Do you take abilities to 20?

[Nik Gervae]

Do you feel a need to push your key ability to the limit, or, since ability boost above 18 only add 1, do you prefer to get more bang for your boost buck by gaining a full +1 to all boosted attributes, even if they're perhaps less frequently used?

[Wheldrake]

Since you boost 4 stats at a time, it's not too huge a sacrifice to only boost 3 and put that +1 on your prime requisite, waiting for 10th level to make something of it.

YMMV.

[Old_Man_Robot]

There is literally no point to NOT maxing your key stat.

Without apex items, your end game stat array looks something like:
22, 21, 18, 18, 12, 12

No class in the game is MAD enough to really need all their stats at 14 or above. Sure you can do it if you want, but I doubt it would really mean as much as topping out your key stat.

[graystone]

Nik Gervae wrote:

Do you feel a need to push your key ability to the limit

Yes. PF2 is a game where every +1 to rolls matters: since your key stat is most likely going to affect more of your rolls than other stats, it's more valuable than other stats. most times as long as you're raising your Key stat and your save stats, you're good and any points left over are gravy.

[shroudb]

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

There is literally no point to NOT maxing your key stat.

Without apex items, your end game stat array looks something like:
22, 21, 18, 18, 12, 12

No class in the game is MAD enough to really need all their stats at 14 or above. Sure you can do it if you want, but I doubt it would really mean as much as topping out your key stat.

Tbf there's like no point, at level 20 to take your 20->21

As for the rest, i agree.

You can safely have a 22 on your main, a few 18s, and if you wish to push it a 20 as well.

[TwilightKnight]

Old_Man_Robot wrote:

There is literally no point to NOT maxing your key stat

No offense, but you might want to curb your enthusiastic use of “literally.” There are plenty of reasons to boost your non-prime stat. It all depends on the build. Your class is only part of the build. With every skill being equally available to every class plus the inclusion of archetypes/multiclassing, it is easy to see times when a build may have a lot of MAD.

[Nocte ex Mortis]

No, that doesn’t really change the fact that there is literally no point to not raising your Key ability score to the absolute maximum, seeing as vast amounts of your class abilities run off of it, including Class and Spell DCs for most of them. Your Key ability score is your One Ring, everything else is nice, but that score makes you function.

[David knott 242]

There is also the expectation as to what level you expect to reach in the campaign. If your campaign is planned to end by 10th level, there is no reason to raise any 18 stat to 19 at 5th level. Ditto for the 10th level increase if you don't expect to reach 15th level.

And the classes do vary as to the relative importance of their key stats in any case.

[shroudb]

Nocte ex Mortis wrote:

No, that doesn’t really change the fact that there is literally no point to not raising your Key ability score to the absolute maximum, seeing as vast amounts of your class abilities run off of it, including Class and Spell DCs for most of them. Your Key ability score is your One Ring, everything else is nice, but that score makes you function.

mutagenist (as an example) doesnt care about either starting wtih 18 Int, or boosting to 24. More often than not, it'll stay at 20 max.

there are other builds as well that go for 16 in Main stat and dont bother to max it but leave it at 20, i've seen some warpriest as a second example doing the same.

The new summoner also doesn't "need" max Cha. And etc

Those same points are better served for those builds in either more survivability stats or more offensive ones like Str.

so "literally" isn't the correct word.

[tivadar27]

You typically take your primary stat as far as you can get it, though I'll admit, after getting it to 20 @10, if other things are more valuable, they'll probably give you more mileage. There are classes where their primary ability isn't their class ability (as was mentioned above), and for those, starting at a 16 and going to 20 @15 makes sense.

So yes, always 20, though 22 is probably not necessary unless you plan on actually adventuring at level 20 a lot.

EDIT: Your second ability boost comes 4 levels after your first, and I kinda wish they kept this pacing and did 1, 5, 9, 13, 17 for boosts, so you actually got to play with your final ability boost a bit.

