| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I actually agree with you about something, haha. Yeah, the panic is clearly premature. Just because they didn't mention point buy in a blog primarily about halflings and gnomes that only mentioned ability scores as a small side topic, doesn't mean point buy isn't in the game.
They mentioned rolling dice for stats as an option. The obvious corollary is base 10s with point buy as the expected main stat generation option, with ancestry and such only being in addition to that rather than in place of it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think panic is appropriate for those of us who hate the Starfinder point buy. It's panic on a message board, after all, not a crowded movie theater. How else are we going to get it through to Paizo that the point buy that seems to work so well at conventions doesn't work at home nearly as well. We *tolerate* the way pathfinder is done at conventions because it is better than nothing, but everything about it, from the character creation to the things you are allowed to do in the adventures, is restrictive. You simply cannot cast charm on the guard and have him let you in if the rules for the DM say the party has to fight. You simply cannot create a character with a point spread you like. All of these restrictions assume we are all playing in a giant sandbox together, so the complaints about min/maxers should actually be given some attention. They should not. Put the onus of restrictive point buy and restrictive character conception on the DM enforcing the restrictions. We don't bring a premade character to games we play in our houses; the DM is always there.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like "let's do something different to generate stats" is literally the easiest thing to bolt on to one of these things anyway.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Most tables I have played at have some crazy stat generation method chosen by the GM anyway. If we are talking PFS then I really think the time to get across issues with the point buy is when we have actually played with them during the playtest instead of when we have some vague and incomplete impression about it from the blog.
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the paladin hysteria and the goblin hysteria have pretty much run their course.
There's got to be some kind of active hysteria thread or it wouldn't be the Playtest Forum.
At the end of the day, Ability Scores are probably the single least interesting part of the game and I for one think the game would go much better without them.
If, for some reason, their continued existence is necessary for the game's underlying math to work out, it probably doesn't matter how they're derived: roll, point-buy, stat-array? In the end it all comes down to a few static bonuses scattered about.
I agree. If the trade-offs inherent in a graduated point buy are eliminated, we are left with modifiers that will always be put where they "belong." Why bother to have an INT modifier if you are a Wizard or Alchemist? Just assume Wizards and Alchemists have an 18 INT and everybody else has 10, then chuck INT in the trash. If you want your fighter to be educated, take a feat (or maybe your GM will let you have that trait for free if it doesn't have a mechanical impact on the game); you don't need to "waste" 12 in INT to be a Fighter, and it is wonky to force players to put a 13 in INT as a feat prerequisite Fighters might want.
Although I agree point buy is utterly unimportant to those who are getting what they want in Starfinder, I do not agree that eliminating the mini-game that is the graduated point buy improves the game. If point buy is unimportant to you, use the static array (or select from six interesting static arrays that were built using graduated point buy). Although I'm almost always DM now, I've played in a ton of 3.5e games (and 2e) and the house rules for stats were never point buy with all points worth the same because that is the most inane way to do it and invariably results in almost identical builds for a given class.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We know stats start at 10 and how ancestry effects stats. I believe it was said that background also affect stats and maybe class does too so there are probably a few more +2s floating around somewhere.
I also think in the level up blog it was mentioned that the stat increases that you get at 5th 10th etc. levels (+2 to four different stats) are the same as you get at level one.
So I'd guess its probably:
All stats start at 10
Ancestry: +2 to two stats (maybe another +2 and a -2)
Background: +2 to one or two stats
Class: +2 to one or two stats
Starting Character ability increase: +2 to four stats
(Four sources providing +2s mean that characters can start with 18(s) if ABCs all align)
Personally I think it would be good if maybe background and/or class also adds a +2 for -2 option maybe at higher costs.
Example: Wizards can sacrifice their physical health for more intelligence so all wizards gain +2 Int but also can take another +2 Int for -2 Str, -2 Con and -2 Dex. That would capture some of the feeling of point buy but make it sightly more of a series of narrative backstory choices than a math mini game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If Kyra gets +2 to 4 stats, they have to be STR, DEX, WIS, CHA.
It follows ABC would be
A: +2 STR/+2 WIS (assuming no dump stat for human)
B: +2 WIS/+2 CHA (or Background could give one +2 and Class two)
C: +2 WIS
D: +2 STR/+2 DEX/+2 WIS/+2 CHA
If Kyra gets +2 to 4 stats, they have to be STR, DEX, WIS, CHA.
It follows ABC would be
A: +2 STR/+2 WIS (assuming no dump stat for human)
B: +2 WIS/+2 CHA (or Background could give one +2 and Class two)
C: +2 WIS
D: +2 STR/+2 DEX/+2 WIS/+2 CHA
Yah that was my thinking exactly. Of course there is no uniqueness theorem for speculation so we don't really know. I see how that is nice and simple but potentially bland as well. A few more +2/-2 options would help give a little more flavor though that might be better as an optional rule.
