Is there any advantage to raising an attribute to an odd number (eg 19 or 23) at level 20? I can see it at level 15 if you plan to raise it again for the additional +1 to the attribute modifier at level 20, but at first glance, at least, it seems to me that an advance that would leave you with an odd attribute value and no increase to the attribute modifier is better spent somewhere else - even perhaps bumping your "dump stat" by 2 for a +1 to its modifier. Am I missing something?
Occasionally (I know of one) there's a campaign reward where the PCs get a free stat boost. That would take an odd number to an even, though it's nothing to bank on.
I try to map out my bonuses to peak at a level appropriate for the campaign so that my last bonuses don't get jammed up, so few get forced into being odd or used on dump stats.
And technically, one could say 21 is technically stronger/smarter/wiser/etc. than 20, even if mechanically the same.
Other than Strength though, in character it will only seem like opinion anyway.
I suppose at some point there could be an apex item that raises a stat by 1, but afaik there aren't any now.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
:o
Apex items that raise two stats by 1 could be really cool!
Only if you're trying to get your stat to 20 or 22 such as raising an 18 to a 19 or a 20 to a 21.
I confess that I've always been bemused by rules that up your character's attributes, particularly on a permanent basis. I guess it's because I spent quite a bit of time back in the day with a game (Harnmaster) where the only change to attributes, barring temporary magical effects is that they may decrease as you get older*. But then I get the distinct impression that as far as most Pathfinder players are concerned, their PCs are 18 when they're created, 18 when they reach level 20, and presumably 18 forever after. Or perhaps it's just "how old? who cares?" <shrug>
* The Harnmaster Gold GMguide has a very interesting bit on "death as a part of the story" - and not necessarily from old age. In fact, I'd almost say the GMguide is worth the price ($25 at [url=https://www.kelestia.com/harnmaster/gmedition]Kelestia.com[url]) for this even if you're not going to use the harnmaster ruleset.
|
I confess that I've always been bemused by rules that up your character's attributes, particularly on a permanent basis. I guess it's because I spent quite a bit of time back in the day with a game (Harnmaster) where the only change to attributes, barring temporary magical effects is that they may decrease as you get older*. But then I get the distinct impression that as far as most Pathfinder players are concerned, their PCs are 18 when they're created, 18 when they reach level 20, and presumably 18 forever after. Or perhaps it's just "how old? who cares?" <shrug>
* The Harnmaster Gold GMguide has a very interesting bit on "death as a part of the story" - and not necessarily from old age. In fact, I'd almost say the GMguide is worth the price ($25 at [url=https://www.kelestia.com/harnmaster/gmedition]Kelestia.com[url]) for this even if you're not going to use the harnmaster ruleset.
I used to play a little Harnmaster (and even still have the books!), but that was a long, long, long time ago (decades, not years).
Harn was an incredibly detailed and realistic world. Loved it!
Sadly, like most systems more complex than a coin toss, your primary ability score has a major effect on the balance of the PF2 game. Hence we always have to have the maximum possible ability score to be fair.
Its pretty much a given. Its more than a bit childish but if equality and fairness is what you are after then we are stuck with it.
So along with uncomfortable truths like old age. We ignore differences, which are the spice of life, and everyone gets the same generic values.
My wishlist:
1. Options locked behind odd ability score prerequisites. Doesn't really matter what they are, could be equipment, feats, skill uses, or story rewards. Particularly high level stuff requiring a 19 or 21 minimum score.
2. Minor apex item that boosts a score by one point. If combined with (1) they suddenly have a reason for existing besides helping people who have built their characters into a corner.
3. Raw ability score values being used as tiebreakers in certain circumstances (skill vs skill competitions, estimating someone's prowess, or long-term performance in things like academics or labor)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My wishlist:
1. Options locked behind odd ability score prerequisites. Doesn't really matter what they are, could be equipment, feats, skill uses, or story rewards. Particularly high level stuff requiring a 19 or 21 minimum score.
Me too. I remember when abilities could be anywhere from 3 to 18, 16 different values. Point buys narrowed the range from 7 to 18, 12 different values. Now with limitations on flaws and only even numbers, it's 8/10/12/14/16/18, just 6 values.
It feels very assembly line - efficient and repetitive.
My wishlist:
1. Options locked behind odd ability score prerequisites. Doesn't really matter what they are, could be equipment, feats, skill uses, or story rewards. Particularly high level stuff requiring a 19 or 21 minimum score.
Me too. I remember when abilities could be anywhere from 3 to 18, 16 different values. Point buys narrowed the range from 7 to 18, 12 different values. Now with limitations on flaws and only even numbers, it's 8/10/12/14/16/18, just 6 values.
It feels very assembly line - efficient and repetitive.
I'm pretty sure that those 6 values only produce 4 real stat arrays:
-Human 18 primary stat
-Non-human 18 primary stat
-Human 16 primary stat
-Non-human 16 primary stat.
