!
I find it dreary in the extreme- especially since it leads to a genuine optimal array for a given point value for any given character class.
How fortunate, then, that we're each free to use the method we prefer.
And I really don't get the people that are quite happy rocking the 6 that they rolled, but point buying down-wards is somehow eeevil. The practical result is exactly the same.
The distinction (which is pretty facile, but, you know, it's the internet) is that the choice to take a 6 expressly to bump another attribute is what rubs people wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find it dreary in the extreme- especially since it leads to a genuine optimal array for a given point value for any given character class.
And that I can accept. It's certainly more valid than some reasons I've heard.
What amuses me is when you get people espousing the benefits of rolling for stats then performing all sorts of (sometimes quite complex) contortions to mitigate the negative effects - at that point I think you just have to be honest with yourself and accept your just shy of point buying anyway. Seeing people re-rolling stats or characters with lacklustre arrays is one of the reasons I abandoned rolling (It had absolutely nothing to do with my firm - and maybe a little irrational - belief that the RNGods hate me...)
I will always choose point buy where possible - the benefits vastly outweigh the negatives (of which there are undoubtedly some) for me. It is neither the answer for everyone, nor is it some satanic force for evil.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"How do you balance the thrill of rolling with the need for balance?"
Screw balance. I tell all my players to roll for their stats. I don't allow any other method at my table. Balance is not something I have ever been worried about maintaining in my games. I like randomness in ability scores and big differences in power levels between players because it creates more interesting characters and party dynamics. I once rolled up a character who had two 18's and every other stat was a nine or below. He ended up being a charming genius of a wizard who was sickly, weak, and clumsy, but still kept up with the rest of the party. Anytime I hear someone yapping about "balance balance balance" what I actually hear them saying is "I like to play my games on Easy Mode and will whine at you until your ears bleed if my character dies." To me, randomness is a good thing and 'balance' results in a dull, uninteresting gaming experience.
Except your not juust stuck dealing with anything if you re-roll sub par arrays - there is no sacrifice at all if you are doing that.
With point buy the sacrifice - the decision making - is real.
And I really don't get the people that are quite happy rocking the 6 that they rolled, but point buying down-wards is somehow eeevil. The practical result is exactly the same.
If you roll a 6 you don't gain anything (I would like to point out that it is more likely to roll an 18). In point buy you are stronger mechanically if you dump a stat to 7. It isn't a sacrifice for Fight McSwordy to dump Cha down to 7 so he can have 18 Str and 16 Con. It would be to dump Con for Dex but what fighter would do that? Answer: Only the extreme roleplayer's. So about 0.1% actually sacrifice a meaningful stat for their class.
Rolling is just more fun. It's the same reason I roll for attacks and saves. You could say that rolling for saves is inherently unbalanced, "What if I roll a 2 and Billy rolls a 19!" The game is based in dice and fun, not balance (though balance is important, just not the most important thing). The game will never be balanced between optimizers and non-optimizers, between people who spend hours making builds and people that don't, so why does this have to be balanced?
I've personally seen a 3 Str character played. The player, who has only been playing for about 3-4 months and is a kid, played the character very well. If you watched him play you would have no idea he had 3 Str. He didn't complain that it wasn't balanced because he was having fun and cooperating with the rest of the party. He helped in combat with sneak attack and dexterity and out of it with illusion spells. Sure, he wasn't as good as the other characters, but it was barely noticeable and we all had fun.
I find it dreary in the extreme- especially since it leads to a genuine optimal array for a given point value for any given character class.
And that I can accept. It's certainly more valid than some reasons I've heard.
What amuses me is when you get people espousing the benefits of rolling for stats then performing all sorts of (sometimes quite complex) contortions to mitigate the negative effects - at that point I think you just have to be honest with yourself and accept your just shy of point buying anyway. Seeing people re-rolling stats or characters with lacklustre arrays is one of the reasons I abandoned rolling (It had absolutely nothing to do with my firm - and maybe a little irrational - belief that the RNGods hate me...)
I will always choose point buy where possible - the benefits vastly outweigh the negatives (of which there are undoubtedly some) for me. It is neither the answer for everyone, nor is it some satanic force for evil.
Honestly, I thought the sameness of point buy was just a given negative of it. I do totally recognize this and I hate it too.
If you roll a 6 you don't gain anything (I would like to point out that it is more likely to roll an 18). In point buy you are stronger mechanically if you dump a stat to 7. It isn't a sacrifice for Fight McSwordy to dump Cha down to 7 so he can have 18 Str and 16 Con. It would be to dump Con for Dex but what fighter would do that? Answer: Only the extreme roleplayer's. So about 0.1% actually sacrifice a meaningful stat for their class.
And how many would put that 6 they rolled in con rather than charisma when creating a fighter? about 0.1% I imagine. If you roll a 6 and an 18 I'm pretty sure that they will put them in the same place as the guy buying stats will if given the choice. IME rolling really only affects secondary stats, not primary or tertiary (unless you rolled really well or really badly).
This argument really doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny.
Rolling is just more fun.
This is a legitimate reason.
It's the same reason I roll for attacks and saves. You could say that rolling for saves is inherently unbalanced, "What if I roll a 2 and Billy rolls a 19!"
Not the same situation at all. Creating a character is not a conflict situation - there is no opposition, there is just a vision of what you want your character to be - some methods achieve that better than others, different methods work better depending on what you want to achieve.
The game is based in dice and fun, not balance (though balance is important, just not the most important thing). The game will never be balanced between optimizers and non-optimizers, between people who spend hours making builds and people that don't, so why does this have to be balanced?
fair point, I don't think that point buy solves every problem.
