Low Point Buy = negative LA?

[Cheiromancer]

Suppose that, as a DM, I were to offer a negative LA in exchange for a low point buy. I.e. instead of generating a 3rd level character with a 32 point buy, a player could make a 4th level character with a lower point buy. Or even a 5th level character with a still lower point buy.

What numbers should I use? I was thinking 32 = +0 LA, 24 = -1 LA, 15 = -2 LA,

What class combos would this option work best with? Especially in the lower levels- i.e. ECL 3 to 10 or so.

 

[Pyrex]

Hmm, while I've seen point-buy variances used to offset actual LA, I'm not convinced it's all that balanced to use it to let characters have more levels.

Generally I think the players who are building primary casters will take the -1 or -2 LA option, while fighter-ish classes will tend to opt for 0 or -1.

+2 Caster Levels is a pretty big boost and (IMO) definately offsets the lower stats.

Particularly, a wildshape-focused Druid is a no-brainer for LA -2.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Generally I think the players who are building primary casters will take the -1 or -2 LA option, while fighter-ish classes will tend to opt for 0 or -1.

+2 Caster Levels is a pretty big boost and (IMO) definately offsets the lower stats.

Particularly, a wildshape-focused Druid is a no-brainer for LA -2.

So you are saying that if the players all made 5th level characters using a 15 point buy, the spellcasters would be the strongest PCs? And the wild-shaping druid would be the strongest of the bunch?

That's interesting. Last time I asked the question, folks tended to say that fighters and rogues would be hurt least by a low point buy.

 

[Voadam]

So you are saying that if the players all made 5th level characters using a 15 point buy, the spellcasters would be the strongest PCs? And the wild-shaping druid would be the strongest of the bunch?

That's interesting. Last time I asked the question, folks tended to say that fighters and rogues would be hurt least by a low point buy.

I agree with Pyrex, fighters and rogues don't need many high stats, but neither do wizards or sorcerers.

With a 15 point buy I'd have 6 points in int/cha, 4 points in con, 4 points in dex and 1 point wherever. With all stat advancement in the spellcasting stat the character will hit a natural 19 at 20th level.

So I'd expect something like a wizard with 8, 12, 12, 15, 8, 9 and cast 3rd level spells. over a wizard with 8, 13, 14, 18, 8, 8 who can only cast 2nd level spells.

That is assuming it is a one shot game. For a campaign more players might go for the long view with the second set of stats and catching up on levels with the xp curve.

Similarly a druid who can wildshape and cast 3rd level spells vs. one who can't is a big difference.

 

[Arkhandus]

Something to note about this; a Wizard or Sorcerer may, for instance, choose to take the maximum number of extra levels you'll allow, as long as he or she has enough points to start with Intelligence or Charisma of 15 or higher (probably 16 or higher). All they really need is 8 points, or preferably around 10 to 18 points (for better Int/Cha and Constitution), and they'll certainly jump at the chance to get access to higher-level spells a full one or two levels sooner.

A barbarian or fighter also might not hesitate to play a half-ogre, half-giant, or goliath under these circumstances, what with the nice ability score bonuses and greater capacity to wield powerful weapons (either Large size, or Powerful Build, either way they get nice melee bennies).


Also note that, under 3.5 experience point rules, a lower-level character in the party will catch up to a higher-level character after a little while. In which case, if this is expected to be a campaign rather than a standalone adventure or mini-campaign, the PCs might all ignore the option you provide, because it would become moot by the time the higher-level ones go up a few levels (the others will have more or less caught up by then). This would be rather unfair to those who do take the option.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Also note that, under 3.5 experience point rules, a lower-level character in the party will catch up to a higher-level character after a little while.

The characters will have the same ECL. They'll earn xp at the same rate.

 

[Drowbane]

So campaign starting at 5th Level

32pt = LA +2
25pts = LA +1
15pts = LA +0

Core Druid looks like the way to go there.

Halfling Druid 5

- Str 6
- Dex 10 (+2 racial)
2 Con 10
- Int 8
13 Wis 18 (+1 boost at lvl 4)
- Cha 8

(or just 8 in Wis for a 16, and raise Int and Cha up some)

Wildshape and Animal Companion easily makes up for the physical weaknesses.

32pts might make for a decent Monk, but he'd notice those -2 levels pretty quick. He is already a paper tiger just being a Monk.

 

[Pyrex]

So you are saying that if the players all made 5th level characters using a 15 point buy, the spellcasters would be the strongest PCs? And the wild-shaping druid would be the strongest of the bunch?

Definately.

Imagine two wizards. One is casting 3rd level spells at DC 16. One is casting 4th level spells at DC 16.

Who's stronger?

And the wildshaping druid only needs two stats. Enough wisdom to get all his spells, and enough Con for bonus HP. Str and Dex are replaced when he wildshapes...

 

[Andre]

Just my two cents', but I think if you try to balance this with point buy, it won't work very well. Players can be very good at getting the most out of their stats, if allowed to pick and choose.

One possibility is to have all characters use the same point buy up front (say 28 points), then tell each player they can start one character level higher if they take a -2 to every stat, and 2 levels if they take a -4 to every stat. Note: the minuses come after point buy, so buying a stat up to 18, only to have it drop to 16 costs a lot of points. You'll end up with characters with pretty average (8-14) all-around stats, but an extra character level, which might be balanced. Spellcasters might get reamed with this idea, given how important a high spellcasting stat is.

 

[Nifft]

Positive LA is an effective punishment because almost nothing is as good as more levels.

This is the same reason negative LA is bad.

Cheers, -- N