Yah that was my thinking exactly. Of course there is no uniqueness theorem for speculation so we don't really know. I see how that is nice and simple but potentially bland as well. A few more +2/-2 options would help give a little more flavor though that might be better as an optional rule.If Kyra gets +2 to 4 stats, they have to be STR, DEX, WIS, CHA.
It follows ABC would be
A: +2 STR/+2 WIS (assuming no dump stat for human)
B: +2 WIS/+2 CHA (or Background could give one +2 and Class two)
C: +2 WIS
D: +2 STR/+2 DEX/+2 WIS/+2 CHA
I didn't come up with it. I was just riffing off what you said. In any case, it is better than the god-awful Starfinder point buy. It turns into a narrative mini-game, which I think might be kind of interesting.
Also, I think it would be better if you only increased three abilities every 5th level. It's too generous, which makes it uninteresting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't come up with it. I was just riffing off what you said. In any case, it is better than the god-awful Starfinder point buy. It turns into a narrative mini-game, which I think might be kind of interesting.Yah that was my thinking exactly. Of course there is no uniqueness theorem for speculation so we don't really know. I see how that is nice and simple but potentially bland as well. A few more +2/-2 options would help give a little more flavor though that might be better as an optional rule.If Kyra gets +2 to 4 stats, they have to be STR, DEX, WIS, CHA.
It follows ABC would be
A: +2 STR/+2 WIS (assuming no dump stat for human)
B: +2 WIS/+2 CHA (or Background could give one +2 and Class two)
C: +2 WIS
D: +2 STR/+2 DEX/+2 WIS/+2 CHA
If the Ancestry, and Background, both have a floating bonus you could get an 18 in your most important stat as long as it wasn't your ancestry flaw.
E.G.
Kyla could be Performer background with +2 Cha +2 Floating(Wis)
Farmhand background with +2 Con +2 Floating(Wis)
Scholar background with +2 Int +2 Floating(Wis)
Gives background a purpose without making it so that all Clerics need to have the pre-cleric background to make sure they get 18 Wis. I think that was a design goal with the floating +2 in ancestries as well.
That seems to strike a nice balance between the design goals of allowing you to make the character you want without feeling mechanically punished, and having ancestries and backgrounds actually have a mechanical effect.
I've never played Starfinder. Is the pointbuy in that different than the one in PF1?
I've never played Starfinder. Is the pointbuy in that different than the one in PF1?
It's flat. Basically all your stats start at 10, you divvy up 10 points between any of your stats (so 18,12,10,10,10,10 and 12,12,12,12,10 cost the same), your species gives you either +2/+2/-2 or a floating +2, and you get another +1 from a theme.
Also every 5 (I think) levels you can increase 4 stats, which gives them +2 if you they started at 16 or less and +1 otherwise.
I don't particularly see anything wrong with it.
I've never played Starfinder. Is the pointbuy in that different than the one in PF1?
Yah it is pretty different:
Step 1: Start with a score of 10 in each ability.
Step 2: Add and subtract points for race. (+2/+2/-2 or +2 floating for human)
Step 3: Add points for theme(background). (+1 to one score)
Step 4: Spend 10 points customizing your scores. You apply these to your existing ability scores on a 1-for-1 basis—if you have a Dexterity score of 12 and you add a point from your pool, you now have a Dexterity score of 13. You can divide these points up however you want, but you can’t make any individual score higher than 18.
So there is not an increasing point cost for higher ability scores. You are also allowed to dump an ability below 10 but you gain no extra points for doing so.
Then at 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th levels you choose four ability scores you would like to increase. If the score is 16 or lower you increase it by 2. If it is 17 or higher it increases by 1.
EDIT: Id say ninjaed but I got sidetracked while writing this and finished it in an untimely manner so it probably wouldn't have required a ninja.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mostly, people just don't seem to like that you can't start with a stat higher than 18. I guess a lot of people just really wanted to eke out that last +1 bonus there.
I kind of really like that I can start with a 16 in a main stat and at level 5 have the same bonus as someone who started with an 18 has.
Like I think we're play Starfinder this summer and going to roll a Shirren Operative (Bug Detective!) and a 10 16 12 14 13 8 spread seems fine, since it'll be 10 18 14 16 15 8 in 5 levels.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nope, we've got this. Y'all don't have to worry your pretty little heads about it.
I didn't come up with it. I was just riffing off what you said. In any case, it is better than the god-awful Starfinder point buy. It turns into a narrative mini-game, which I think might be kind of interesting.Yah that was my thinking exactly. Of course there is no uniqueness theorem for speculation so we don't really know. I see how that is nice and simple but potentially bland as well. A few more +2/-2 options would help give a little more flavor though that might be better as an optional rule.If Kyra gets +2 to 4 stats, they have to be STR, DEX, WIS, CHA.
