D&D 4E Point buy, 4e & you.

[mattdm]

I always perfer SOME kind of dice rolling. Yeah, sometimes the players can get obscenely lucky or obscenely unlucky. But hey, it builds character.

What I like to do is: at the beginning of a campaign, everyone rolls a d10. Then, for the next two years of gaming, they get to add the resulting number as a bonus to every die roll they make.

 

[BartD]

What I like to do is: at the beginning of a campaign, everyone rolls a d10. Then, for the next two years of gaming, they get to add the resulting number as a bonus to every die roll they make.

I actually do that, but in addition I multiply the characters' hitpoints by that same number. It allows really heroic characters!

 

[Khaim]

It was reverse-engineered from the preview characters:

Start at 8.
1 point cost per increase from 9 to 13.
2 point cost per increase from 14 to 16.
Cost of a 17 is unknown, but it costs 7 points to increase a 16 up to an 18.

17 is 3, 18 is 4. (You could have guessed that.)

What's not obvious is that five stats start at 10 instead of 8; the sixth is still 8. Then it's 22 points on top of that, plus racials.

This actually gives you fairly good scores. Not amazingly so, but you'll probably have an 18 in your primary (unless you took a race that doesn't give a bonus to it- but why would you do that?). A 19 is possible, but it'll cost you a bit. Starting with a 20 (buy an 18 and add a racial bonus) hurts your other stats, hard. As it should!

 

[Ipissimus]

I've DMed for a long time. Having honestly concocted, ran and killed more PCs than I can remember, from my experience, I can't say that high ability scores have an appreciable effect on gameplay, except that a low score in a primary stat is frustrating for a player.

I've played against some of the most min/maxed, optimized, characters and I've played with seriously nerfed and practically useless PCs. The only truth I've found is that they all die just as easy.

I can see the point of point buy (no pun intended) if you're running a PC through a tournament, the RPGA or over the net. But as long as the stats remain within the usual range, who cares? Get too uppity and the DM can always squash you like a bug and six 18s ain't gonna stop that.

Oh, and if you're feeling a little constrained in character choices with 22 point buy in 4e, I find 32 point buy a bit more flexible particularly if people want to multiclass.

 

[mattdm]

This actually gives you fairly good scores. Not amazingly so, but you'll probably have an 18 in your primary (unless you took a race that doesn't give a bonus to it- but why would you do that?). A 19 is possible, but it'll cost you a bit. Starting with a 20 (buy an 18 and add a racial bonus) hurts your other stats, hard. As it should!

This paragraph basically should be added to the PHB as an errata.

 

[Doug McCrae]

If you would pick 18 8 8 8 8 8 over 17 17 17 17 17 17 then yeah, the strongest weighting possible won't keep you off the 18s.

 

[Ahglock]

17 is 3, 18 is 4. (You could have guessed that.)

What's not obvious is that five stats start at 10 instead of 8; the sixth is still 8. Then it's 22 points on top of that, plus racials.

This actually gives you fairly good scores. Not amazingly so, but you'll probably have an 18 in your primary (unless you took a race that doesn't give a bonus to it- but why would you do that?). A 19 is possible, but it'll cost you a bit. Starting with a 20 (buy an 18 and add a racial bonus) hurts your other stats, hard. As it should!

While this is true, I would not add the value judgment to the end of it. Why should it hurt your other stats hard, is your play style some how inherently superior to others? Somehow I doubt that you method of fun is somehow better than another groups method of fun.

I think it would have been nice if they had added a non-weighted point buy, acknowledging that not all groups play the game the same way. Weighted point but is not superior, it just enforces one style of character creation.

 

[mattdm]

I think it would have been nice if they had added a non-weighted point buy, acknowledging that not all groups play the game the same way. Weighted point but is not superior, it just enforces one style of character creation.

Eh. The basic ability scores play a huge factor in the game's math. I'd be very hesitant to house-rule them before understanding the game as a whole a lot better. This isn't accusing you of wrongfun, but just indicating that using non-weighted point buy may break some of the games key assumptions.

 

[redwulf25_ci]

Most "weighted" systems are laughably so. I would hardly call them anything but Timmy Tools for players that want to force GMs to comparably twink out his encounters.

For example, anything based off of 4d6 drop the lowest and arrange to suited would give you a chart like this:

Ability 	Point Cost (Assumed Statistical Outcome)
Score
6                -1
8	        0
9	        1
10	       3
11	       7
12	       13
13	       21
14	       30
15	       42
16	       53
17	       65
18	       77

You'll get about 16.4 per assumed roll, so about 98 for your basic 6 set.

You hardly will see 18 11 11 8 8 8 characters under this system.

Mostly because I have NEVER rolled that low with 4D6 drop the lowest.

 

[Voss]

This paragraph basically should be added to the PHB as an errata.

Why? The system, as written, rewards you for maxing out your attack stat and either going 13/13 or 14/11 in your secondary and tertiary stats and ignoring everything else. Putting any points at all in the other three stats is a mathematically provable mistake, unless you really feel you have to have a slight bonus to skills that probably won't matter.

Unless you make the conscious decision to make the game not about combat, having a lower than maximum attack stat means you have a subpar character forever, especially since there aren't a lot of ways to boost an attack roll. (either be a star warlock, or keep a cleric or warlord around to give you attack bonuses all the time... assuming they hit).