I've personally seen a 3 Str character played. The player, who has only been playing for about 3-4 months and is a kid, played the character very well. If you watched him play you would have no idea he had 3 Str. He didn't complain that it wasn't balanced because he was having fun and cooperating with the rest of the party. He helped in combat with sneak attack and dexterity and out of it with illusion spells. Sure, he wasn't as good as the other characters, but it was barely noticeable and we all had fun.
more power to him. I have played in a similar, albeit not as extreme, position. I didn't find it fun. Needing a nat 20 to AC 10, only meaningful action being to aid another, lacking the skills to achieve much outside of combat - it was distinctly unfun - everyone enjoyed my reluctant dwarf adventurer who wanted to be anywhere but right in the thick of trouble - except me.
Except your not juust stuck dealing with anything if you re-roll sub par arrays - there is no sacrifice at all if you are doing that.
With point buy the sacrifice - the decision making - is real.
And I really don't get the people that are quite happy rocking the 6 that they rolled, but point buying down-wards is somehow eeevil. The practical result is exactly the same.
The internet gobbled up my response, dammit!
Again, the problem with point buy is that the game was not designed around it so they had to start writing in ways to accommodate for it in later classes and feats.
Point buy only works if the classes have stat prerequisites that are balanced around each other, they are not. To assume that point buy is balanced shows a clear lack of understanding of the game's mathematical engine.
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
That's one example, of thousands. I prefer rolling and closing the gap so secondary and tertiary stats have a chance of hitting that sweet spot of around 13. It really doesn't hurt anyone if the caster/whoever has something other than a 7 or 8 in their dump stat, because they aren't really going to use it unless it's flavorful. I've never understood why we're so afraid of powerful characters when the actual math of what they're gonna be doing as far as the CR system is concerned really doesn't care about the classes that can afford dump stats anyway. All point buy does is reinforce attribute dependency on everyone.
This may not matter in PF2 though, since the game's engine is being designed around point buy from what I have read.
If you roll a 6 you don't gain anything (I would like to point out that it is more likely to roll an 18). In point buy you are stronger mechanically if you dump a stat to 7. It isn't a sacrifice for Fight McSwordy to dump Cha down to 7 so he can have 18 Str and 16 Con. It would be to dump Con for Dex but what fighter would do that? Answer: Only the extreme roleplayer's. So about 0.1% actually sacrifice a meaningful stat for their class.
And how many would put that 6 they rolled in con rather than charisma when creating a fighter? about 0.1% I imagine. If you roll a 6 and an 18 I'm pretty sure that they will put them in the same place as the guy buying stats will if given the choice. IME rolling really only affects secondary stats, not primary or tertiary (unless you rolled really well or really badly).This argument really doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny.
Quote:
Rolling is just more fun.
This is a legitimate reason.Quote:
It's the same reason I roll for attacks and saves. You could say that rolling for saves is inherently unbalanced, "What if I roll a 2 and Billy rolls a 19!"
Not the same situation at all. Creating a character is not a conflict situation - there is no opposition, there is just a vision of what you want your character to be - some methods achieve that better than others, different methods work better depending on what you want to achieve.Quote:
The game is based in dice and fun, not balance (though balance is important, just not the most important thing). The game will never be balanced between optimizers and non-optimizers, between people who spend hours making builds and people that don't, so why does this have to be balanced?
fair point, I don't think that point buy solves every problem.Quote:
I've personally seen a 3 Str character played. The player, who has only been playing for about 3-4 months and is a kid, played the character very well. If you watched him play you would have no idea he had 3 Str. He didn't complain that it wasn't balanced because he was having fun and cooperating with the rest of the party. He helped in combat with sneak attack and dexterity and out of it with illusion spells. Sure, he wasn't as good as the other characters, but it was barely noticeable and we all had fun.
more power to him. I have played in a similar, albeit not as extreme, position. I didn't find it fun. Needing a nat 20 to AC 10, only meaningful action being to aid another, lacking the skills to achieve much outside of combat - it was distinctly unfun - everyone enjoyed my reluctant dwarf adventurer who wanted to be anywhere but right in the thick of trouble - except me
So, before I start I want to say two things. 1) This is the most fun I've had today so thanks for debating with me. 2) I tried to do the thing where I quote you in a bunch of little bubbles but I failed at it like 8 times so I'm just doing this as one big bubble.
I disagree with your first point (counterpoint? counter-terrorist?) because the fighter who rolled isn't gaining anything by putting a 6 in charisma. It is a small bad thing about his character. He doesn't get something great about his character by taking this small bad thing, though he might get one coincidentally.
Sidenote, and this is a real question, is IME a thing and what does it mean? I think you might have meant IMO but I'm not sure.
Continuing here, that is kind of the point. It can affect my fighter's Int and Wis. Maybe he has 13 Wis and 14 Int. You wouldn't see that in the sameness of point buy. Also, it can totally affect tertiary stats, giving you a mechanically optimal (people don't like it when I say viable) fighter with 12 Cha.
Next, I can't tell if your being sarcastic about the rolling is more fun thing, but I really do think it is.
The false-equivelency you bring up does make sense but I do think that it is still die rolling which is inherently random, which makes it unfair. I don't really get how some systems are better for some characters. Rolling makes much more interesting characters IMO as your stats aren't decided by what is optimal or correct. Sure, I put Wizzy the Wizard's 17 into Int and his 16 into Wis, but now my 14,14,12, and 9 can make him different than other wizards. He can have 14 Dex, 14 Con, 12 Str, and 9 Cha and be totally optimal for my roll, and in general. Wizzy the Wizard will have 18 Int, 16 Wis, 13 Dex, 7 Str, 12 Con, and 8 Cha (or something like that, I didn't actually do the points) if he is done via point buy.
