| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not to put too fine a point on it, but SF attribute point-buy, IMHO, sucks. You can always voluntarily gimp yourself (it’s even in SF core that you can start with a lower attribute with no benefit), but gimping doesn’t work with attributes; it works in a system like Fate where you get a cool, crunchy effect for it. Like “You are weak so the strong megalomaniac is more responsive to your groveling.” In SF, it’s more like the other soldier in the party is just as strong, dexterous, tough, wise, and charismatic as you, but you are worse at lore checks because you dump INT without benefit. That’s not good game design. The only other options are designed to prevent min-maxing or something, but end up falling flat.
I find the SF point buy to be simple, yet unintuitive (particularly with the +1 theme and how you don’t want to put it in an ability you plan to increase to 18, even though that is the theme of your character). I find the increase of 4 attributes every 5 levels to be underwhelming; increasing all 6 makes more sense to me, which is just as boring, but doesn’t have any false choices. Also, you spend half of your levels from 1-20 with an odd (and therefore lame) primary ability, so most of the time you are getting better at stuff that is far less significant to your character. Fewer ability increases makes the increases more meaningful, even if you spend several levels with odd primary abilities; the barrel-loads of ability increases actually diminishes your most significant ones.
The point-buy choices you get with Pathfinder: Kingmaker crpg are so much more fulfilling than SF. I would even double down on the graduated point buy by giving players the option of +2/+1 to any two attributes every 5 levels OR +1 to four. That’s a real choice. Also, ancestry bonus + theme bonus gets you to 21 at 1st Level, if you want.
If not, just get rid of the ancestry and theme bonus because they serve no useful purpose if you are just going to cap at 18. It can serve as a detriment to getting ability scores you want for certain ancestries, but it will never serve to make you more like the ancestry. Specifically, a +2 INT ancestry bonus doesn’t make you a better Wizard because everyone puts 18 INT when they play a Wizard; it gives you a better DEX or CON. I think it would be better to just say “Dwarves tend to have high STR, CON, and WIS, and low DEX and CHA, but you are free to play against type.”
To be clear, I like the ancestry bonus if there is no cap, but I don’t like it if there is an 18 cap. I personally saw no problem with point buy as in PF.
|
They're not doing either at Character Creation. They've said that they're doing something else entirely, with hints that it's done as you do the rest of the character (my current theory is that you get Ability ups from Ancestry, then Background, then Class, with some being 'floating' at each stage).
Whatever they're doing it result in Kyra as a level 1 character having Str 14, Dex 12, Wis 18, Cha 14 (and probably Con 10 and Int 10, from context), so at the very least the number of points is more generous than Starfinder.
They are doing something similar to Starfinder with stat-ups every 5 levels, but I'm cool with that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They're not doing either at Character Creation. They've said that they're doing something else entirely, with hints that it's done as you do the rest of the character (my current theory is that you get Ability ups from Ancestry, then Background, then Class, with some being 'floating' at each stage).
Whatever they're doing it result in Kyra as a level 1 character having Str 14, Dex 12, Wis 18, Cha 14 (and probably Con 10 and Int 10, from context), so at the very least the number of points is more generous than Starfinder.
They are doing something similar to Starfinder with stat-ups every 5 levels, but I'm cool with that.
Thank you for the info. I'm looking forward to seeing what is done and relieved that it is not like SF. I don't really care how high generous the spread, just that you can fiddle with it in a meaningful way. SF feels so much like "put an 18 in one and a 14 in another (or 12s in two) and ignore the +1 from theme because it doesn't matter."
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you for the info. I'm looking forward to seeing what is done and relieved that it is not like SF. I don't really care how high generous the spread, just that you can fiddle with it in a meaningful way. SF feels so much like "put an 18 in one and a 14 in another (or 12s in two) and ignore the +1 from theme because it doesn't matter."
Yeah, I actually like Starfinder, but the starting Ability allocation is one of my least favorite parts of that system, and I'm pleased they're doing something different for PF2.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with the OP that SF point-buy sucks and you get no benefit from your racial + theme attribute bonuses. The only one that matters is the -2, and that's only if you wanted to dump it anyways. It makes ability score bonuses at the start of the game totally superfluous, and would make the new +2 +2 -2 +floating become pretty pointless too.