It follows ABC would be
A: +2 STR/+2 WIS (assuming no dump stat for human)
B: +2 WIS/+2 CHA (or Background could give one +2 and Class two)
C: +2 WIS
D: +2 STR/+2 DEX/+2 WIS/+2 CHAIf the Ancestry, and Background, both have a floating bonus you could get an 18 in your most important stat as long as it wasn't your ancestry flaw.
E.G.
Kyla could be Performer background with +2 Cha +2 Floating(Wis)
Farmhand background with +2 Con +2 Floating(Wis)
Scholar background with +2 Int +2 Floating(Wis)Gives background a purpose without making it so that all Clerics need to have the pre-cleric background to make sure they get 18 Wis. I think that was a design goal with the floating +2 in ancestries as well.
That seems to strike a nice balance between the design goals of allowing you to make the character you want without feeling mechanically punished, and having ancestries and backgrounds actually have a mechanical effect.
There is a more likely answer though...
Kyra's stats:
Str 14
Dex 12
Con 10
Int 10
Wis 18
Cha 14Start with all 10's
10/10/10/10/10/10Human racial - She adds 2 to Strength and 2 to Wis
12/10/10/10/12/10
Then she spends 10 points how she wants them:
14/12/10/10/16/12
Then she gets 2 points to Wis and Cha due to Background
14/12/10/10/18/14
This is the most logical...
Except the level up blog said "You'll also amp up several of your ability scores every 5 levels. The process might be familiar to those of you who've been playing Starfinder for the last several months! There are, of course, a few tweaks, and we made all ability boosts work the same way instead of being different at 1st level. Learn it once, use it in perpetuity."
Which implies a +2 to multiple attributes similar to starfinder level up increase at level one. So any model that does not take that into account is incomplete.
I see. Thank you for the info.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Please guys"
So, the women aren't panicking?
The current playtest threads are largely equivalent to this old folk remedy that goes along the lines of:
"Set the menfolk to chopping wood and boiling water. We have babies to deliver."
The 'menfolk' are those 'panicking' on the playtest threads. Those delivering the babies are the developers and moderators. :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Please guys"
So, the women aren't panicking?
But what about that children? Won't someone please think of the children!!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We know stats start at 10 and how ancestry effects stats. I believe it was said that background also affect stats and maybe class does too so there are probably a few more +2s floating around somewhere.
I also think in the level up blog it was mentioned that the stat increases that you get at 5th 10th etc. levels (+2 to four different stats) are the same as you get at level one.
So I'd guess its probably:
All stats start at 10
Ancestry: +2 to two stats (maybe another +2 and a -2)
Background: +2 to one or two stats
Class: +2 to one or two stats
Starting Character ability increase: +2 to four stats
(Four sources providing +2s mean that characters can start with 18(s) if ABCs all align)Personally I think it would be good if maybe background and/or class also adds a +2 for -2 option maybe at higher costs.
Example: Wizards can sacrifice their physical health for more intelligence so all wizards gain +2 Int but also can take another +2 Int for -2 Str, -2 Con and -2 Dex. That would capture some of the feeling of point buy but make it sightly more of a series of narrative backstory choices than a math mini game.
Hrm, this is pretty logical and plausible as a potential system. It also seems to work fairly well. The ABCs mnemonic is nice touch. I had some initial skepticism of putting the racial bonuses at the beginning like Starfinder, rather than the end like Pathfinder. Because it would seem that the ceiling for all races would be the same. But your speculated system does seem to handle that by requiring everything to line up to get the highest result. So a stronger race will have a higher top end than an average one and a weak one, but it's now 18 vs 16 vs 14 instead of 20 vs 18 vs 16.
I also had some initial problems with the background being so important, in that I was worried that certain backgrounds would be required for certain builds. "Oh I wanted to go with a nerf-herder background, but the stat bonues are just horrible with the Tyromancer class, so I'll need to take the greep-crottler background instead." But on further thought and reading more of this thread it looks like that can be solved with generous use of floating bonuses. Also I'm hoping to see a large amount of backgrounds and more added as things go along.
So I think this thread took me from being a bit anxious about where I thought the system might be heading to being significantly more optimistic. Thanks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is pretty slick. However, a single +2 for three -2s seems to be the kind of thing that should be able to break the "max score of 18" cap as sucking down three -2s is too steep for a single +2. Unless it accompanies some other cool bonus(es).
That is pretty slick. However, a single +2 for three -2s seems to be the kind of thing that should be able to break the "max score of 18" cap as sucking down three -2s is too steep for a single +2. Unless it accompanies some other cool bonus(es).