Wow, I just realized how weird that came out. Also, autocorrect made counter-point into counter-terrorist. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with your first point (counterpoint? counter-terrorist?) because the fighter who rolled isn't gaining anything by putting a 6 in charisma. It is a small bad thing about his character. He doesn't get something great about his character by taking this small bad thing, though he might get one coincidentally.
This is an important point on the difference between dumping a stat to 6 and rolling a 6 - rolled stats are all independent. I don't get a cookie for rolling a stat of 6 like I would for dumping it to 6 with point buy. None of my other rolled stats are affected by having a bad (or good) roll.
I am OK with point buy in other RPGs, particularly superhero RPGs, in no small part because there are literally hundreds of things that the points can be spent on (Champions has at least 14 stats alone plus hundreds of options in skills, perks, and powers) - I'm not expressly dumping Intelligence to get more Strength. A high strength will tie up points that could be spent elsewhere, but they would be spent in far more places and variations than a small pool of 6 stats.
I also like to roll stats in D&D and PF because I like to discover my character during the generation process. I've changed plans more than once because of the rolls I've gotten.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IME=in my experience.
I was being genuine - same as I was with Cole Deschain. Just because I don't find something fun doesn't take anything away from your enjoyment of that thing.
A lot of people seem to miss that simple fact and on both sides can come across a little (for want of a better way of putting this, sorry for my lack of eloquence it's near 3am and the insomnia is wearing off) preachy/holier than thou when putting forward the merits of their preferred system. I am happy both are available - even if one of them I wouldn't touch with the proverbial 11' pole.
Your example kind of proves my point, whatever you roll you are going to look very similar to the guy point buying - identical actually if the rolls turn out just so - the only difference is the luck of the rolls versus the value of the point buy.
I disagree with your first point (counterpoint? counter-terrorist?) because the fighter who rolled isn't gaining anything by putting a 6 in charisma. It is a small bad thing about his character. He doesn't get something great about his character by taking this small bad thing, though he might get one coincidentally.I also like to roll stats in D&D and PF because I like to discover my character during the generation process. I've changed plans more than once because of the rolls I've gotten.
Yes, this. 100% this. If I have an extra 13 I can put in Int as a hunter or it turns out my Wis is just as high as my Int as a wizard that matters. That changes my character. The wizard is now a wise old man, or maybe an eagle eyed youth, or he could be a former student of the esteemed General Kylil who left to pursue magic. All this comes from high Wis.
One time I created a character by rolling randomly for race and ability scores (3d6 down the line) I ended up making an elven warpriest and it was a challenge to fit everything in but the character turned out great and completely viable. It was a lot of fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree with your first point (counterpoint? counter-terrorist?) because the fighter who rolled isn't gaining anything by putting a 6 in charisma. It is a small bad thing about his character. He doesn't get something great about his character by taking this small bad thing, though he might get one coincidentally.This is an important point on the difference between dumping a stat to 6 and rolling a 6 - rolled stats are all independent. I don't get a cookie for rolling a stat of 6 like I would for dumping it to 6 with point buy. None of my other rolled stats are affected by having a bad (or good) roll.
I really don't get the distinction. Net result you end up with a 6 charisma and an 18 strength - how you got there doesn't really matter beans. One way certainly doesn't seem to me to carry the moral superiority you seem to be conveying here.
I also like to roll stats in D&D and PF because I like to discover my character during the generation process. I've changed plans more than once because of the rolls I've gotten.
This is a legitimate reason, if that's what you enjoy. I cannot create characters that way as easily. I like to come up with an idea then try to find the best way to represent that character. It is likely that the two different approaches are fundamental to our preferences.
Except your not juust stuck dealing with anything if you re-roll sub par arrays - there is no sacrifice at all if you are doing that.
With point buy the sacrifice - the decision making - is real.
And I really don't get the people that are quite happy rocking the 6 that they rolled, but point buying down-wards is somehow eeevil. The practical result is exactly the same.
T
Point buy only works if the classes have stat prerequisites that are balanced around each other, they are not. To assume that point buy is balanced shows a clear lack of understanding of the game's mathematical engine.
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
That's one example, of thousands. I prefer rolling and closing the gap so secondary and tertiary stats have a chance of hitting that sweet spot of around 13. It really doesn't hurt anyone if the caster/whoever has something other...
That all assumes you roll well (extremely well in some instances). That doesn't always happen. I prefer a little consistency and ability to plan. I'd hate to turn up at session 0 with an idea of what I want to play and then be unable to because a few dice fell badly.
On the balance issue the game is not balanced to enable the person who rolled 15PB equivalent to play alongside the guy with the 45PB equivalent either. It is just as well equipped to handle 20PB as it is the group that all rolled within 3 points of 20PB equivalents. I'm really not sure this balance argument stacks up well.
That all assumes you roll well (extremely well in some instances). That doesn't always happen. I prefer a little consistency and ability to plan. I'd hate to turn up at...Except your not juust stuck dealing with anything if you re-roll sub par arrays - there is no sacrifice at all if you are doing that.
With point buy the sacrifice - the decision making - is real.
And I really don't get the people that are quite happy rocking the 6 that they rolled, but point buying down-wards is somehow eeevil. The practical result is exactly the same.
T
Point buy only works if the classes have stat prerequisites that are balanced around each other, they are not. To assume that point buy is balanced shows a clear lack of understanding of the game's mathematical engine.
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
That's one example, of thousands. I prefer rolling and closing the gap so secondary and tertiary stats have a chance of hitting that sweet spot of around 13. It really doesn't hurt anyone if the caster/whoever has something other...
Again, the classes are not balanced around each other so point buy still doesn't hold up, because math.