They're not doing either at Character Creation. They've said that they're doing something else entirely, with hints that it's done as you do the rest of the character (my current theory is that you get Ability ups from Ancestry, then Background, then Class, with some being 'floating' at each stage).
Floaters sound interesting. Better than cutting cookies.
I kind of like how Starfinder Point Buy is something I can do wholly in my head, for as long as I played Pathfinder, I would still need to refer to something to figure out the stat allocation.
I've also never been a fan of "I'll set stats intentionally as low as they go to get bonuses."
|
|
I kind of like how Starfinder Point Buy is something I can do wholly in my head, for as long as I played Pathfinder, I would still need to refer to something to figure out the stat allocation.
I suspect the new version is gonna be a bit more intuitive than PF1 point-buy.
I've also never been a fan of "I'll set stats intentionally as low as they go to get bonuses."
This may well not be an option in the set-up we get, we'll have to wait and see.
I kind of like how Starfinder Point Buy is something I can do wholly in my head, for as long as I played Pathfinder, I would still need to refer to something to figure out the stat allocation.
I've also never been a fan of "I'll set stats intentionally as low as they go to get bonuses."
This is one of those binary problems for which it is hard to compromise. There is one game system that did the dump stat really well, and that is Fate, but I only like to play it as a one-off, not a campaign, and there aren't really attributes in that. You just pick "Strong" or "Weak" and use your choice to modify checks along the way. Strong will let you reroll in melee combat and weak might let you grovel better (or give you no benefit at all). It's cool because it's fun. Unfortunately, having a low score in D&D is just not fun.
I think it is desirable to have a trade-off of dumping some attributes for a small number of points per decrease to spend on higher attributes for a large number of points per increase. I think GURPS takes it too far with each malus giving you an equal and opposite bonus, but PF1 was just about right. I would only change it such that dumping anything under 10 would always give you one more point to spend, not 2, which is what Pathfinder: Kingmaker crpg currently gives you for dumping to a 7. I won't be able to convince you that is better, though, because "better" is what you prefer.
I will say I probably feel stronger about wanting to dump stats than those who don't like it much probably want to prevent it. Also, it is easy to houserule a static array.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like a reasonable compromise is just to start every stat at the lowest it can go and give people more points to spend, but there's no way to reduce a stat during the point buy process (though ancestry penalties and similar still apply).
I agree with the OP that SF point-buy sucks and you get no benefit from your racial + theme attribute bonuses. The only one that matters is the -2, and that's only if you wanted to dump it anyways. It makes ability score bonuses at the start of the game totally superfluous, and would make the new +2 +2 -2 +floating become pretty pointless too.
Racial stat bonuses are still important in SF because they limit how low you can make a stat; i.e., effectively require you to put two points into it. So it’s bad to take a race with a stat bonus in something you’d like to not spend any points in.
So the SF racial adjustments, both + and -, do make a meaningful difference from a optimization standpoint. It’s just not the difference we’re used to from PF.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like a reasonable compromise is just to start every stat at the lowest it can go and give people more points to spend, but there's no way to reduce a stat during the point buy process (though ancestry penalties and similar still apply).
Whaddaya know! Maybe compromise is possible. I would just want the attribute to start below average, which in PF is 10. Lower is fine, too, but 8 is where you can say, "I'm not strong" or "I'm not smart."
I'm hoping for a simple but still weighted point buy like pay 1 per point above 10, 2 per point above 14, 3 per point above 16. This makes 14=4, 16=8, and 18=14.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see what is wrong with PF point buy as it is. There are about a dozen good builds at 1st level and almost another dozen that come into their own after 4th or 8th level. That's a lot of builds, but not so many that you couldn't list them out for your players. You could even do a different build for each class as an example, and mention you can move the scores around and use for any of the other classes. It's not a waste of space because it will quickly show new players what attributes are important for a class, and you can add a hint with very few words.
For example, this is what I presented to my characters:
The default Alchemist array is the same as the Druid, but swap INT and WIS.
The default Barbarian array is 18/16/16/7/7/7. Consider the default Fighter array if you are an Armored Hulk.
The default Bard array is 12/14/12/13/7/18. Consider the default Monk array, but swap WIS and CHA, for a less erudite Bard.
