48-point buy

[Rystil Arden]

Actually, 48 is probably closer to LA +2, albeit on the low end. In terms of translating the pregenerated stats into racial modifiers, it comes out to something like +4, +2, +2, +0, +2, +2, and you get to pick where the bonuses go. I don't think there's a LA +1 race that gives such significant stat bonuses, or in the same ballpark and also gives equally valuable special abilities.

The reason why I disagree is that the majority of the strength of those ability-boosting LA races comes from boosting stats above the normal maximums, whereas this method does not allow that. An actual race that had those floating bonuses might be able to field a 22 in a starting stat somewhere, for instance. And let me tell you, a 22 Strength for a bruiser or 22 casting stat for a caster can cause a bit stir.

However, due to the limitation, the bonuses aren't as major. It's just like how racial bonuses can vanish in point buy depending on what you do (ever put a 12 in Dex and a 14 in Con with an elf, for instance, and have those changed to 14 Dex and 12 Con? If so, the racial mods might as well not have existed as far as the cost is concerned)

 

[deltadave]

LA +1 sounds about right to me too, however I would use more monsters rather than higher CR monsters to raise the ECL. Larger numbers of monsters seem to be less overwhelming than more powerful monsters when adjusting for raised stats rather than more powers, feats, DR, etc.

BTW the best way that I have seen to compute ECL is here: http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=4036&

 

[ValhallaGH]

How ridiculous is a campaign run with these kinds of stats?

Not very. PCs will hit more often, have higher save DCs and generally be cooler than PHB standard but that will just mean that the DM can safely throw +1 and +2 CR at the party.

Is there any stat rolling method that comes close to approximating 48-points or that array?

1d8+10, which is what I'm using in one of my current games. Average of 14.5, versus the average 15 of a 48 point buy.

2d4+10, which I almost used for the afore-mentioned game. I wanted people to be able to have a 9, though. Average of 15, same as the 48 point buy.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

A few thoughts:

- Your probably going to see a few more Monks and Paladins, and other stat heavy classes used.

- Early on, your warrior types are going to be much more powerful then first glance would indicate.

- Your spell casters will also have astonishingly effective save DC's.

Other than that, if you really are using a set array rather than allowing the players to spend the points, things wont be too unmanagable. If you start early, you can figure out what the functional power level of your players is.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[darthkilmor]

When I had posted about starting a 40 point buy Ptolus game here(http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?t=175971) , Shilsen's suggestion(at the end) seemed pretty reasonable. I unfortunately havent started that campaign yet to see how it works out for my group.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Actually, 48 is probably closer to LA +2, albeit on the low end. In terms of translating the pregenerated stats into racial modifiers, it comes out to something like +4, +2, +2, +0, +2, +2, and you get to pick where the bonuses go. I don't think there's a LA +1 race that gives such significant stat bonuses, or in the same ballpark and also gives equally valuable special abilities.

I agree with RA's analysis as why it isn't really an LA +2 and I'd like to add a bit more to it. In many cases a +2 to a rarely used stat isn't going to change the game much. For example, say your character is a fighter and is going from a CHA of 8 to a CHA of 10. That isn't really going to impact the game often. Or a wizard going from a STR 10 to a STR 12. Almost every class has these stats - even MADD classes.

I understand that an increase is an increase. But there comes apoint when having too manyincreases just means you got to increase all the important ones plus some that really won't matter.

 

[Jdvn1]

I know a guy whose group uses this method:
4d6, drop the lowest. Keep rolling until you're happy.

The first time I GM'd for him, he came to me with a sheet of paper covered back and front with stat rolls. He pointed to one off to the side somewhere. "These are my stats" he said. "No they're not" I said.

I think they averaged 14 or 15 or so. Not too far off your super elite array. His normal group played like that on a regular basis, so it's certainly playable.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I don't know about that. I found that running 36 point characters is roughly equivalent to ECL+1 when compared to 28 point buy characters.

48 points is probably pushing ECL +2 for characters who find a use for all those extra stats. For characters who are simply 36 point barbarians with decent Int and Cha, it won't amount to a dramatic power boost vis a vis the 36 pointer. (Or even vis a vis the 28 pointer if min-maxed sufficiently).

You're right if someone were creating a race with these bonuses, but in actual play, I've found that high stats (in the 48 point range) means the party can generally take on challenges one level higher than normal. They'll hit a bit more often, get hit a bit less often, take a bit less damage, etc. But a group of 4 1st-level heroes with these stats will still find an ogre to be a challenge.

Personally, I find calculating LA even more difficult than calculating CR - just see what happens in actual play and go from there.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I recommend boosting the number of opponents 50% (or even 100%) and see if that feels right. Adding in numbers is safer than a CR boost.

Boosting the CR of the monsters more than +1 is very dangerous unless the DM has a keen eye for implicit level dependency issues in CR. There are significant wealth issues to consider, as well.

 

[Perun]

Our longest 3(.5) campaign was on the over-te-top-a-bit side. Characters were made with "just" 35 points, but we gained various boosts as the game progressed. The experience showed me that such high-powered games, while most certainly doable, require a good deal of extra work.

For example, our group had very high save modifiers, which meant that "oridinary" opponent's saveable attacks rarely succeeded. If the DM used higher CR opponets, that usualy meant they were too tough for us to directly engage in combat.
Our wizard's through-the-roof Intelligence meant that his spells were only rarely, if ever, opposed by the regular opponents. OTOH, if the DM would pick a creature that could oppose the wizard's spells (if just about 50% of the time), that woud mean our other spellcasters' spells were ineffective.

From my experience, the game is "balanced" (and I use the term loosely, primarily to mean: "to require the least amount of extra work to make functionable") for four characters with the equivalent of 25 to 28 point-buy. Anything different requires extra work, and the amount of work is directly proportional to how much the characters are removed from the "ideal" above. The differences between characters with different ability scores might not seem like much at lower levels, but the higher the characters advance, the more pronounced the differences become (this is especially true with attack bonuses and spellcasting ability scores).

But, like I said, it all eventually boils down to two things: how much extra work you're willing to put into making adventures challenging, and how much you like more powerful campaigns.

Personally, I'm not overly fond of either, so that might have coloured my feelings on this subject a bit