Some players roll better or worse and get different PBEs. So what? PBEs prove nothing at the table except that they are useless given the facts that different classes require different things, and sometimes those things that you require doesn't line up with your concept. Fighters may need higher PBEs just to access their class features. PBEs are exceptionally worthless when we get into tertiary stats, because by virtue of being tertiary, they have no effect on how the class is balanced. A wizard with a 16 STR is probably going to play the exact same way that a wizard with 8 STR would, if all their other stats were the same, as an example. PBEs only exist to assert that the game is balanced. It is not.
I get it about having a concept and having the agency to fulfill that concept. You probably also really like the crunching of numbers and resource management part of the game. That's fine, but it's not better, mathematically. If it was, then no one would roll for stats.
As to consistency, I think you need to better set the parameters for your rolls and to your Points for Point Buy. 15 point buy is equivalent on average to 4d6 methods. 20 Point buy is equivalent on average to 2d6+6 methods (iirc). In a vacuum, you gotta compare 2d6+6 to 20 point buy, which actually has more consistency given minimum stats now become 8 across the board.
I like 4d6 drop lowest for some chance, but everyone else in the group goes with point buy, so...yeah, stuck with point buy.
Always wanted to try 3d6 in order just to see how such a game would go, but I got shot down with that idea, lol.
What amuses me is when you get people espousing the benefits of rolling for stats then performing all sorts of (sometimes quite complex) contortions to mitigate the negative effects - at that point I think you just have to be honest with yourself and accept your just shy of point buying anyway. Seeing people re-rolling stats or characters with lacklustre arrays is one of the reasons I abandoned rolling (It had absolutely nothing to do with my firm - and maybe a little irrational - belief that the RNGods hate me...)
I'm a roller all the way and I thoroughly agree with this. To me the check as to whether you like rolling for stats is whether you're happy playing the "nothing better than a 14" character in a party where everyone else starts with an 18.
I don't personally understand the disappointment some people feel if their stats are worse than the rest of the party - but it's clearly a widespread issue and something you need to address if your group is going to go with rolling.
The "You can choose anyone else's stats" is the obvious solution, although that has always been unsatisfying to me as it feels more like choosing from four random arrays rather than true rolling. To me, the real enjoyment of rolling is the creative spur it provides to coming up with the PC - I usually take my stats in order and never have a character 'build' in advance.
I like 4d6 drop lowest for some chance, but everyone else in the group goes with point buy, so...yeah, stuck with point buy.
Always wanted to try 3d6 in order just to see how such a game would go, but I got shot down with that idea, lol.
I've done that and my experience was that it's not well suited to Pathfinder. There's a pretty hardcoded expectation as to how well you're going to do. A party with some above average stats and some below average is going to kinda, sorta muddle through. A party of almost exclusively below average (and suboptimally assigned) stats is going to struggle unless the DM is particularly careful in crafting encounters (and I suspect it becomes downright impossible at higher levels if one of the PCs flukes very above average stats).
I also like to roll stats in D&D and PF because I like to discover my character during the generation process. I've changed plans more than once because of the rolls I've gotten.
Yeah, that's a fine concept, but it does not always work... say 3 out of 4 player all roll a high Str type and are goaded into playing fighter types... unbalanced party.
plus, let's face it, many players have some idea what they want to play, and distributing scores according to concept (whether rolled or pt bought) is generally a better solution than rolling in order.
I also like to roll stats in D&D and PF because I like to discover my character during the generation process. I've changed plans more than once because of the rolls I've gotten.
Yeah, that's a fine concept, but it does not always work... say 3 out of 4 player all roll a high Str type and are goaded into playing fighter types... unbalanced party.
plus, let's face it, many players have some idea what they want to play, and distributing scores according to concept (whether rolled or pt bought) is generally a better solution than rolling in order.
Um, he wasn't talking about rolling in order. He is talking about seeing what you can put in your Sorceror's Dex and Con, his Int and Wis, his Str. These secondary and tertiary stats really identify tour character. Maybe you have the same Dex and Con, or maybe you have more Con and play a tough guy. Maybe your Int is 8 and you can play a well meaning but kind of dumb tough guy. This is so much more meaningful than the standard Sorceror build you get from point buy, or even something set up for the character you want to roleplay/play as this makes your character weaker. Using rolling you can make a character with interesting ability scores who still has a 17/18/19/20 Cha and fine secondary stats.
I have played by rolling for a long time and I have never run into a situation where a character is useless because of their stats, even if that character has the misfortune to get 3 Str, which happened once. The character became more nuanced as he could be rollplayed as a weakling who wants to prove himself and compensates by rebelling and making money. That characterization came out of rolling 3 Str. And guess what, he still got to play his Kitsune Trickster (Homebrew arcane trickster base class) that he wanted to play. He still got to play the chaotic greedy rebel he wanted to play. He just got even more characterization.
I also like to roll stats in D&D and PF because I like to discover my character during the generation process. I've changed plans more than once because of the rolls I've gotten.
Yeah, that's a fine concept, but it does not always work... say 3 out of 4 player all roll a high Str type and are goaded into playing fighter types... unbalanced party.
plus, let's face it, many players have some idea what they want to play, and distributing scores according to concept (whether rolled or pt bought) is generally a better solution than rolling in order.
Plus, even if you did roll 3d6 down he line and got a bunch of high Str guys you can still make a balanced party. One guy can make a Fighter, another can make a Magus, and the third can make a Warpriest. Or any other combination like Barbarian, Hunter, Battle/Metal Oracle. All of those benefit from high Str but play differently and can make a balanced party. You can also get Slayers, Shifters, Str based Rogues, Paladins, Kinetic Knights, Battle Host Occultists, the Mesmerist fighty Archetype, Monks, Brawlers, Rangers, I can go on. You can fill a ton of roles with high Str characters.
