Point Buy Method: What is a good number?

[Carnifex]

What weaknesses?

No, this is not a slam, nor is it an attempt to start a flame war. Just an honest question.

With a 40-point Buy, where are the characetrs particularly lacking?

Fair question, and here's the answer: Many of their weaknesses are not just stat-based, but character-based.

Yes, I know, you need to be comfident in your players for this to work, but it does. The party is currently split into two groups as follows:

Melisande, aasimar sorceress
Sebastion, human fighter
Ebri, human ??? (a mystery to the other players)/cleric
Meg'anna, human druidess
Sandslipper, earth genasi nomad psion (now an NPC)

Kale, human rogue/ranger
Burl, human necromancer
Wyshira, water genasi cleric
Cord, dwarven monk
Wolf, NPC fighter/ranger

The second group is a mercenary band, and as such has been pretty well welded together in companionship by a series of battles and experiences together. They've come to trust each other, and are learning each others strengths and weaknesses and how to work as a team. The characters accept that Wolf (the NPC leader) is the guy who has the most experience and best knowledeg of tactics, so even if they don't *like* his decisions they follow them. Kale has found out that without magical support, he can be quite vulnerable, while the spellcasters know their own weakness if in h-t-h or isolated.

The other group has a lot of inter-party conflicts, but is getting tied together quite strongly by friendship over anything else. They lack the tactics of the mercenary party, but they're beginning to wrok a bit better together. After they nearly lost a party member to an attack by a bunch of monks I think they'll pay more attention to co-operation and teamwork.

All the characters in each group do have their weaknesses - their arrogance, naivety, lack of experience, overconfidence, physical weaknes. Ironically, many of the spellcasters have a high Constitution score, while the fighter types don't. I can foresee this being a problem in the future, because the front-line guys are going to lack the necessary hp's to suck up damage on a serious level - but it'll encourage them to look to the spellcasters for buffing.

You'd be surprised at how many points can quickly be drained by good scores in a couple of stats. It means that most of the PC's do excel in something but can be really quite weak in other areas.

[Edit] Basically, like Reveal, many of the characters do indeed have low scores in some stats becasuse they have to give it up in return for the hgih stats they do have. Yep, even in a 40 point campaign...

 

[Desdichado]

You have an NPC as the leader of the party?!?

 

[Carnifex]

You have an NPC as the leader of the party?!?

Of the mercenary band, yes, that's right.

I use him sparingly; the players usually come up with the good ideas, but if they come up with something really dumb he puts them on the right path. He's justa useful tutor at the moment, letting the PC's get new contacts etc.

As one of the players commented, he has 'Obi-wan' overtones to him - ie, he'd going to die before too long.

I use him as a tool, basically; he by no means dominates the story line, in fact perhaps is used *less* than he should be. He's not much more powerful than the PC's, and has often needed the cleric's healing, and the ranger/rogues combat support. He's by no means a one-man ubercharacter.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

The following is not a flame:

I honestly don't understand when people say that they are runing a "tough" campaign so the players will need more power. Aren't all encounters relative to the players? Why not have a 25/8 point game and start out at 2nd level (or higher) if you want to give out harder encounters?

 

[Carnifex]

The following is not a flame:

I honestly don't understand when people say that they are runing a "tough" campaign so the players will need more power. Aren't all encounters relative to the players? Why not have a 25/8 point game and start out at 2nd level (or higher) if you want to give out harder encounters?

One reason is as follows: I wanted to start the PC's at first level to build up a chunk of their 'back story' as actual stuff in game. They're still in the prologue - once we start'Chapter 1' of the game, they'll be levels 3-4.

Also, I throw harsh encounters at people. I don't use dungeaons often, but rather, fights against tough foes, stuff that really, really pushes the PC's quite often and leaves them hanging on their last few hp's. Tougher characters mean I'm less likely to screw up and kill them all - it basically acts as something of a safety net, sicne it makes it easier for me to avoid completely smashing them to pieces by mistake.

Furthermore; it's to compare them with other characters in the game world. I specifically want them to stand out as being special, as being amongst the few who really are above average. It being a 'tough' game means that normal people tend to to survive what the PC's would go up against, and indeed even normal adventurers would have a hard time. It distinguishes them as being special.

I wouldn't use 40 points buy for every campaign, but for what I want in my current campaign it works well.

 

[reveal]

The following is not a flame:

I honestly don't understand when people say that they are runing a "tough" campaign so the players will need more power. Aren't all encounters relative to the players? Why not have a 25/8 point game and start out at 2nd level (or higher) if you want to give out harder encounters?

Edit: I also whole-heartedly agree with Carnifex. In my campaign, I want them to be heroes, not your average adventuring party out looking for things to do. I want them to be someone people look up to, not only for their deeds and actions, but just from their presence. One look at this party and you KNOW they are heroes.

 

[KDLadage]

40-point weaknesses

Fair enough guys! Thanks.

I guess a lot of it has to do with tone... and in my (most recent) games, 40 points in a point buy just would not "feel" right. I am a fan of the underdog story; the players finding themselves (at elast at first) little fish in a big freakin' ocean.

And in my games, Hero is not a title you are born with (ie: it is not in the stats) it is a title you earn (ie: by how you react and deal with situations).

I want my players to eb heroes, too. Just in a different way.

Still, I can see the appeal (and how a 40-point game could definately be run as a nail-biter...) -- and I am glad it is working out for you.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[~Joseph~]

In my campign I olny have 2 PCs at the moment, a first level ranger going for the tempus PrC, played by my friend, and I first level Fighter (read Tank) played as by me, the DM.
This campaign also happens to be an earth shaking campaign about defying the supreme dualistic gods to return the banished gods to power.

I use a 24 point buy system, but I start every stat at 10. Each point over 14 is worth 2, so a 14=4 15=6 16=8, however again I stray from the DMG, I do not make 17 and 18 cost 3 each, in the DMG 17=13! IMC it costs only 10, that's a big difference if you ask me. And I like my chars to have at least one score above 15, teh spread is 17 15 14 13 12 10, it could have a 16 and have 2 12s or and 18 and 2 10s, so I think it's a good traid off.

 

[Desdichado]

Sure, it's all relative. I like tough campaigns, BG, but for some reason, there's something psychologically comforting for players to look at stats and think that they're pretty good. That's why I'd rather toughen up the PCs rather than just scale the encounters to be tough for "average" PCs.

 

[Mojo]

We use a 45 point for the two games I run in the Forgotten Realms.

my next campaign will be a little more gritty and set in the Kingdoms of Kalamar, so I'll probably use 28 or so.