Point buy - How high do you go? (and why)
- Thread starter Glyfair
- Start date
Daredevill
First Post
Sorry, I posted in the wrong thread.
Last edited:
Daedrova
Explorer
Well, most of my players feel as though their character is not heroic or "good" enough to even be an adventurer without good stats.
I have to admit, most did start out in 2e, and I can definitely see why it created that sort of mindset.
And I do agree that heroism is defined by actions, not by stats, but I also don't see a problem with giving the players some extra so that they are more likely to survive encounters. I also don't much like complete dependency on magic items.
Don't get me wrong, I like magic items, and I see why they are needed and how they fit (I had to argue for them against a couple of players who thought they should be able to operate independently of them). But giving some extra points when using point buy allows characters to operate without having to be completely decked out with the items (yes, I think it is cheesy for a character to have, or need to have a +6 item for every stat). Also, characters I and my friends have created rolling 4d6 and dropping the lowest have always had much better scores that what is possible with a 25 point buy system.
I do like the fact that lower points forces choices, but most players I know are stuck with a choice that they do not want to make. For these reasons, I have not run a game where characters are created using less than 32 points. I know, it can be excessive, but again, I do not always run games in "high" magic worlds where every magic item a character wants he can just buy. Plus, I really have found no problem with tailoring the campaigns to the characters... It may also help that many of the opponents that the PCs will face are NPCs that I have drawn up. And, again, I like the fact that they have a slightly (usually very slightly) increased chance of achieving victory in a tough encounter. If I want them to fail, I will create a higher challenge, something that they will/should know is probably too much of a challenge, and provide them with other choices (this is where if their heads get to big, they will choose poorly, only to be quickly reminded that they are indeed still not superman/still mortal) I really don’t like the prospect of the entire party dying when I was expecting a close or hard earned victory. I know that not all things can be accounted for, and those things can still happen, but I don't mind PCs having the edge. Aside from that, I think we all know that the CR system isn’t an exact science…
Aside from that, I still see the players struggling over choices when making their characters, but they are more happy with those that they must make, rather than "man, if I take the starting Str and Con my fighter needs to survive, he wont have the points needed to make him even a semi dexterous or intelligent fighter, and his Wisdom/will save will, as always, suck, and of course he is going to be the ugliest most abrasive adventurer ever..." My players don't like having to choose in that manner, and I don't like forcing it on them.
It also seems that using lower points greatly favors the classes that really only need the one high ability score. A Paladin with 25 points: Str 15, Dex 10, con12, Int 8, Wis 13, Cha 14... They are a melee class, demanding of Str and Con, but in order to even compare with other melee classes, their Cha based bonuses and casting from Wis, need to be there, meaning they can be, at BEST, just above average with each. That character really doesn’t seem to be worth while.
Compare to a Wizard: Str 8 (no problem), Dex 12, Con 14, Int 17, Wis 10, Cha 8, His very high ability score (not 18) is the only one he is too concerned with, and he has no need of str or cha (unless he desires them for RP reasons-maybe a higher Cha? which is no argument for using lower points) and he can still take the above average Dex and/or Con for and edge in HP or init and AC.
This character is a bit weak for my tastes, and for most of my players, (that may just be due to my gaming environment) but I wouldn’t have a problem playing this character. I would have a problem playing the Paladin above. I think the Paladin would have a hard time being the Paladin above.
32 point Paladin: Str 14, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 16. Does this really make him “superman?” So he doesn’t have to be stupid or clumsy to have the above average stats needed to be a survivable character.
I don't know who I am trying to convince, since this is really just a matter of taste. I guess I just justified my response so that I don't get allot of replies claiming that I am a I have an inferior view of RP or of the concept of the system
I have to admit, most did start out in 2e, and I can definitely see why it created that sort of mindset.
And I do agree that heroism is defined by actions, not by stats, but I also don't see a problem with giving the players some extra so that they are more likely to survive encounters. I also don't much like complete dependency on magic items.
Don't get me wrong, I like magic items, and I see why they are needed and how they fit (I had to argue for them against a couple of players who thought they should be able to operate independently of them). But giving some extra points when using point buy allows characters to operate without having to be completely decked out with the items (yes, I think it is cheesy for a character to have, or need to have a +6 item for every stat). Also, characters I and my friends have created rolling 4d6 and dropping the lowest have always had much better scores that what is possible with a 25 point buy system.
I do like the fact that lower points forces choices, but most players I know are stuck with a choice that they do not want to make. For these reasons, I have not run a game where characters are created using less than 32 points. I know, it can be excessive, but again, I do not always run games in "high" magic worlds where every magic item a character wants he can just buy. Plus, I really have found no problem with tailoring the campaigns to the characters... It may also help that many of the opponents that the PCs will face are NPCs that I have drawn up. And, again, I like the fact that they have a slightly (usually very slightly) increased chance of achieving victory in a tough encounter. If I want them to fail, I will create a higher challenge, something that they will/should know is probably too much of a challenge, and provide them with other choices (this is where if their heads get to big, they will choose poorly, only to be quickly reminded that they are indeed still not superman/still mortal) I really don’t like the prospect of the entire party dying when I was expecting a close or hard earned victory. I know that not all things can be accounted for, and those things can still happen, but I don't mind PCs having the edge. Aside from that, I think we all know that the CR system isn’t an exact science…
Aside from that, I still see the players struggling over choices when making their characters, but they are more happy with those that they must make, rather than "man, if I take the starting Str and Con my fighter needs to survive, he wont have the points needed to make him even a semi dexterous or intelligent fighter, and his Wisdom/will save will, as always, suck, and of course he is going to be the ugliest most abrasive adventurer ever..." My players don't like having to choose in that manner, and I don't like forcing it on them.