There's almost no reason for anybody not to max their primary stat, have 14 in every save stat, and then ignore 2 dump stats. Any class that is "forced" to go away from this paradigm should get boosted class features to compensate.
I used to play a little Harnmaster (and even still have the books!), but that was a long, long, long time ago (decades, not years).
Harn was an incredibly detailed and realistic world. Loved it!
It's still incredibly detailed and realistic. :-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My wishlist:
1. Options locked behind odd ability score prerequisites. Doesn't really matter what they are, could be equipment, feats, skill uses, or story rewards. Particularly high level stuff requiring a 19 or 21 minimum score.
Me too. I remember when abilities could be anywhere from 3 to 18, 16 different values. Point buys narrowed the range from 7 to 18, 12 different values. Now with limitations on flaws and only even numbers, it's 8/10/12/14/16/18, just 6 values.
It feels very assembly line - efficient and repetitive.
I'm pretty sure that those 6 values only produce 4 real stat arrays:
-Human 18 primary stat
-Non-human 18 primary stat
-Human 16 primary stat
-Non-human 16 primary stat.There's almost no reason for anybody not to max their primary stat, have 14 in every save stat, and then ignore 2 dump stats. Any class that is "forced" to go away from this paradigm should get boosted class features to compensate.
I've seen too many suggested stat arrays that disprove this notion of there only being four variants. Factor in qualifying for MCDs or wearing armor on a non-martial (like Druid or Bard) and that leads to more too.
Barring randomness (which is hard to balance), PF2 does as well as any other point-buy system, and with the boosts at every 5th level players while keeping one's top stat strong, one can make beefy PCs without sacrificing elsewhere (like the 7 Int/7 Cha martials of PF1!).
I play in a house table and we all agreed to allow the last attribute increase end rounded up to avoid unnecesary worriness. I mean, the PCs are at their carrer pinacle at lvl 20 so a little reward is well deserved.
Right now the only reason odd values exist is because the rules "slow down" the attribute increase at a certain point.
Yeah the odd attributes and slow down past 18 is just for balancing between mad and sad builds I think
Yeah the odd attributes and slow down past 18 is just for balancing between mad and sad builds I think
Since it's easy in PF2 to have an 18 and still pad one's MAD build, it's more likely IMO that it keeps top & bottom tighter.
A person with a 14 is only two behind at levels 1-4 if they boost.
Then it's 16 vs. 19, 18 vs. 20, 19 vs. 21, 20 vs. 22 (not counting Apex).
So somebody in the middle, if they invest, will remain competitive.
Somebody at the bottom, say an 8, will only fall behind by 8 (including Apex this time), which on a d20 means they're still in the game if say they invested a similar amount into a skill based on that stat.
Also, stats might overshadow other investments too much.
Look at how PCs get +1 items in the early game, yet +3 ones don't arrive until late game. As in it's easy to rise to competence, yet difficult to rise to excellence.
In game, one's moving into superhuman levels, so there's that. One can't expect that to come as easily as hitting peak human levels. (I mean, one could given the fantasy genre, yet these are nonmagical achievements and some tables play a gritty game.)
Yeah the odd attributes and slow down past 18 is just for balancing between mad and sad builds I think
An easier way to fix this is to not have the 18+ attributes increase by 1, but still implement a cap of increasing an attribute to 22, so as not to mess with the endgame math.
By 10th level, characters can have a 22 in their primary, which makes them stronger in the early game, but gives them less improvement in the late game, and also gives them more incentive to invest in other attributes towards the end as well.
I can’t believe that it took me until this thread to realize that attribute modifications could be done to “correct” any math without having to add any new content.
Real facepalm moment
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Making it so it gives the full +2 always means that characters would be incentivized to get their primary and secondary to 22. Which is impossible in the current system without a gracious GM.
And tertiary... and whatever fourth is.
A 14 can get to 22, leading to a lot of bloat.I don't see that in the realm of gracious, rather sloppy or easy instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since you get four increases every five levels, one possible approach might be to let all increases be by +2 but have increases past 18 cost two increases each, then impose limits on the final values as follows:
Levels 1 and 5: No ability score can exceed 18.
Levels 10 and 15: No ability score can exceed 20.
Level 20: No ability score can exceed 22.
This method would have similar ultimate results to the current method but would eliminate the need to track odd ability scores.
Yeah the odd attributes and slow down past 18 is just for balancing between mad and sad builds I thinkAn easier way to fix this is to not have the 18+ attributes increase by 1, but still implement a cap of increasing an attribute to 22, so as not to mess with the endgame math.
By 10th level, characters can have a 22 in their primary, which makes them stronger in the early game, but gives them less improvement in the late game, and also gives them more incentive to invest in other attributes towards the end as well.