The default Cleric array is 14/12/10/7/18/14. You put a 12 in DEX in anticipation of getting full plate.
The default Druid array is 14/14/14/7/18/7. Consider the default Monk array, as well.
The default Fighter array is 18/13/18/7/7/7. You put a 13 in DEX in anticipation of getting full plate.
The default Inquisitor array is the same as the Ranger.
The default Monk array is 14/16/11/7/18/7. Consider the default Druid array, as well.
The default Oracle array is the same as the Sorcerer, but swap STR and INT.
The default Paladin array is 14/12/14/7/10/18. You put a 12 in DEX in anticipation of getting full plate.
The default Ranger array is 14/16/14/9/16/7. Consider the default Monk array if you want to focus on spells a bit more.
The default Rogue array is 10/18/12/12/12/12. Rogues work with a wide variety of arrays, but DEX should generally be high.
The default Sorcerer array is 7/16/12/12/8/18. If you really want to min/max, use the default Fighter array with 18 in DEX and CHA, 13 in CON, and 7 in STR, INT, and WIS.
The default Wizard array is 7/16/12/18/10/10. If you really want to min/max, use the default Fighter array with 18 in DEX and INT, 13 in CON, and 7 in STR, WIS, and CHA.
All I want is to be able to start with a 20(+5) in your primary ability.
OR else, cap stat growth like 5E so I may lose my obligation for the maximum score possible...
I'm hoping for a simple but still weighted point buy like pay 1 per point above 10, 2 per point above 14, 3 per point above 16. This makes 14=4, 16=8, and 18=14.
Isn't that exactly what we have now? Edit: I see it now. No 4 for 18s.
They're not doing either at Character Creation. They've said that they're doing something else entirely, with hints that it's done as you do the rest of the character (my current theory is that you get Ability ups from Ancestry, then Background, then Class, with some being 'floating' at each stage).
Whatever they're doing it result in Kyra as a level 1 character having Str 14, Dex 12, Wis 18, Cha 14 (and probably Con 10 and Int 10, from context), so at the very least the number of points is more generous than Starfinder.
They are doing something similar to Starfinder with stat-ups every 5 levels, but I'm cool with that.
I've seen your speculation in several posts now, and I've got to say - I'm really hoping for something like your theory. It seems really intuitive and makes for easy character building for new players.
Also, I've never really liked weighted point buys, as they always feel like they favor SAD over MAD.
I'd like to see a unified system like how SF does level-ups: 2 points to increase starting at 17. Just expand that to Creation as well and adjust point buy amount appropriately. I'd apply ancestry bonuses after.
|
|
I've seen your speculation in several posts now, and I've got to say - I'm really hoping for something like your theory. It seems really intuitive and makes for easy character building for new players.
Yeah, I think that'd be really neat, and pretty intuitive to use. It would also give good structural guidance to new players (ie: Cleric gives a bonus to Wisdom, I should probably invest some more in that).
Also, I've never really liked weighted point buys, as they always feel like they favor SAD over MAD.
IMO, it depends on how weighted and how many points.
I'd like to see a unified system like how SF does level-ups: 2 points to increase starting at 17. Just expand that to Creation as well and adjust point buy amount appropriately. I'd apply ancestry bonuses after.
They may well be doing the doubling cost at 17 and 18, though I suspect Ancestry bonuses occur first out of all bonuses rather than last.
Also, I've never really liked weighted point buys, as they always feel like they favor SAD over MAD.IMO, it depends on how weighted and how many points.
Yeah, that's a good point. A weighted system where the weight is just 2 points to go from 17-18 is pretty benign. Especially if there's a fair number of points to spread around.
|
|
I'm personally interested in seeing something like this:
Ancestry: +2 stat, +2 stat, -2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Background: +2 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Class: +4 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Fighter and Barbarian default arrays have 7 wisdom scores? GTFO
Ancestry: +2 stat, +2 stat, -2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Background: +2 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Class: +4 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
That's insanse. That would mean you could start game with one attribute at 26.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fighter and Barbarian default arrays have 7 wisdom scores? GTFO
To me, those arrays are a joke. Mass number of 7s everywhere. 100% combat/optiization only builds where everyone ends up being ignorant brutes. I hope mass dumping to 7 is not even allowed on the new edition so I can never see that kind of array ever again.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now I honestly hope there will be no banned arrays in PF2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like a reasonable compromise is just to start every stat at the lowest it can go and give people more points to spend, but there's no way to reduce a stat during the point buy process (though ancestry penalties and similar still apply).