[graystone]

shroudb wrote:

mutagenist (as an example) doesnt care about either starting wtih 18 Int, or boosting to 24. More often than not, it'll stay at 20 max.

there are other builds as well that go for 16 in Main stat and dont bother to max it but leave it at 20, i've seen some warpriest as a second example doing the same.

The new summoner also doesn't "need" max Cha. And etc

This is more a failure to allow the correct Key stat than not wanting to max it out. Other classes should take a page from the Rogue that allows every stat to be a Key stat.

David knott 242 wrote:

There is also the expectation as to what level you expect to reach in the campaign. If your campaign is planned to end by 10th level, there is no reason to raise any 18 stat to 19 at 5th level. Ditto for the 10th level increase if you don't expect to reach 15th level.

IMO, I'd say 'maxing out' would be getting the highest bonus vs the highest stat: So to me the 'maxing out' stat I'm talking is the highest even numbered stat you can get.

[Garretmander]

I'd boost my main stat to 22 ASAP.

Whether I would boost a second stat to 20 or try for more 14-16s is dependent on what the character actually does.

[Captain Morgan]

Also while it might be mechanically optimal to do so you can decide not to for a variety of roleplay reasons.

Personally, I'd find it hard to justify, but there are reasons. I have a player who has chosen to put all her skill increases towards training in new skills because her character's skill set would become broader rather than specialized, which I would never do but fits her concept.

[Unicore]

I have found that I really enjoy a lot characters that only start with a 16 in their "main" stat and only boost to a total of 20 at level 15.

Like my cleric started with a
STR: 10 Dex: 16 Con: 10 INT: 12 WIS: 16 CHA: 14
and I boosted DEX, INT, WIS, CHA at level 5.
10 / 18 / 10 / 14 / 18 / 16
And will boost DEX, CON, WIS, CHA at 10,
10 / 19 / 12 / 14 / 19 / 18
DEX, CON, WIS and CHA at 15
10 / 20 / 14 / 14/ 20 / 19
and STR, CON, INT, and CHA at level 20
12 / 20 / 16 / 16 / 20 / 20

I am only actually behind 1 point on my casting at levels 1-5, 10-15, and 20. In return, I get to be good at firing a bow, and have a ridiculous amount of skills.

My basic rule of thumb is, "Do I attack every round with this attribute?" and if the answer is no, then starting with 2 16s in each of your attack attributes can make for a much more flexible and interesting character. Ending at 20 instead of pushing for 22 actually buys you 3 additional attribute boosts by level 20.

[Perpdepog]

Graystone wrote:

This is more a failure to allow the correct Key stat than not wanting to max it out. Other classes should take a page from the Rogue that allows every stat to be a Key stat.

Other than Con, that is, and just you wait. Those slippery rogues will find a way to key off that, too.

[graystone]

Perpdepog wrote:

Graystone wrote:

This is more a failure to allow the correct Key stat than not wanting to max it out. Other classes should take a page from the Rogue that allows every stat to be a Key stat.

Other than Con, that is, and just you wait. Those slippery rogues will find a way to key off that, too.

True but Con has always been the red headed stepchild of stat: It doesn't even get a skill. ;)

[Lucas Yew]

I feel like sinning (yeah, really, it's that strong a feeling) if I don't manage to reach 24 in my character's key stat (including the appropriate apex item bonus).

To be fair, it's different for each player and their decision though.

[Deadmanwalking]

IMO, Key Stats (or, more specifically, whatever stat you use to attack) are usually worth starting at 18 and increasing them whenever you can (though if you start with a 16 there's no point in going to 21 at 20th). So you should almost always increase whatever stat you use for that.

Also, if you have no armor and you can manage Dex 20, you want to do that for the AC.

Those aside...it depends on concept. Usually 18 will probably be enough unless you really want to focus on something for some specific reason, either mechanical or thematic.

[Ubertron_X]

My WP level 20 setup will look like this:

STR: 20 Dex: 12 Con: 20 INT: 10 WIS: 20 CHA: 20

So yeah I will take a couple of stats to 20...

