Here's a tangential thought on how you could have 25 point buy player characters interacting with 20 point buy player characters and 15 point buy player characters in the same general party mix- haz the 15 pointers be just young kids and the 20 pointers be the teenagers; naturally, the 25 pointers end up being the adults and so on. ;)
My group played for a time while generating stat by rolling 4d6 and keeping 3, ordering them as they wished, and then re-rolling one stat and keeping the better one. We still had a guy roll a character with a total stat cost of -5 and another, in the same party, with a total of +38.
Haz played with the thought of having rolled up stats by the players, then having the collective highest Stat rolls of all the participating players being put into a pooled array of Stat scores [depending upon the total number of players; if less than 6, the next highest rolls and so on] that could be chosen to make a final collective 6 Stat array that can be used by all the players to arrange as they wish for their characters. These would be just the base Stat scores without any modifiers to 'em. The end Stat scores might be kinda all the samey but it'd definitely be fair in character score distribution.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously, I allowed the -5 build guy to reroll, but even after 3 rerolls he ended with an 18 points buy.
Ina different campaign player rolled 4 18, 1 17, and one 16 before my eyes. A 91 points build.
Rolling the stats was nice in AD&D 1st and 2nd editions were only a few stats mattered and only when the rolls were very high or very low. The whole system was about characters not being balanced with each other.
3.x and Pathfinder try for balanced characters, so a significant stat disparity affects the game.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure why 15 pt buy is so disliked/feared.
15, 15, 13, 12, 10, 8 So a human wizard could do S 13, D 15, C 12 I 16 (14+2) W 8 Ch 10 if you want to avoid the 'weak nerdy wizard' Perfectly playable.
Heck a Swashbuckler/Dex Magi/Vigilante/Rogue could be perfectly playable with S 13, D 16 (14+2) C 12 I 15, W 8 CH 10.
I'm trying to find enough players out in the boonies I can teach. I'm going to stick to just the hardbacks and the 15 points.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously, I allowed the -5 build guy to reroll, but even after 3 rerolls he ended with an 18 points buy.
Ina different campaign player rolled 4 18, 1 17, and one 16 before my eyes. A 91 points build.
Rolling the stats was nice in AD&D 1st and 2nd editions were only a few stats mattered and only when the rolls were very high or very low. The whole system was about characters not being balanced with each other.3.x and Pathfinder try for balanced characters, so a significant stat disparity affects the game.
We always called these instant abortion characters, and it's a big reason why we switched to point build. There was always that 1 lucky person who had 3 18's, but the other unlucky guy who never got anything better than a 12. Point buy made this all go away, and made the character creation process much more streamlined, and balanced. It also got rid of the need for the GM to watch everyone's rolls (i.e. prevent cheating)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't even know what those words mean. Lol.
To clear it up: I play games on easy mode to simply enjoy the story and narrative aspects, without too much worry about the mechanics until I've got a firm grasp on them. If the story is robust enough (or divergent enough based on choices that can be made), I will take the time to replay the game (many, many, many times) and eventually hit that 'hardcore' or 'insanity' or 'legendary' difficulty.
Ima beat the same game 4 times in a row just to beat it again on Master Ninja sort of guy... Legendary or nothin'... all in, all the time... turn that $#!+ up to 11... the only way to get better is to fight a better opponent...
Getting 'good' for the sole purpose of 'getting good' has never appealed to me and likely never will. For example, I've played Elden Ring just to give the genre a try. I put aside the lack of upfront narrative that generally draws me into liking a game or not, and just went at it from a pure mechanical angle. To put it quite bluntly: it annoyed me immensely. I'd say infuriated me, but that level of annoyance and rage wasn't really there but that level of intention to utterly CRUSH the game into dust was quite present. It played dirty and so I responded in kind. After I finished the first run through, having done nearly everything the game had to offer, I set down the controller and never turned it on again.
So... I like playing Pathfinder with 25 point buy. It is the narrative story mode option for me. 20 point buy is the easy mode. And 15 point buy is the core difficultly. You want it harder, you play it with less point buy or you play with intentional handicaps. The system mastery you bring to the table, with your choices and use of the mechanics, is how 'easy' the game actually is to your specific skill level.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure why 15 pt buy is so disliked/feared. 15, 15, 13, 12, 10, 8
.
There's no problem with it -- it's just not for me. To me, honestly, a +2, +2, +1, +1, +0, -1 just sounds like a peasant farmer who doesn't wear shoes. Or rather, since that is exaggerating for effect, it sounds like an NPC village guard or town merchant. It does not sound like a hero or champion. At least to me. And I like to play, and DM for, heroes and champions. (Not peasant farmers with no shoes.)
