you drew the short end of the stick

[TheAuldGrump]

Let me practice my answer:
No.
No!
No!
NO!

That about covers it.

It is unfair, and makes the whole point of the point buy useless. You can create as good or better with point buy, so why do this to one of the players and not the others? If it is a replacement character then it is not too likely that the characters are overpowered, otherwise he would not need a replacement character.

If it is for a brand new character again the question is why?

The Auld Grump

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Tecknik, your Fellowship comparison takes two hobbits--who are as a race meant to be weak physically but strong-willed and good-hearted--and compares them to Gandalf and Aragorn. Far better would be if you compared Gandalf and Aragorn to Gimli, Legolas, and Boromir. Things start to look much more even stat-wise at this point. You could still make an argument for Gandalf having better stats, but I would never equate Galdalf to a PC. He strikes me as clearly as filling the NPC "wise councillor" role, rather than that of a player character.

Setting that aside, though, I wouldn't be the 25-point guy, nor would I want someone else to be. Call me petty, but I like my guys to have as much inherent oomph! as any other player's, even though I very much enjoy roleplaying.

 

[BOZ]

the title of your thread reminds me of that old metallica shirt i always used to see back in the day.

 

[Lasher Dragon]

the title of your thread reminds me of that old metallica shirt i always used to see back in the day.

Shortest Straw
Challenge Liberty
Downed by Law
Live in Infamy
Rub You Raw
Witchhunt Riding Through
Shortest Straw
This Shortest Straw Has Been Pulled for You

\m/ Rock on dude

Back before they castrated themselves hehehe

On second thought I would play a 25 point character in a 36 point campaign - just so I could use "Shortest Straw" as my theme song

 

[zeo_evil]

Never. And if it happened mid-game I would probably leave.

 

[Victim]

I wouldn't choose to do so normally. However, thanks to the joys of rolled stats, I did end up playing a character with around 28 points in a group of characters who had more than 40 points. If you switched my INT and WIS, I think the wizard had equal or higher stats in every ability. My cleric was the only original character who didn't die. But being a 3.0 Cleric with Persistent Spell can make up for alot of other deficiencies.

 

[Jdvn1]

... I don't see why you'd intentionally create character imbalance. Seems silly.

 

[suburbaknght]

As a player I wouldn't be against it, but I checked the box for I would be against it and I wouldn't want other players to do it because I frequently GM. If I give players 35 points to build with, it's because I'm tossing heavy challenges at them. If they get that many points they're expected to use them. It may not be a huge difference if a fighter has a Strength of 16 or 17 or 18, but it sure makes a difference if a wizard has an Intelligence of 18 compared to 17, or a Barbarian has a slightly higher or lower Constitution.

Yes, I hear the arguments about character concepts, but the fact is not every concept is right for every game.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

Ain't no way. It'd be pretty stupid.

 

[Zappo]

If I can choose, I'd take the same point buy as the rest of the party. But, whether it is a choice or not, it depends on why the DM has told me this. If there is a good reason, I could play the underpowered character. It doesn't make a terrible difference anyway; situations like that happen quite often when rolling for stats (and are part of the reason for which I always use point buy).