Should point buy be discouraged?

[Hassassin]

Think about it before you ask questions like this. When I say they should be "roughly equivalent in terms of damage" that means that there may/should be circumstances where one build would outperform the other but on the balance they contribute roughly the same damage per encounter. In other words, both builds should be viable and neither one should too often outclass the other. That's not the point though. The point is attribute scores, if too tightly integrated into combat, make this kind of balance that much harder to achieve.

Ok, it may seem like my question was stupid. What I was trying to ask is: if you don't add Str to damage (or do add Dex for finesse fighters), how do you differentiate them?

In 3e, TWF means you need higher Dex -> lower Str -> lower damage/hit, but more attacks. For one weapon finesse classes (duelist, swashbuckler, etc.) there is precision damage instead, which is somehow conditional.

 

[darkwing]

Ok, it may seem like my question was stupid. What I was trying to ask is: if you don't add Str to damage (or do add Dex for finesse fighters), how do you differentiate them?

In 3e, TWF means you need higher Dex -> lower Str -> lower damage/hit, but more attacks. For one weapon finesse classes (duelist, swashbuckler, etc.) there is precision damage instead, which is somehow conditional.

Weapons, sub-class choice, powers. Honestly you can make the dex fighter a separate class and call him a duelist or something.

 

[Elf Witch]

Firstly, a default is in my opinion needed for convention games and so that new players don't have to make yet another choice when they start playing.

All the "default options" should still be balanced - i.e. generate on average about equally powerful characters. The fact that something isn't a default makes it no more difficult for experienced groups to use it.

I don't think you are giving inexperienced people very much credit. It is not that hard to read a paragraph on each type and go from there.

As for conventions how many new people are actually running a game there? The players may be new but the DM usually is not besides it has been my experience with con run games that most use pregenerated characters because it is faster.

 

[Soramain]

The second is that the PCs and NPCs should follow the same rules...

No. No. Just no.

Sorry, pet peeve of mine, but NPCs are basically monsters - you're going to fight them once and then they're dead. Just make up the parts of the NPC you need and wing the rest. From a PF/3.5 standpoint, anyway; I have no experience running 4e.

/end digression

 

[DonTadow]

No. No. Just no.

Sorry, pet peeve of mine, but NPCs are basically monsters - you're going to fight them once and then they're dead. Just make up the parts of the NPC you need and wing the rest. From a PF/3.5 standpoint, anyway; I have no experience running 4e.

/end digression

Yes and no. Most npcs your party encounter either they will kill, capture or ignore in the first few minutes.

I agree, for the most part, I would like to see a monster book that was just a table of monsters and their stats in the beginning. those stats tell me how to run it in combat (includes senses). Any more clarification is further in the book.

For those npcs that need more detail, I'd like to see a basic set of stats, almost a chart, for level vs creature type. Outsider at 5th level and i need a diplomacy stat, bam right there.

However, if the character creation process is simple enough, it still should be a third option for dms that like to craft thier own npcs.

 

[Wormwood]

Just make up the parts of the NPC you need and wing the rest. ... I have no experience running 4e.

Sounds like you're halfway there.

 

[the Jester]

flumphs,

curious day yesterday, watched a guys review of Advanced Players Guide on youtube and he had a good observation: point buy for abilities lead to min maxing of characters. Which in turn leads to overpowered pcs. He stressed that you do point buy so everyone is treated fairly in the character creation process. Alternatively he said that it would be better to role a 3d6 or a 4d6 to generate characters. Yes, some people would have average characters and there would be the occasional uber character generated but it solved the problem of bland and boring min maxing.

is he right?
foolish_mortals

IMHO, absolutely.

How many cries of "You have to put an 18 in your prime stat!" have I heard from point buyers? Sheesh. Enough.

I have never allowed point buy in my campaign and I never will. If that's a group's preference, I have nothing against them following that preference, but both as a player and as a dm, I loathe point buy.

 

[the Jester]

Sample conversation:

"So how does your fighter have 18s in Str, Con, Dex and Int?"
"I rolled lucky!"
"You do remember we were all supposed to roll up here today right?"
"My dice got hot at home, I can't help it"

Uh, no. More like:

"So how does your fighter have 18s in Str, Con, Dex and Int?"
"I rolled lucky!"
"You do remember we were all supposed to roll up here today right?"
"My dice got hot at home, I can't help it"
"Bummer, should have saved that luck! Roll over."

If cheating is an issue, either confront it ("Hey, you need to roll in front of everyone, starting with re-rolling this character") or accept it (your original conversation), or better yet, play with people that you trust not to cheat.

 

[DonTadow]

Uh, no. More like:

"So how does your fighter have 18s in Str, Con, Dex and Int?"
"I rolled lucky!"
"You do remember we were all supposed to roll up here today right?"
"My dice got hot at home, I can't help it"
"Bummer, should have saved that luck! Roll over."

If cheating is an issue, either confront it ("Hey, you need to roll in front of everyone, starting with re-rolling this character") or accept it (your original conversation), or better yet, play with people that you trust not to cheat.

I get that it's a preference thing, but the question is why are people cheating? Because they want to have a usuable character for the next year.

Pathfinder's point buy is neat in the fact that an 18 means you have to be absolutely horrible at something else. If a dm uses the full rules, you can truly punish a character with a "dump stat". I had a couple of folk try this in my new campaign. It came back to bite them enough that they asked to realign their stats to something more reasonable and average.

Also, note. There are degrees of point buy. If you don't want 18s then go with a lower stat. It allows you to control the power level of the game. The randomness of 6 people rolling 24 random dice to determine thier level of fun for the campaign is always going to be unfair to someone.

 

[Alzrius]

I get that it's a preference thing, but the question is why are people cheating? Because they want to have a usuable character for the next year.

There's a difference between "useable" and "munchkin."

Pathfinder's point buy is neat in the fact that an 18 means you have to be absolutely horrible at something else. If a dm uses the full rules, you can truly punish a character with a "dump stat". I had a couple of folk try this in my new campaign. It came back to bite them enough that they asked to realign their stats to something more reasonable and average.

It doesn't necessarily mean that; between the careful allocation of your remaining points and racial ability bonuses, you can end up with an 18 in your primary ability score and having your dump stat being only 10 - a statistical "average."

Add in ability points gained as you level and stat-boosting items, and even that can be raised with surprising quickness (while the primary ability score will inflate even further).

That's not to mention the fact that PCs are great at finding ways to minimize reliance on their dump stat; the party is very good, in my experience, at working together for this. Yes, that fighter has a Charisma of 10, but guess what? The group won't want him to be the "face man" for them anyway - they'll want the guy who started with an 18 in Charisma to do it, and he'll be more than happy to.

Min-maxing allows the PCs to specialize in their "role" in the party, and they'll work together as such that they'll each cover their role well enough that it becomes increasingly difficult to use that min-maxing against them by making a situation where they'll have to play to their characters' weaknesses.

It's natural for the party to work together, to shore up their strengths and cover each other's weaknesses. But the min-maxing that point-buying allows, and that they then capitalize on, makes it very easy as well as obvious to inflate their strengths to a ridiculous degree while simultaneously minimizing their individual weaknesses to near-nonexistence.