Now if you excuse me, I have to leave this wonderful debate (not sarcastic) and go to middle school. :( Thanks for debating with me.
I rolled up 6 characters using the 4d6 drop lowest, and their point buy ranged from a 38 (16, 16, 16, 13, 12, 9) to a 0 (13, 12, 12, 9, 8, 4) and that's assuming the 4 is only worth -4 points.
I also tried the same thing with the 3d6 in order. Here is what I got:
10, 12, 7, 11, 10, 9
(PB: -2. I don't know, maybe a rogue?)
5, 12, 9, 14, 6, 15
(PB: 10, assuming -4 is the most you can get for a negative. Probably a sorcerer or oracle)
11, 8, 14, 16, 12, 11
(PB: 17, looks like a wizard.)
7, 16, 12, 16, 8, 14
(PB: 21. another wizard. Likely an elf)
8, 14, 11, 11, 7, 7
(PB: -3. Um... maybe a crossbow wielder?)
15, 18, 3, 6, 11, 15
(Holy crap, an 18! Also holy crap, a 3! PB: 22? I'd say since he is he only one with a strength bonus higher than 0, he gets to be the martial. With a -4 bonus in con.
So what it looks like is that unless you have some sort of floor for dice rolling, it is possible to get scores that are actually worse than a commoner.
I rolled up 6 characters using the 4d6 drop lowest, and their point buy ranged from a 38 (16, 16, 16, 13, 12, 9) to a 0 (13, 12, 12, 9, 8, 4) and that's assuming the 4 is only worth -4 points.
I also tried the same thing with the 3d6 in order. Here is what I got:
10, 12, 7, 11, 10, 9
(PB: -2. I don't know, maybe a rogue?)
5, 12, 9, 14, 6, 15
(PB: 10, assuming -4 is the most you can get for a negative. Probably a sorcerer or oracle)
11, 8, 14, 16, 12, 11
(PB: 17, looks like a wizard.)
7, 16, 12, 16, 8, 14
(PB: 21. another wizard. Likely an elf)
8, 14, 11, 11, 7, 7
(PB: -3. Um... maybe a crossbow wielder?)
15, 18, 3, 6, 11, 15
(Holy crap, an 18! Also holy crap, a 3! PB: 22? I'd say since he is he only one with a strength bonus higher than 0, he gets to be the martial. With a -4 bonus in con.So what it looks like is that unless you have some sort of floor for dice rolling, it is possible to get scores that are actually worse than a commoner.
Wow. I've only done it one time (and it was on a real character so I went and looked at it) 12,16,8,9,17,12 pre-racial. I guess I got lucky.
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
Existential fallacy and false dilemma...
Class balance has absolutely nothing to do with ability score generation method balance.
Combat Expertise is extremely easy to qualify for without sacrificing Str or Dex with most point-buy methods. Depending on the point-buy and other factors, you may have to make choices as to whether or not you can also meet the prerequisites for Improved Bravery, but you are not guaranteed to be able to have a high Str, good Dex and Con, and 13+ Int and Cha (especially with wanting an above average Wis, as well) with most rolling methods, either. With a 20 point-buy: 14 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha (before racial modifiers; likely human or half-elf, so +2 Str for 16 starting score); qualifies for Combat Expertise, Improved Bravery, and Power Attack from 1st level (and Armor Training 1 allows full Dex bonus in full plate), although one of the 1st-level feats might be Toughness.
P.S.: As far as the system mechanics go, as I mentioned in my first post, the math behind the entire 3.x/d20/Pathfinder CR sub-system is based on the assumption of 4 PCs using 15 point buy (actually the "elite array" of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8; but that's equivalent to 15 point-buy in Pathfinder) and "balanced" WBL. Claiming that "classes are not balanced around each other so point buy still doesn't hold up, because math" when a central part of the entire d20 system is based on equivalent "balance" to point buy is an opinion unsupported by facts.
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
Existential fallacy and false dilemma...
Class balance has absolutely nothing to do with ability score generation method balance.
Combat Expertise is extremely easy to qualify for without sacrificing Str or Dex with most point-buy methods. Depending on the point-buy and other factors, you may have to make choices as to whether or not you can also meet the prerequisites for Improved Bravery, but you are not guaranteed to be able to have a high Str, good Dex and Con, and 13+ Int and Cha (especially with wanting an above average Wis, as well) with most rolling methods, either. With a 20 point-buy: 14 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha (before racial modifiers; likely human or half-elf, so +2 Str for 16 starting score); qualifies for Combat Expertise, Improved Bravery, and Power Attack from 1st level (and Armor Training 1 allows full Dex bonus in full plate), although one of the 1st-level feats might be Toughness.
P.S.: As far as the system mechanics go, as I mentioned in my first...
You're missing the point. Some classes are SAD, like the Wizard, and some classes are MAD,like the Swashbuckler. To play a Wizard you need high Int and nothing else. You would like Wis, Con, Dex, and maybe Cha but you don't need them. A Swashbuckler needs Dex and Cha and really really wants Wis and Con. Point buy will benifet the Wizard because he can get that 20 starting Int while the Swashbuckler has 16 Cha and Dex, 14 Wis, 14 Con, 10 Int, 10 Str because he needs all of that. Rolling alleviates this as they will both probably get about two natural 15-18s pre-racial.
Also, I would never take that ability score array you made from 20 points. That is highly suboptimal and I would classify it as barely viable. 16 starting Str post racial is not high enough IMO and your Con is only 12! You actually have higher Cha and Int than Con and Wis on a fighter. Wow.