* But that's what's great about the game: It's deep enough for everybody. It's got so much of everything, and every style, that not only can both of us play our preferred style of game, we can also have an every-once-in-a-while different adventure. For a change of game, I can play a 12-point-buy PC in a low fantasy game; you can play a 34-point-buy uber-powerful gestalt game. Just for something different. Every once in a while. I can play maester Grump in the Sandpoint farms; you can play Old Mage Jatembe.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's no problem with it -- it's just not for me. To me, honestly, a +2, +2, +1, +1, +0, -1 just sounds like a peasant farmer who doesn't wear shoes. Or rather, since that is exaggerating for effect, it sounds like an NPC village guard or town merchant. It does not sound like a hero or champion. At least to me. And I like to play, and DM for, heroes and champions. (Not peasant farmers with no shoes.)
You are correct to a degree that such an array does not seem seem like a hero or a champion, though it is no where accurate as to apply to a peasant farmer. Humans (on average) in the setting have a net zero modifier to their ability scores (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8) while the 'heroic' or elite members (such as the town guard or a cut above the rest merchant) have a net +5 to the ability modifier range (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8). It is the later pool in which 'heroic' player characters are drawn from. These scores do not reflect the inherent +2 racial bonus (or other modifiers you have from being a non-human).
While you can play any particular way you want in the game, adjusting up and down the values available for ability score purchase, it is important to remember where the baseline expectation for the game actually lays so that any GM/Player can adjust their expectations accordingly. More often that not, the reason people's games feel so off balance and broken is because they have lost touch with that baseline (or never knew about it).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, DL1, you're saying that you engage MORE with the setting and narrative if you've got a higher point buy?
Yes, but I am not a typical player nor a typical GM. Higher point buy equates to less attention (or resources) spent on worrying about the mechanics, and leaves more mental capacity to focus on everything else. Tabletop games are vastly different that videogames, and have vastly different means of storytelling.
I don't play games purely for the mechanics. They are just another means of storytelling, allowing a certain level of control to the players and helps randomize and adjudicate the results of conflicts.
I've given these players open worlds, one campaign was even originally intended to be a hexcrawl game. Their PCs don't have goals or motivations beyond leveling, WBL, etc. If I give these players bigger numbers to build their PCs with, that just means they'll be MORE optimized for the type of encounter resolution method they chose to focus on.
That is sad. IMO, a terrible way to play but if they are having fun, I'm not going to step on their toes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I am with you on this. In a 25-30 point buy, I can typically justify 12-14 intelligence on a character that get nothing other then skill ranks from it...
We use background skills from the Unchained book specifically because of this. Everyone gets 2 skill points per level to invest in skills that are outside the typical 'most useful' ones. It has yet to lead to anything even remotely gamebreaking. If I am playing a character that already gets a bunch of skill points, I tend to throw the bonus skills towards linguistics just for the additional languages.
She lost 3 points of Str. That's it. On a PC that doesn't really NEED Str, in a game where I'm not tracking encumbrance and where you're 1 Teleport spell from getting back to the Cohort with the scrolls. Sometimes it is... jarring, to play with players like this.
I can only join you in the eye-roll session.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To me, honestly, a +2, +2, +1, +1, +0, -1 just sounds like a peasant farmer who doesn't wear shoes. Or rather, since that is exaggerating for effect, it sounds like an NPC village guard or town merchant. It does not sound like a hero or champion.
IMO, heroism and championship are more about attitude and deeds than capabilities. At least heroism is way more convincing if there is an actual challenge - superhuman stats actually undermine that. To use an extreme example: Superman stopping a mundane bank robber is not heroic, it's something he does without any risk. At least for himself, he still has to care a little bit for innocent persons involved.
Sure, with more power the scope of heroic deeds increases. A high-powered PC can save the multiverse, while a low-powered one might struggle to drive off a bunch of goblins. IMO both can be equally heroic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just because you can tell a meaningful story with your players only have 14 as their highest stat doesn't mean the game system was DESIGNED to accommodate that. The lower average stats a character has the more hyper-focused they need to be to be effective. Its why there are a hundred or more threads here in GD and Advice about "My highest Stat is a 12 what should I play" and the answer always comes back to pet-classes and spellcasters. I personally have more fun when my players come to me and go "So I wanna be a monk who fights with a Broom" and I can go "Sure, sounds good" instead of "Well, you don't really have the stat points to be a monk. How about a Spiritualist?"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way I see it 15- point buy is much better at making players care about the character and story because there is actually threat that something might happen to their characters. While also making it much easier on the GM given how the game is balanced for 15- point buy not for 25+.
People are saying that you cannot increase your int when you have 15- point buy? That's a lie by omittion you 100% can but it requires that something else goes down and that's the crux of the matter. The reason why people like 25 point buy is because it allows them to minmax their main stat and still have left over for the other stats.
25- point buy doesn't make a character any more compelling, nor does it make it any better story wise. What it does is remove the consequences and makes it so that the GM has to work double to make sure things play right. Which leads me to the next point: Most people do not know how to write or play as superheroes (specially not superman), but they want the power of one.