Yah the three to one trade off getting Int 20 was my intent with that one. But its really just trying to think of cool things they could do within the framework of how I think they will actually do it. One flavorful 3 to one trade per abiliy score might be an interesting way to introduce some additional variance and allow starting scores of 20. Since they gave charisma resonance and are using a bulk system which is less likely to be ignored than tracking by the pound each ability score is a bit more punishing to dump.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if the "class" step of the ABC progression can have different numbers of stats boosted depending on what class you take at level 1, and this can be leveraged to solve the SAD/MAD class problem.
Like saying "the monastic life is more demanding than academe, so monks get more stat boosts than wizards" sees like a thing that's at least worth considering.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I recall, those Con and Int values are guesses/minimal assumptions, right? She may well have a 12 Con, or even a 08 Int from customization...
Looks like we’ll get comfortable, balanced stats without the temptation to militantly dump some stats to make a 20. Win-win if you ask me!
I wonder if the "class" step of the ABC progression can have different numbers of stats boosted depending on what class you take at level 1, and this can be leveraged to solve the SAD/MAD class problem.
Like saying "the monastic life is more demanding than academe, so monks get more stat boosts than wizards" sees like a thing that's at least worth considering.
Being as I've recommended elsewhere that you get a bonus feature at 1st level in your 1st class, I'm totally on board with this. So maybe a MAD class like a monk gets an extra +2 compared to other classes if it's your 1st class, a rogue gets both an extra skill proficiency and a bonus skill feat if it's your 1st class, a bard gets an extra bardic performance, and so on. This reflects that you spend longer training for that 1st class in your backstory than other classes you might pick up later via multiclassing.
|
As I recall, those Con and Int values are guesses/minimal assumptions, right? She may well have a 12 Con, or even a 08 Int from customization...
An 8 is possible but a 12 unlikely since the person listing them listed off 12 Dex. It'd be weird to do that and then not list the 12 Con. Personally, I think an 8 would've been notable enough to mention, too, but not mentioning it is somewhat more likely.
Her having 10s in both doesn't make more customization impossible, though. The progression could be something like:
Ancestry: Two +2s (often another +2 and a -2)
Background: Two +2s and a -2 (this -2 could be in Class instead)
Class: Two +2s
First Character Upgrade: Four +2s
And then Kyra just countered whatever was dropped by the -2 with a +2.
Looks like we’ll get comfortable, balanced stats without the temptation to militantly dump some stats to make a 20. Win-win if you ask me!
Yeah. Assuming Background gets at least one floating bonus (which I expect), it's freeform enough to allow any ABC choice to be viable (most with an 18 primary stat unless you go with an ancestry with a stat penalty).
All while being intuitive and much less complicated than point-buy in the PF1 sense.
First off, I'm stunned I agree with HWalsh about something.
That said... I don't understand the commotion. It looks like this is vastly simplifying ability score generation and baking in fair and equal stats as the default assumption. Why are either of these problems? I lost so much freaking time testing various permutations of ability score math in PFS builds to get the exact combination I wanted. Streamlining it is a good thing.
First off, I'm stunned I agree with HWalsh about something.
That said... I don't understand the commotion. It looks like this is vastly simplifying ability score generation and baking in fair and equal stats as the default assumption. Why are either of these problems? I lost so much freaking time testing various permutations of ability score math in PFS builds to get the exact combination I wanted. Streamlining it is a good thing.
I would say streamlining *can* be a good thing, not that it *is* a good thing. Elegance, which is streamlining without losing anything that is fun about, in this case, character creation, is good.
In my opinion, a straight point buy is not fun. Even worse is the Starfinder point buy with a +1 theme and a +2 floating bonus that do not matter if you put them in an attribute you want to increase. Ironically, if you put them in an attribute you don't want to increase, they do have an effect, positive in the case of theme because the theme bonus is wasted when you increase the score to 18 in the future, but negative if you put it in an ability you don't want to increase (though, why would you?).
Also, we have had the option of dropping some scores to increase others for a long time now. I rather like the +2 to certain attributes at each ABCD (where D stands for distribution of three +2s at start, 5th, 10th, 15th, and 20th Levels, if that is how it works). The only thing missing is a -2 floater at each ABC (or even D, in the guise of "retraining"). While I've never understood the dislike of character concepts that include a fighter who is not only stupid, but also uncouth (seems fine to me) or a Wizard who is not only weak, but also foolish, at least the perceived min/max advantage of a negative floater will be to secondary attributes because it looks like everyone is going to have an 18 in the primary. Indeed, if ABC each provide a +2 floater and another +2, the advantage of dumping an attribute will be to a tertiary attribute. That's hardly overpowering, but allows for customization below average without just saying "OK, you suck worse than everyone else. Hurray! Options!" Gimping without "advantage" works in Fate, but it doesn't work in PF.