Tell that to the millions of dead wizards who never made it to Schrödinger levels because they dumped Dex and Con. : ) But your point is made.
I'd totally play that array, though.
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
Existential fallacy and false dilemma...
Class balance has absolutely nothing to do with ability score generation method balance.
Combat Expertise is extremely easy to qualify for without sacrificing Str or Dex with most point-buy methods. Depending on the point-buy and other factors, you may have to make choices as to whether or not you can also meet the prerequisites for Improved Bravery, but you are not guaranteed to be able to have a high Str, good Dex and Con, and 13+ Int and Cha (especially with wanting an above average Wis, as well) with most rolling methods, either. With a 20 point-buy: 14 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha (before racial modifiers; likely human or half-elf, so +2 Str for 16 starting score); qualifies for Combat Expertise, Improved Bravery, and Power Attack from 1st level (and Armor Training 1 allows full Dex bonus in full plate), although one of the 1st-level feats might be Toughness.
P.S.: As far as the system mechanics go, as I mentioned in my first...
Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
Existential fallacy and false dilemma...
Class balance has absolutely nothing to do with ability score generation method balance.
Combat Expertise is extremely easy to qualify for without sacrificing Str or Dex with most point-buy methods. Depending on the point-buy and other factors, you may have to make choices as to whether or not you can also meet the prerequisites for Improved Bravery, but you are not guaranteed to be able to have a high Str, good Dex and Con, and 13+ Int and Cha (especially with wanting an above average Wis, as well) with most rolling methods, either. With a 20 point-buy: 14 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha (before racial modifiers; likely human or half-elf, so +2 Str for 16 starting score); qualifies for Combat Expertise, Improved Bravery, and Power Attack from 1st level (and Armor Training 1 allows full Dex bonus in full plate), although one of the 1st-level feats might be Toughness.
P.S.: As far as the system mechanics go, as I mentioned in my first...
Completely missed the point.
3.x has a different system, and pathfinder has the same mathematical skeleton.
False premise, strawman, pick your favorite, it doesn't matter.
Again, point buy guarantees you some things, but about the same things you can expect rolling. If you like the resource management stuff, then go nuts.
Newer classes had to be designed around it. Fact.
Classes that have to invest into multiple attributes to gain access to their class features cannot invest into tertiary stats that affect their choices. This is also a fact.
I never said rolling guarantees anything, but point buy guarantees lack of access. This is a fact.
You have proven nothing.
...Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
Existential fallacy and false dilemma...
Class balance has absolutely nothing to do with ability score generation method balance.
Combat Expertise is extremely easy to qualify for without sacrificing Str or Dex with most point-buy methods. Depending on the point-buy and other factors, you may have to make choices as to whether or not you can also meet the prerequisites for Improved Bravery, but you are not guaranteed to be able to have a high Str, good Dex and Con, and 13+ Int and Cha (especially with wanting an above average Wis, as well) with most rolling methods, either. With a 20 point-buy: 14 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha (before racial modifiers; likely human or half-elf, so +2 Str for 16 starting score); qualifies for Combat Expertise, Improved Bravery, and Power Attack from 1st level (and Armor Training 1 allows full Dex bonus in full plate), although one of the 1st-level feats might be Toughness.
P.S.: As far as the system
With point buy I can build around it/make sacrifices/compromise. With dice rolling - who knows, maybe I will be able to make those tertiary stats, maybe I won't even get good secondaries. Maybe I'll contrive something to make it more likely or just flat out re-roll until I do get what I want.
Rolling isn't the answer to this issue. It is no better or worse an answer than point buy. It is entirely independent of the method you use to generate ability scores.
Now most preferably I'd run something like this.
Propose players a game, tell them to have no dreams or expectations.
Session 0.
Choose race/ancestry, culture, background (eventually roll d100 for how high on social ladder you are raised), gender, hair color, all that stuff, beliefs, quirks, aspirations.
Roll 4d6 drop lowest in order.
Add/retract racial bonuses.
Work your characters around overall results of random rolls and characters description given earlier.
I have to say that rolling in order does not have my favor, unless I'm truly ready to make up the character from what I get and to follow the rolls... unhfortunately, I generally have a more precise Idea of what I wanna play, and if the rolls don't agree with that, the dice are wrong.
Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
So let's try that.
(-7 pt buy equiv)
(3 pt buy equiv)
(9 pt buy equiv)
Which of these would you pick? Or more importantly, which of these would you be excited to play?
This is the problem with flat die rolls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roll 4d6 drop lowest in order.
Add/retract racial bonuses.
Work your characters around overall results of random rolls and characters description given earlier.
So let's try that.
Yowza! I don't know anyone who would turn down a 45-pt build.
How about character #2?
Uhhhh....That's technically a 14 pt. build. But more importantly, would you want to be playing character #2 in the same campaign with character #1?
This is the problem with flat-formula die rolls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Haven't done it in a while, but I always liked...
Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
This works best with the party generating their characters together so they can create a complementary team. Creates a party that rely more on tactics and teamwork.
Alice: Hey, wanna startRise of the Runelords this week!
Bob: Hells yeah I do! I've been playing fighters forever and really wanna play a wizard this time.Alice: Okay, everybody roll for stats, 3d6 in order.
Bob:
Alice: Oh, and roll three arrays and pick your favorite
Bob:
Alice: Pick your array, you're stuck with it for the next year or so! ♪
Bob: On second thought, can we just play Lords of Waterdeep this week?
"But that's not very likely to happen!"
Among, say, five players who all have ideas of what kind of character they want to play? It's more likely than you might think.
"If that happens, we'll just let them swap scores or roll a new array."
Cool, but that's a different method then.
...Point Buy is not balanced, because the classes are not balanced, it is a stain on game design.