[WatersLethe]

I'm more tolerant of failure than most, and I enjoy characters with a diverse array of abilities and skills. Unless my concept is really focused on something (like, say, Archery) I tend to start with 16s.

I also love support roles, so if I whiff but help someone else hit, I still have a blast.

[Ravingdork]

Ironically, maxing out your key stat seems less important to me in this edition, not more.

I think you can get by with anywhere from a 20-24 in your main stat by level 20, depending on what you're trying to accomplish.

I think that David knott 242 also makes a good point about campaign duration.

[TwilightKnight]

Nocte ex Mortis wrote:

there is literally no point to not raising your Key ability score to the absolute maximum

Well, you folks can keep using that word but obviously you don't know that it doesn't mean what you think it means. There are literally tens of thousands of players who will continue to not boost our prime score to the absolute maximum and be a quite functional and very successful character. If there ever was a case of YMMV, this is it.

The number of people who insist there is only one 'right' way to play this game continues to amaze.

[Joyd]

I think it would be reasonable for somebody to say that having +1 in their fifth-most-important stat for five levels is more important to them than having +1 in their most important stat for exactly level 20, even if you knew for certain that your campaign was definitely going to reach level 20. I probably would still always boost mainstat in most circumstances, but I also don't think that the strategy that produces the best possible stat array at 20 is necessarily automatically the best strategy if it produces a slightly worse stat array for several levels before that. It's a question of getting a very important boost for a short time vs. getting a less important boost for a longer time.

[HumbleGamer]

I think that there's really no use to increase a stat past 20, simply because you will get your bonus by lvl 20.

your maximum stats will be +4 for 10 levels and +5 for 10 levels.

I really wouldn't care about raising it past 20 ( unless you know that once hit lvl 20 you will be playing that character for a long time ).

[TwilightKnight]

I think generally the deciding factor will be, is your character specialized in a small suit of powers that are only modified by four or fewer ability scores or is your character much more broad in its suite that need up to all six abilities to be effective in the vision you have for it. My characters, even my martials tend to be more generalist than specialist so I don’t always gravitate towards a +1 to the prime score “just cause.”

Example, for a fighter I might go for charisma for social encounters, Wisdom for perception/initiative and Medicine, Intelligence for crafting to repair my shield, and Constitution for more hit points or Dex for better acrobatics, Stealth ranger and AC, all might outweigh the need to add to my 18 Strength knowing I get no value from that until level 10. Plus there are so many other ways to improve Athletics and melee attack mod that the weighted value of another +1 from Str reduces over time.

[Garretmander]

I think a better question is: If you stop your favored stat at 20, did you start at 16 or 18 for that stat?

[HumbleGamer]

Garretmander wrote:

I think a better question is: If you stop your favored stat at 20, did you start at 16 or 18 for that stat?

I say yes.

You will get your bonus earlier, so it's definitely the right thing to do.

Or else, you will be using your +5 ( 20 stat score ) by lvl 15+ instead of by lvl 10+

And since it's your main stat, I suppose it would only be the right thing to do.

[Nik Gervae]

Interesting discussion. A lot of it depends on the type of game you're playing, of course, and the types of challenges your GM throws at you. If you're pressured to optimize narrowly, you'll probably do that. If your GM challenges the martials with charisma encounters and such, rather than always pitting the group against super-powerful monsters, you'll want to cover that rather than dumping charisma. It seems more folks do the former, than the latter.

[Jon Yamato 705]

I would never assume a campaign would go to 20. Just look at how many reports we have on "how episode #1 went for my group" vs. "how episode #6 went for my group." So, rather than it seeming obviously best to push the high stat, to me it seems obviously best to go for having a useful bonus (and they are pretty much all useful) at a level I *know* I will be playing at.

Game design wise, I am really not a fan of "give up power at level N to get more power at level N+5 or N+10." It puts pressure on the GM to run from N to N+5 or N+10, and in my experience also creates pressure to get to N+ *sooner*, which can damage the campaign.

Certainly if you were building for a one-shot rather than a campaign you would never consider taking that odd stat point.