25 or 32...what's the REAL "standard" point buy?

[EricNoah]

I don't roll, I just pick numbers that suit the character. Don't tell my DMs though!

In my games, if I wanted "balance" I would probably just go with the default array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).

 

[Al'Kelhar]

I use a 28 point buy in my campaign, which I've found to be more than adequate. I play a specialist wizard in a campaign using a 31 point buy (why 31? Not too sure, really...), and have found the party is really quite powerful. 25 points is for the campaign where the PCs are experts at what they do, but are not 1-in-1,000,000 individuals. Remember that the whole xp, CR and EL system is geared towards characters using 25 point buy. I acknowledged from long history that I was a DM with a tendency to create "difficult" challenges for my players, and so went with the 28 point buy.
32 points is really for "heroic" fantasy, where the PCs are so far above the norm that they are truly heroes.

Cheers, Al'Kelhar

 

[Hardhead]

We always use 28 point buy, as well.

 

[cdsaint]

I use 32 point buy IMC. I like the fact that it balances the PC's against each other, and against the NPC's. BBEG's are also 32 point buy, Henchmen are 28 point buy, and Mooks are 24points. Schlubs that don't have any importance at all are straight out of the MM. So, even though the PC's are very high powered, so are most of the NPC's and monsters.

Chris

 

[ohGr]

One of our group's DMs is heavily into Living Greyhawk, so he uses 28 point buy in his games; i've found it to be more than adequate.

 

[Guillaume]

In all my campaigns, both as a player and a DM, I've used the 28 point buy. No complaints here, and it works pretty well. No TPK either.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

We use 40.







What?

 

[Ogre Mage]

Point buy

We use 32 point buy. I've found this gives good but not insane stats and the chracters have a good chance of survival at low levels instead of dropping like flies. It also makes characters which suffer from MAD like paladins and monks viable. However, I think 28 points could work well under the right circumstances. I would not play 25 pt. buy.

I would consider ...

28 pt. buy -- standard campaign.
32 pt. buy -- tougher campaign.
35 pt. buy -- high powered campaign

 

[Conaill]

I realized something a year or two ago. 32 pt buy is really +1 or +1.5 level adjust. It's the difference between the average stat being a 12 and the average stat being a 14.

I've been arguing for a long time that +1 LA is worth about 10 point-buy points.

For me, 25 point-buy is plenty. It's what the system has been balanced for. True, 4d6 will on average give you a slightly higher point total, but the ability to choose you optimal stats more than makes up for that.

Choosing higher stats just means making all encounters easier than they're intended to be. Some DM's claim their players need the higher stats, because of the encounters they throw at them. Well, if you throw higher CR encounters at them, they'll just gain XP faster than expected. Why not just give them an extra level instead?

 

[Creamsteak]

32 point buy here. I don't think some of the multiclass characters in my campaign would be viable on 25. We had a Gestalt Paladin/Wizard, for instance, and having a 14 wisdom and 15 intelligence is the minimum in order to see the character keep full spellcasting capacity (pre-items) through all levels, after putting all 4th level points into intelligence. Then you've only got 16 points to split between Str/Dex/Con/Cha. Dropping the Gestalt would make the character viable with a lower wisdom or intelligence, at least.

Another example is the Bard/Barbarian we had a bit back. Charisma, Dexterity, Strength, and Constitution all played parts, I believe something like 14/13/14/10/13/15. On a 25 point buy the Barb 3/Bard 4 would have been even worse than he seemed at times.

25 is enough for just about any normal character, except perhaps a monk. I've played 28 at other games and been fairly nice.

I'd say start with 28 or 32. 25 is acceptable, but it does make some types of characters with legitimate concepts unfairly difficult.