That isn't to say that point buy on its own is a bad thing, far from it. Giving players the ability to know they will have the specific 2 stats they want good for their builds and settling for mediocrity everywhere else is fine when you want that style of play where literally every aspect of the game forces you to engage the resource management section of your cerebellum, some people play the game specifically for that. Others not so much.
So I can support the stance that point buy enables players to fulfill a concept mechanically, but it is not fair nor is it balanced as far as the actual playing of the game is concerned.
Fighter wants Combat Expertise? Power Attack? Improved Bravery? Guess what, you can have those things, but Armor Training will never affect your AC because you'll never have the DEX for it. Wasted ink I suppose....
Existential fallacy and false dilemma...
Class balance has absolutely nothing to do with ability score generation method balance.
Combat Expertise is extremely easy to qualify for without sacrificing Str or Dex with most point-buy methods. Depending on the point-buy and other factors, you may have to make choices as to whether or not you can also meet the prerequisites for Improved Bravery, but you are not guaranteed to be able to have a high Str, good Dex and Con, and 13+ Int and Cha (especially with wanting an above average Wis, as well) with most rolling methods, either. With a 20 point-buy: 14 Str, 14 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 12 Wis, 13 Cha (before racial modifiers; likely human or half-elf, so +2 Str for 16 starting score); qualifies for Combat Expertise, Improved Bravery, and Power Attack from 1st level (and Armor Training 1 allows full Dex bonus in full plate), although one of the 1st-level feats might be
Respectfully, while you posit the same rhetoric about the nature of the merits of point buy that I have stated multiple times, your conclusion that point buy is still better doesn't hold up because of the game design.
Rolling by virtue isn't better, which is why I use different methods for rolling.
Class requirements are a big deal, and a huge factor in this decision. Again, from practical experience at the table, enabling players with better access to tertiary stats hardly affects the outcome, other than characters who might make a saving throw 5-10% more often, or having incentive to invest resources like skills and feats into avenues other than those mandated by the limited range their respective PBEs.
PBEs are still a useless metric, since different attributes have varying impact on any given character, and some classes built on lower PBEs may function just as well as they would on higher PBEs or even in a parallel way where you don't even notice it.
I've toyed with the idea of having physical stats in a point buy scenario being less costly than mental stats. It's a treatment of the symptom though in asymmetrical game design, where again originally the mathematical architecture that PF1 is based on did not have and it changed the standard for game design over the course of the edition. I find this problematic, not because point buy is bad on it's own, but because point buy is bad for PF1.
Haven't done it in a while, but I always liked...
Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
This works best with the party generating their characters together so they can create a complementary team. Creates a party that rely more on tactics and teamwork.
Alice: Hey, wanna startRise of the Runelords this week!
Bob: Hells yeah I do! I've been playing fighters forever and really wanna play a wizard this time.
Alice: Okay, everybody roll for stats, 3d6 in order.
Bob:
Alice: Oh, and roll three arrays and pick your favorite
Bob:
Alice: Pick your array, you're stuck with it for the next year or so! ♪
Bob: On second thought, can we just play Lords of Waterdeep this week?"But that's not very likely to happen!"
Among, say, five players who all have ideas of what kind of character they want to play? It's more likely than you might think.
"If that happens, we'll just let them swap scores or roll a new array."
Cool, but that's a different method then.
Or, you know. He could play a kineticist which is more like a wizard than a fighter and can use his high Con. Or, even better if one has a high Cha he can play a sorceror or a cleric with high Wis. It isn't that hard to play a character concept with a stat array. Not nearly as hard as you make it seem.
Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
So let's try that.
[dice=Str]3d6
[dice=Dex]3d6
[dice=Con]3d6
[dice=Int]3d6
[dice=Wis]3d6
[dice=Cha]3d6
(-7 pt buy equiv)[dice=Str]3d6
[dice=Dex]3d6
[dice=Con]3d6
[dice=Int]3d6
[dice=Wis]3d6
[dice=Cha]3d6
(3 pt buy equiv)[dice=Str]3d6
[dice=Dex]3d6
[dice=Con]3d6
[dice=Int]3d6
[dice=Wis]3d6
[dice=Cha]3d6
(9 pt buy equiv)Which of these would you pick? Or more importantly, which of these would you be excited to play?
This is the problem with flat die rolls.
I would like to play the second one. I can play a non-combat cleric or maybe a zen archer. A zen archer sounds like a lot of fun actually.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...but because point buy is bad for PF1..
If it was that bad it wouldn't be so popular. If it was objectively bad why do so many people never ever want to go back to rolling. I mean I've rolled for stats far longer than I've used point buy. I would not go back voluntarily.
And if you are using a different method for rolling that grants you higher expected results for secondary and tertiary stats then you can achieve the same result by increasing the PB value.
The issues with game design are not changed by your stat generation method. Your stat generation method will not fix any issues with game design.
I would like to play the second one. I can play a non-combat cleric or maybe a zen archer. A zen archer sounds like a lot of fun actually.
Would you, now. You'd play a character with a pre-racial, -2 penalty to Str and Con for two levels in order to start reaping the benefits of your only attribute with a bonus.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that your enthusiasm is not typical.
Or, you know. He could play a kineticist which is more like a wizard than a fighter and can use his high Con. Or, even better if one has a high Cha he can play a sorceror or a cleric with high Wis. It isn't that hard to play a character concept with a stat array. Not nearly as hard as you make it seem.Haven't done it in a while, but I always liked...
Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
This works best with the party generating their characters together so they can create a complementary team. Creates a party that rely more on tactics and teamwork.
Alice: Hey, wanna startRise of the Runelords this week!
Bob: Hells yeah I do! I've been playing fighters forever and really wanna play a wizard this time.