So...3.5 point buy?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's insanse. That would mean you could start game with one attribute at 26.Ancestry: +2 stat, +2 stat, -2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Background: +2 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Class: +4 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
+2 from ancestry, +2 from background, and +4 from class. The base is 10. 10+2+2+4 = 18 maximum.
There's no point buy in their version; it's just bonuses. (This sounds like what they're probably going with, since they talked about building your stat array.)
I feel like a reasonable compromise is just to start every stat at the lowest it can go and give people more points to spend, but there's no way to reduce a stat during the point buy process (though ancestry penalties and similar still apply).So...3.5 point buy?
5E as well!
+2 from ancestry, +2 from background, and +4 from class. The base is 10. 10+2+2+4 = 18 maximum.
There's no point buy in their version; it's just bonuses. (This sounds like what they're probably going with, since they talked about building your stat array.)
Oh, that's just... blah.
Definitely not be going incorporated in my games, I sooner roll 2d6 in order.
I'm fine with dumping down to 7, but I'd never do it on multiple stats. I've created only 2 PF characters (with 25 PB, like those ridiculous arrays). Without thinking much about it, I ended up with the same array (18/14/14/12/10/7), with STR and CHA switched (barbarian and sorcerer). I'd probably use the same array for any SAD class, just switching stats around. For a MAD class, I'd drop the 18 to 16 get another 16 (instead of a 14) and either a 15 (instead of the remaining 14) or a 13 (instead of the 10).Fighter and Barbarian default arrays have 7 wisdom scores? GTFOTo me, those arrays are a joke. Mass number of 7s everywhere. 100% combat/optiization only builds where everyone ends up being ignorant brutes. I hope mass dumping to 7 is not even allowed on the new edition so I can never see that kind of array ever again.
Your spreads seem fine to me. In my groups I have a house rule where you may only ever dump 1 stat, and only ever end up with one 18 stat (never 19-20). Not gonna say it's perfect or anything (tough for MAD classes), but I just wanted to curb those "optimized" arrays with heavy dumps.
People are free to play what they want or what PFS technically allows, but I like characters kinda feeling like real people.
+2 from ancestry, +2 from background, and +4 from class. The base is 10. 10+2+2+4 = 18 maximum.
There's no point buy in their version; it's just bonuses. (This sounds like what they're probably going with, since they talked about building your stat array.)
Oh, that's just... blah.
Definitely not be going incorporated in my games, I sooner roll 2d6 in order.
I call bluff or typo on preferring capping stats at 12 and giving an average of -2 on stat modifiers. 3d6 in order, maybe?
I like it. Simple without Starfinder’s overly narrow focus. I expect fewer +2s, though.
They can do whatever they want with point buy, as long as one of the ability score generation options involves rolling dice.
I loved the simplicity of Starfinder's point buy and tried to enforce it at my table, only for players to revolt. So now we've got a vesk solarion with an Intelligence of 3, and the player is happy because it was a legitly rolled 3.
I call bluff or typo on preferring capping stats at 12 and giving an average of -2 on stat modifiers. 3d6 in order, maybe?
I used 4d6 drop lowest, re-aragne although I plan play a game with 4d6 in order. 4 because I assume adventuring characters shall be statistically more gifted by gods.
But I;d rather playd 2d6 in order than arrays based on Class+Background+Ancestry combo.
So now we've got a vesk solarion with an Intelligence of 3, and the player is happy because it was a legitly rolled 3.
3d6 in order. Cruel, but I respect it.
That's insanse. That would mean you could start game with one attribute at 26.Ancestry: +2 stat, +2 stat, -2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Background: +2 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Class: +4 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)+2 from ancestry, +2 from background, and +4 from class. The base is 10. 10+2+2+4 = 18 maximum.
There's no point buy in their version; it's just bonuses. (This sounds like what they're probably going with, since they talked about building your stat array.)
What!? No choice, no odd stats!? It will be like I dont exist anymore...