Most players want to play with the super stats, but without any of the limitations that superheroes normally face (ex: not killing). When presented with the choice of doing something heroic for no pay or asking for pay, most players would ask for pay. So all that 25- point buy does is let players be jerks because "who is gonna stop us we are the heroes"
* P.S. You can see a similar mentality in novels where the MC is OP. Where they often degenerate into jerks that do whatever they want. While the comment section applauds the actions (regardless of good or bad), while often complaining if the MC doesn't fight and/or kill the enemies.
I disagree with your evaluation that 15pt buy makes players care more.
Usually the creativity of the backstory and interactions in game are what make me care about the character. It has little to do with their stats. Better stats do not make a character more compelling to play, but bad stats can make a character so unfun to play mechanically that no amount of personal attachment to the substance of the character will overcome that issue.
The main thing I think of when providing higher stat arrays or point buys is that it enables characters that require more than 1 stat to be effective. Like a fighter can get by putting everything into strength, and a wizard can get by putting everything into int. But the monk can't choose just one stat and be as effective as the fighter or wizard.
This is why I'd rather give a stat array that caps players at 18 in a stat at character creation while allowing for well rounded character stats, because it enables MAD characters to be on a more even playing field. If you felt that was too much you could go so far as to give players 14 in every stat, to be adjusted by racial modifiers and see how that goes.
Honestly, most of the stats give very little benefit to you unless you're playing a class that focuses on it. But having very low in certain stats can be a problem. Wisdom and Con on most classes isn't interesting, but prevents you from having absolutely terrible saves. Charisma is frequently dumped unless it's needed for you class abilities. Strength is often dumped unless you're a melee fighter.
I think the benefits of those abilities being in the 12 to 14 range is small, but just a nice quality of life thing to keep you from really sucking. The alternative is you really suck at some stuff and are good at one thing. I think lower point buy actually leads to more min maxing than a high pt buy.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, the times slapping the Advanced template slapped onto a monster with maximized HP has made my job easier as a GM cannot be understated. I just have to glance at a creatures stats now and just go "That attack is +2. That DC is +2. That CMD is +4. That AC is +4. # x # + ## is that much HP. Let's go." It is, by far, my favorite template.
I generally do not have to use such measures when the game is being played with 15 point buy and not every player feat is devoted to making them better at combat. But when we inch our way up to 25 points, the combat oriented feats just keep coming, and I do not feel even the slightest hesitation to throw those players right into the Epic Fantasy game they want to play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a house rule where the minimum a character can roll on HP is Con Mod +1. So if you have 14 Con you’re getting at least a 3 on your HP roll.
This applies to monsters and doesn’t give a damn about the dice cap. If the monster has a 30 Con but only D6 on their HD they’re still “rolling” a 10. This helps late game monsters not get one shot.
Does mean if you’re a Con based class you will be huge: and that’s okay.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know if a stat array makes a player care more about their PC, but I agree w/Temp-for-hire upthread on a 15 point buy being easier on the GM. This is the whole reason I started thinking of making this thread. I like the convenience of slapping together an NPC based on the generic rules I put to memory 13 years ago, or else just grabbing a monster from the bestiary and running them.
If I want to build a Heroic NPC and I want to follow the rules, I start with a 15 point buy array of stats. As Temperans articulated so well, this means I will have consequences to my build choices for this NPC. If I want to make, say, an evil Unchained Monk NPC, I need to scrape together bonuses for 3 important stats out of that array. Meanwhile a 25 point buy PC monk can ignore those consequences.
Monsters with PC classes, at low levels, can be dangerous but if creatures define themselves by class like many humanoids and I want to add, say, NPC class levels, these are already inherently weak compared to PC classes. Then those NPC levels don't increase the monsters' base stats. The end result with NPC levels is laughable after APL 4.
As the characters advance I've got to start tacking on templates, getting "creative" with HP, add extra gear or re-optimize a monster's feats, and so on. All of these little tweaks take time. I can't just grab a monster whose CR kind of matches up or is maybe APL +1 b/c the PCs are so far beyond the stats of that monster. Now with campaigns at APL 10 and 11 respectively I'm managing spreadsheets to figure DPRs and class abilities in order to properly balance combat.
So we don't encounter lot of NPCs in the APs, mostly just monsters. If you use Combat Manager it's super easy to put the monsters in the encounter and either add a template or advance them a time or two (or add a monster or two). The program will show the approximate CR of the the encounter so you can balance with the party on the fly.
Talk about making it easy on a GM.....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not everyone uses "Combat Manager" or anything similar. Not to mention that requiring an app to keep track already means that it would be hard otherwise.
It is simply not hard to keep track of default creatures, but very hard to deal creatures modified to deal with anything greater than 15- point buy.
I'm guessing you must not have tried Combat Manager. it's super easy to deal with every creature, modified or not, using the program. The App has historically been unstable, but using the program is very stable, and extremely useful for a GM. for a game, I can grab my laptop and a set of dice, and have everything I need to run a game.