Alice: Okay, everybody roll for stats, 3d6 in order.
Bob:
Alice: Oh, and roll three arrays and pick your favorite
Bob:
Alice: Pick your array, you're stuck with it for the next year or so! ♪
Bob: On second thought, can we just play Lords of Waterdeep this week?"But that's not very likely to happen!"
Among, say, five players who all have ideas of what kind of character they want to play? It's more likely than you might think.
"If that happens, we'll just let them swap scores or roll a new array."
Cool, but that's a different method then.
That's not the point. The point is I wanted to play a wizard, not something that's sorta, kinda, wizard like - if you squint and look at it sideways. I for one do not want to be at the mercy of the dice to determine what class I play - I know I am not alone.
It's not about how difficult it is, nobody is saying that building a character from a random bunch of number is hard - it's just significantly less fun for many people.
I would like to play the second one. I can play a non-combat cleric or maybe a zen archer. A zen archer sounds like a lot of fun actually.Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
So let's try that.
[dice=Str]3d6
[dice=Dex]3d6
[dice=Con]3d6
[dice=Int]3d6
[dice=Wis]3d6
[dice=Cha]3d6
(-7 pt buy equiv)[dice=Str]3d6
[dice=Dex]3d6
[dice=Con]3d6
[dice=Int]3d6
[dice=Wis]3d6
[dice=Cha]3d6
(3 pt buy equiv)[dice=Str]3d6
[dice=Dex]3d6
[dice=Con]3d6
[dice=Int]3d6
[dice=Wis]3d6
[dice=Cha]3d6
(9 pt buy equiv)Which of these would you pick? Or more importantly, which of these would you be excited to play?
This is the problem with flat die rolls.
Well, the quote didn't come out right. I would also play the 3rd one as a Slayer or Rogue. I ran out of time so I just posted it prematurely before. I would however, hate playing the 1st one.
And if you are using a different method for rolling that grants you higher expected results for secondary and tertiary stats then you can achieve the same result by increasing the PB value.
I think there's room in character design for a blend of point buy and random. What it ends up meaning is "some randomness" rather than "random".
As long as the method generates a playable array, and wide variations are the exception rather than the norm, it's fine. Shared dice pool methods are nice. Weighted stat generation is nice.
I would like to play the second one. I can play a non-combat cleric or maybe a zen archer. A zen archer sounds like a lot of fun actually.Would you, now. You'd play a character with a pre-racial, -2 penalty to Str and Con for two levels in order to start reaping the benefits of your only attribute with a bonus.
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that your enthusiasm is not typical.
I would play human or half-elf to get +2 Str leaving me with 9 or -1. With Perfect Strike I wouldn't miss very often even with my +0 Dex until I get Wis to attack at level 3 (which is pretty early). I can make a viable character out of this. Yes, he will be slightly worse than a regular zen archer but I can still have fun with him.
Or, you know. He could play a kineticist which is more like a wizard than a fighter and can use his high Con. Or, even better if one has a high Cha he can play a sorceror or a cleric with high Wis. It isn't that hard to play a character concept with a stat array. Not nearly as hard as you make it seem.Haven't done it in a while, but I always liked...
Roll 3d6 stats in order. 3d6, that's Str, another 3d6, that's Dex, and so on.
Generate 3 stat arrays, then choose the one you want to use.
This works best with the party generating their characters together so they can create a complementary team. Creates a party that rely more on tactics and teamwork.
Alice: Hey, wanna startRise of the Runelords this week!
Bob: Hells yeah I do! I've been playing fighters forever and really wanna play a wizard this time.
Alice: Okay, everybody roll for stats, 3d6 in order.
Bob:
Alice: Oh, and roll three arrays and pick your favorite
Bob:
Alice: Pick your array, you're stuck with it for the next year or so! ♪
Bob: On second thought, can we just play Lords of Waterdeep this week?"But that's not very likely to happen!"
Among, say, five players who all have ideas of what kind of character they want to play? It's more likely than you might think.
"If that happens, we'll just let them swap scores or roll a new array."
Cool, but that's a different method then.
That's not the point. The point is I wanted to play a wizard, not something that's sorta, kinda, wizard like - if you squint and look at it sideways. I for one do not want to be at the mercy of the dice to determine what class I play - I know I am not alone.
It's not about how difficult it is, nobody is saying that building a character from a random...
That's very close-minded IMO. The player has been playing fighters (he probably means martial actually) and wants to play a full caster. All of these classes accomplish this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roll 4d6 drop lowest in order.
Add/retract racial bonuses.
Work your characters around overall results of random rolls and characters description given earlier.
So let's try that.
[dice=Str]4d6-2
[dice=Dex]4d6-4
[dice=Con]4d6-2
[dice=Int]4d6-1
[dice=Wis]4d6-1
[dice=Cha]4d6-1Yowza! I don't know anyone who would turn down a 45-pt build.
How about character #2?
[dice=Str]4d6-1
[dice=Dex]4d6-3
[dice=Con]4d6-1
[dice=Int]4d6-1
[dice=Wis]4d6-1
[dice=Cha]4d6-1Uhhhh....That's technically a 14 pt. build. But more importantly, would you want to be playing character #2 in the same campaign with character #1?
This is the problem with flat-formula die rolls.
That's the easiest question I've heard all day. Yes, yes I would. I am very confident in my ability to have fun playing my dumb but good natured Sorceror struggling to control his powers, or maybe my naive Swashbuckler trying to understand the world and make his friends proud along with my friend the strong and reliable fighter. Maybe he is my older brother/sister looking out for me, or maybe I'm a charming idiot they met on their travels. I've seen people have fun with 3 Str characters and I believe I can have fun with a 4 Int character.