D&D 4E Point buy, 4e & you.

[Kzach]

I'm a big fan of point buy however one thing I've never quite understood is why there is a weighting for points above 14.

In 3.x and even more prominently in 4e, there is the concept that bonuses ability scores are flat. Bonuses equal the same no matter how many you get. A +1 has the same inherent value as any other +1.

And yet in 4e it seems that there will be an even heavier weighting than there was in 3.x. This makes no sense to me. There is no reason why we should be limiting people from having eighteens in their primary stat. It seems to me to be little more than a hang-up from 1e/2e days.

Consider that with 28 point-buy you can have the following array with the 3.x system and the second array with what is thought to constitute the 4e system:

3.x: 18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 8.

4e: 18, 14, 10, 10, 8, 8.

If you were to make abilities cost one-for-one, all you need do is drop the point-buy amounts. The following would therefore represent 22 point-buy.

18, 14, 10, 10, 10, 8.

Is there some archaic mathematical formulae that I'm missing here? Is there some method to abuse this system that I just don't get? Why make things more complex than they have to be?

 

[Halivar]

Meh. Point-buy is teh lame. 4d6-drop-1 roll-two-sets-take-the-best is the way we've always done it, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think two ideas went into this:
- Harder Choices: You have to decide if a 18 in Str is really worth it since you could also just take a 16 and use the 6 points for Int to round your character off.
- Based on roll system: Values around the average of 4d6 drop lowest are more likely then the extremes (since there are more ways to roll a medium total then to roll a high total).

 

[Xorn]

Weighted point buy lets the player make a decision:

Do I want an 18, 16, 10, 8, 8, 8 (total attribute bonus of +4) or
do I want 14, 14, 14, 14, 12, 8 (total bonus of +8) or
Somewhere in between, like:
16, 16, 12, 10, 10, 8 (total bonus of +6)

Weighted points gives the choice between a really high stat, and better overall stats (basically if you go over a 14, you are reducing your total attribute maximum). Flat costs makes there no advantage to not taking the 18, especially since there's now not enough points to spread out stats evenly.

The rolling method includes the note that you should throw out scores with a total bonus of +1 or less. In the last 3.5 game I started, we did 4d6 minus low die--I had a paladin with stats that would have cost 19 with points buy (but was a +2 total bonus) and a ranger with something like 52 points cost (like +14 total stat bonus). I quit using random hit points after that character creation session, too. Players get their hit die divided by two (rounded down) plus one when they leveled.

Best thing I ever did with my game--random attributes are a silly artifact from the distant past. The best way to make the game about player skill is to start them all on even ground.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Weighted/diminishig returns systems encourage more well rounded characters, and give more "real" choices. One for one systems encourage maxing out your stats from most important downwards untill you run out of points.

Also, what Xorn said.

 

[Westwind]

Meh. Point-buy is teh lame. 4d6-drop-1 roll-two-sets-take-the-best is the way we've always done it, and I don't see that changing any time soon.

You sound like someone who's never played with a) The DMs girlfriend or b) a slightly-less- than-honest powergamer. Either way, I envy you.

 

[Mr Jack]

Weighted/diminishig returns systems encourage more well rounded characters, and give more "real" choices. One for one systems encourage maxing out your stats from most important downwards untill you run out of points.

Point buy encourages flat, uninteresting stat blocks. Point-for-point opens up characters with both exceptional stats and remarkable flaws. Points buy also penalises character concepts that require two or more high stats.

I much prefer 78 points, spend as you like, to points buy.

Although, in general, I use random stat generation: 21 dice, assign three to each stats being a nice one.

 

[parvatiquinta]

The reason for high scores to be weighed more is they do provide a quite considerable advantage. Abilities are innate to the PCs, and they are added to whatever else the character is going to get to improve their effectiveness.
Especially if they kept the maths so that the character is roughly challenged the same throughout their career, having an innate +4 instead of +2 is going to matter.

 

[Torchlyte]

Point buy encourages flat, uninteresting stat blocks. Point-for-point opens up characters with both exceptional stats and remarkable flaws. Points buy also penalises character concepts that require two or more high stats.

I much prefer 78 points, spend as you like, to points buy.

Although, in general, I use random stat generation: 21 dice, assign three to each stats being a nice one.

Actually a point system (by definition) encourages flat, uninteresting stat blocks.

Le /cry?

 

[Kzach]

Weighted points gives the choice between a really high stat, and better overall stats (basically if you go over a 14, you are reducing your total attribute maximum). Flat costs makes there no advantage to not taking the 18, especially since there's now not enough points to spread out stats evenly.

But the exact same thing happens with flat or weighted.

The only difference I see is that you get punished for wanting to excel in one particular area. Weighting encourages, ironically, flatter stat choices. This isn't necessarily a good thing.

I'm still not seeing any real mechanical reason to simply give point for point costs. 22 point-buy is then the effective equivalent of 28 point-buy, but much simpler to calculate.