You know since ability damage is gone I dont see why stats have to be so high at all. Y'all are going to hate this, but what if the new stat gen was 1D6 down the line and apply your ABCs? Instead of topping out at 26, you could top out at 16.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My typical 20pt buy arrays look like the following (pre-racial, before assigning to stats)
17, 14, 12, 10, 10, 10
17, 14, 12, 12, 10, 8
16, 14, 14, 10, 10, 10
16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8 <== personal fave
15, 14, 14, 14, 10, 8
15, 14, 14, 14, 12, 7
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually liked the Starfinder method. It allows a race that has a penalty in an attribute to still make a functional character in a class focused on that attribute -- like my Vesk mechanice.
Although it will not make a difference in every case, the odd point did make a difference for two of my characters because I put it into Strength. On both of those characters, it allows them to qualify for feats that they wouldn't without the odd point.
I very seldom dump attributes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All I want is to be able to start with a 20(+5) in your primary ability.
Honestly a 20 in a starting stat is the one thing I want the PF2 stat generation system to explicitly prevent. I've never allowed starting stats above 18, even when we ran "write down whatever you want" as a stat generation method.
After all, a max of 18 at chargen was good enough for AD&D so it's good enough for all of its successors.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we're just stating opinions though, I hate starting 20s. I hate them in 3.0, I hate them in PF1, I hate them in Starfinder. So I would like to see them go away.
Even with racial bonuses? Becasue I suppose that's the point - smartest elf college graduate will be smarter than smartest dwarf college graduate...
Why do ability scores even exist? What purpose do they serve, other than confusing new players? Just use the bonuses and trash the ability scores -- they are a sacred cow that it's time to slaughter.
|
|
I'm personally interested in seeing something like this:
Ancestry: +2 stat, +2 stat, -2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Background: +2 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
Class: +4 stat, +2 stat, +2 floater (can't apply to one of the bonus stats)
This is more or less my theory, though I think the top two stats in the Class entry might be swappable with each other.
There also might be another +2 if 17-18 really does cost double.
We'll see if that's how it works out.
If we're just stating opinions though, I hate starting 20s. I hate them in 3.0, I hate them in PF1, I hate them in Starfinder. So I would like to see them go away.
Amen my brother... It's just number inflation. 16+2 is perfectly fine for ANY class to be good and still have "acceptable" numbers on the other stats. Getting a 20 in point buy just results in something ending up terribly wrong...
Only fair if you rolled 6,6,6 on the 3d6 + race bonus.
Hell, I prefer 5e system the most, where it caps at 15, FIFTEEN, before bonuses. SO max is like 17 at level 1. 18 STR is supposed to be like the power of a HILL GIANT, not your average lv1 char. It's embarrassing how high STR most humans have vs giant monsters.
Fighter and Barbarian default arrays have 7 wisdom scores? GTFO
Default min/max scores, from which players will always deviate. I chose all of the reasonably good builds and spread them out among all the core classes. 18/13/18/7/7/7 is just the most extreme. Sorcerers and Wizards probably make better use of it because of the Will saves.
Anyway, Fighters always eventually succumb to Will saves. The difference between -2 and +0 is Iron Will.
Fighter and Barbarian default arrays have 7 wisdom scores? GTFOTo me, those arrays are a joke. Mass number of 7s everywhere. 100% combat/optiization only builds where everyone ends up being ignorant brutes. I hope mass dumping to 7 is not even allowed on the new edition so I can never see that kind of array ever again.
I think it is silly to not show new players min/maxed arrays. They should at least know what they look like.
In my experience, most players don't stick with the most extreme builds. In any case, I don't see why a GM's aesthetics should restrict players to the 17/16/14/13/8/7 build or whatever array they find more appealing. It's not your character if you are the GM. If you love them set them free.
The default Paladin array is 14/12/14/7/10/18. You put a 12 in DEX in anticipation of getting full plate.Uh... No?
16/10/12/10/08/16 is the default Paladin array.
14/12/14/7/10/18 can barely function. 1 skill per level, way lower attack and damage, the 14 con is nice, but not needed as LoH more than makes up for 1 hp per level you get from going from 12 to 14. 12 Dex is nice, but you can get by without it. You can drop wisdom to 8 because Divine Grace will cover you.
You're missing the point. All of the arrays are different. You can mix and match however you like.