It also seems that using lower points greatly favors the classes that really only need the one high ability score. A Paladin with 25 points: Str 15, Dex 10, con12, Int 8, Wis 13, Cha 14... They are a melee class, demanding of Str and Con, but in order to even compare with other melee classes, their Cha based bonuses and casting from Wis, need to be there, meaning they can be, at BEST, just above average with each. That character really doesn’t seem to be worth while.
Compare to a Wizard: Str 8 (no problem), Dex 12, Con 14, Int 17, Wis 10, Cha 8, His very high ability score (not 18) is the only one he is too concerned with, and he has no need of str or cha (unless he desires them for RP reasons-maybe a higher Cha? which is no argument for using lower points) and he can still take the above average Dex and/or Con for and edge in HP or init and AC.
This character is a bit weak for my tastes, and for most of my players, (that may just be due to my gaming environment) but I wouldn’t have a problem playing this character. I would have a problem playing the Paladin above. I think the Paladin would have a hard time being the Paladin above.
32 point Paladin: Str 14, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 16. Does this really make him “superman?” So he doesn’t have to be stupid or clumsy to have the above average stats needed to be a survivable character.
I don't know who I am trying to convince, since this is really just a matter of taste. I guess I just justified my response so that I don't get allot of replies claiming that I am a I have an inferior view of RP or of the concept of the system
i believe that heroism, as defined in the classical epics and legends (not the modern definition of heroism), requires both the actions and the stats.
in most tales and legends, the heroes are not just the ones who are braver or more moral than the rest -- they are also the ones who are stronger, smarter, tougher, etc. than everyone else.
i give my players 32 points.
in most tales and legends, the heroes are not just the ones who are braver or more moral than the rest -- they are also the ones who are stronger, smarter, tougher, etc. than everyone else.
i give my players 32 points.
jasper
Rotten DM
This is all about flavor
Is Hercules bench pressing the temple over his head = it all about the high stats
Or
farm boy The dread pirate Wesley. it all about the levels.
I don't do piont buy but if I did I would do 28.
And it depends on the gamer.
Gary the second Lt Grunt who would sucide his character if did have a 17 or 18/50+ if it was a fighter type.
Or Bud the Barbarian who would ask to change stats to min entry level for class.
Or Bolo Bob (from FT Ord)(If you out there give me a shout) who did care about high stats just made interesting characters. Now he wouldn't turn down a good roll but he wouldn't ignore a lousy roll either.
If you go with a higher pt buy then you either have increase the monsters in one form or another, or let the super heroes play speed bump with the monsters.
Is Hercules bench pressing the temple over his head = it all about the high stats
Or
farm boy The dread pirate Wesley. it all about the levels.
I don't do piont buy but if I did I would do 28.
And it depends on the gamer.
Gary the second Lt Grunt who would sucide his character if did have a 17 or 18/50+ if it was a fighter type.
Or Bud the Barbarian who would ask to change stats to min entry level for class.
Or Bolo Bob (from FT Ord)(If you out there give me a shout) who did care about high stats just made interesting characters. Now he wouldn't turn down a good roll but he wouldn't ignore a lousy roll either.
If you go with a higher pt buy then you either have increase the monsters in one form or another, or let the super heroes play speed bump with the monsters.
Kastil
Explorer
I use my own system. You get 80pts to spread out. No score above 18 including racial bonuses. I find my players will put an 18 somewhere but then again, I use this same system when creating any 'bad guys' I put against them. If the campaign shifts gears or the players want to try something new, I'll go with the 4D6 drop the lowest system.
All in all, my players are happy with the system and it doesn't make them immune to losing characters. The dice Gods were with me the one night and what should have been a 'use teamwork and win' fight turned into a blood bath. While they were busy tossing their characters to the floor, I had to do the same with the next BBG. They lost their only guide through unforgiving country making me have to come up with another 'plot twist'.
Fighting orcs with greatswords. Nasty lot they are!
All in all, my players are happy with the system and it doesn't make them immune to losing characters. The dice Gods were with me the one night and what should have been a 'use teamwork and win' fight turned into a blood bath. While they were busy tossing their characters to the floor, I had to do the same with the next BBG. They lost their only guide through unforgiving country making me have to come up with another 'plot twist'.
Fighting orcs with greatswords. Nasty lot they are!
GamerMan12
First Post
I run high fantasy, high magic campaigns and in the next one I am going for 32 points. I had previously used a very generous dice rolling one, that gave even higher scores, but now prefer point buys so that the players are more equal with each other.
GamerMan12
GamerMan12
Painfully said:
Not really. This is the first thread on point buy that isn't just a debate on whether to use it or not.
I'm interested in a nice discussion of simply which point buy values to use, like this one.
My group is using 32 point buy right now. This is quite a step down from the previous method (4d6 drop lowest, reroll 1's, roll 7 stats and drop lowest).
I find it heroic enough for our tastes though, and haven't seen evidence of it breaking the system.
My group is running through RttToEE right now, and are all at 7th level.
Regards
Skaros
Similar Threads