Messing with the mid-game math just because it doesn't mess with the end-game math doesn't actually make sense, so that's not a "fix" so much as taking one kind of odd but working as intended thing (odd ability scores) and breaking it.
Using my current wizard character as an example, switching over to your proposed rule would have had the following effect: 1 higher Int mod from 5th level until 20th; 1 higher Dex mod from 10th onward; 1 higher Wid mod from 15th onward; 1 higher Str mod at 20th; 1 higher Cha mod at 15th onward.
A total of 4 extra points of modifiers, and maxing out 3 abilities instead of 1 (excepting apex item, at least).
So in the end, your "fix" messes with the endgame math and the mid-game math, it just doesn't raise the maximum a score can reach.
I mean, yes, you're making the mid-game have higher math to compensate for the change, but in the end it makes non-specialists more viable because they will have higher secondary/tertiary stats that weren't spent on keeping their primary stuff afloat. Heck, it even makes Attributes starting at 14 more viable by the endgame since they can still hit 22 pre-Apex.
I can understand not liking the fact that it has to be done that way, but I remember the reasoning behind removing the desire for odd ability scores was because of keeping math simple for the game. But then it rears its ugly head and does the very thing it set itself out to remove, which is implementing odd ability scores that don't actually do anything. The very topic this thread is about.
Pretty unrelated, but this thread reminded me that the Gradual Ability Boosts variant exists. That's a good heckin' variant! Takes spiky emphasis off Lv 5/10/15/20, and lets non-specialists and secondary attributes catch up quicker. I suppose if you wanted to, you could allow a second boost in an ability at Lv 20 to alleviate an important odd score or bring up a secondary/tertiary stat more than would normally be possible, without being as power-pushing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
QuaternaryMaking it so it gives the full +2 always means that characters would be incentivized to get their primary and secondary to 22. Which is impossible in the current system without a gracious GM.And tertiary... and whatever fourth is.
I only know this because of save files in games like Owlcat's Kingmaker. Sometimes I go as deep as having a septenary save.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah the odd attributes and slow down past 18 is just for balancing between mad and sad builds I thinkAn easier way to fix this is to not have the 18+ attributes increase by 1, but still implement a cap of increasing an attribute to 22, so as not to mess with the endgame math.
By 10th level, characters can have a 22 in their primary, which makes them stronger in the early game, but gives them less improvement in the late game, and also gives them more incentive to invest in other attributes towards the end as well.
Messing with the mid-game math just because it doesn't mess with the end-game math doesn't actually make sense, so that's not a "fix" so much as taking one kind of odd but working as intended thing (odd ability scores) and breaking it.
Using my current wizard character as an example, switching over to your proposed rule would have had the following effect: 1 higher Int mod from 5th level until 20th; 1 higher Dex mod from 10th onward; 1 higher Wid mod from 15th onward; 1 higher Str mod at 20th; 1 higher Cha mod at 15th onward.
A total of 4 extra points of modifiers, and maxing out 3 abilities instead of 1 (excepting apex item, at least).
So in the end, your "fix" messes with the endgame math and the mid-game math, it just doesn't raise the maximum a score can reach.
GMG pgs 182-183 describes a variant rule to ability scores using point buy and modifies attribute advancement via point buy as well. The variant by its own example allows a 20 by level 7. The other stats in that example work out to 14,12,12,10,8.
I’m just noting there is some precedence in having a higher attribute than expected by level.
Yeah the odd attributes and slow down past 18 is just for balancing between mad and sad builds I thinkAn easier way to fix this is to not have the 18+ attributes increase by 1, but still implement a cap of increasing an attribute to 22, so as not to mess with the endgame math.
By 10th level, characters can have a 22 in their primary, which makes them stronger in the early game, but gives them less improvement in the late game, and also gives them more incentive to invest in other attributes towards the end as well.
Messing with the mid-game math just because it doesn't mess with the end-game math doesn't actually make sense, so that's not a "fix" so much as taking one kind of odd but working as intended thing (odd ability scores) and breaking it.
Using my current wizard character as an example, switching over to your proposed rule would have had the following effect: 1 higher Int mod from 5th level until 20th; 1 higher Dex mod from 10th onward; 1 higher Wid mod from 15th onward; 1 higher Str mod at 20th; 1 higher Cha mod at 15th onward.
A total of 4 extra points of modifiers, and maxing out 3 abilities instead of 1 (excepting apex item, at least).
So in the end, your "fix" messes with the endgame math and the mid-game math, it just doesn't raise the maximum a score can reach.
GMG pgs 182-183 describes a variant rule to ability scores using point buy and modifies attribute advancement via point buy as well. The variant by its own example allows a 20 by level 7. The other stats in that example work out to 14,12,12,10,8.
I’m just noting there is some precedence in having a higher attribute than expected by level.
I was literally about to comment on that very variant rule, because it's rather good at making you choose between a single super high stat at the expense of all others, and a nice balance that most people enjoy utilizing.