Point Buy

[BSF]

Point buy all the way for me. On one level, I want the players to be able to play a character that they want to play. On another level, I am slowly weaning them off the idea that the stats make the character. With each campaign, I drop the number of points in the point buy pool.

I have one player that will end up with a median of points spent in all stats. I have another player that will trash some stats to build others as high as possible. The rest of my players end up with a strength or two, a weakness or two and average to above average stats in the rest.

For my NPC's, some of them are built with the same point buy pool. Most are built using a smaller pool. Then there is the above average pool. And finally, the book stats, which is more than enough for some creatures.

There is nothing wrong with randomly rolled stats. But, if stats are widely varied, it will impact the encounters to some degree. And, as I said, I am weaning my players off the idea that they have to have "decent" stats. I also got tired of less than mature arguements about who has a better PC based on stats. The latest batch of PCs, for the latest campaign, are a varied lot and most of them are less than min-maxed. It's a good game that we are all enjoying.

 

[S'mon]

I agree that Point Buy makes relatively weak PCs, even 32 PB (& 25 PB PCs are rather pathetic), unless NPCs are routinely built with low points scores, say 15-20. At low levels 25 PB PCs are actually weaker than 25 PB 3.0 DMG NPCs, having less wealth!

IMC I now use _best of_ 35 PB & the Conan RPG 'Heroic' method, which is roll 1d10+8 6 times, assign as desired. 1d10+8 is highly random, if it gives poor results the player uses 35 PB and still gets a decent PC. If it gives great results, the players has a good PC but not one that will overshadow the 35-PB PCs.

 

[Spamdrew]

The problem with people using high amounts of points to generate characters is that larger stats are exponentially more powerful that lower ones. This is because almost every stat in the game effects multiple things. Thus all you are doing by giving characters more points is making it harder on yourself because the CR system will be far less able to help you design encounters.

Spamdrew

 

[Darklone]

I prefer rolling... even though you get pb 65 chars in a group with pb 25 chars... crit happens.

 

[Thanee]

The problem with the more high powered characters is, that the CR doesn't really work anymore, you'll need to up CR by 2 or more to actually reflect a proper challenge. Ok, not that CR is very accurate, anyways, but you know what I mean.

It's not really that much of a problem, just leads to a upward shift in power for both sides.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Fenes]

PB one way or the other for me. My goal is to have a balanced party, and since my campaigns run for years I need to start the players fairly.

Alternatively, it is "make your character as you see fit, max sum of stat modifiers is +X, and DM adjusts it as he sees fit, taking into account gear, campaign, party, classes and other PCs".

 

[DragonLancer]

My group and I tried point costing a couple times just after 3rd edition came out. We never liked it, not even a little bit.
Everyone turned out about the same with nothing to deferentiate between them except class abilities and skills.

Using the dice-rolling method is more enjoyable, and not everyone is (for the most part) a carbon clone stats-wise.

I think it just comes down to how your group prefers to handle it.

 

[nopantsyet]

IMC I now use _best of_ 35 PB & the Conan RPG 'Heroic' method, which is roll 1d10+8 6 times, assign as desired. 1d10+8 is highly random, if it gives poor results the player uses 35 PB and still gets a decent PC. If it gives great results, the players has a good PC but not one that will overshadow the 35-PB PCs.

HIGHly random is right! Random within the range of 9-18! So it's a linear distribution between average and exceptional...Wow! Is that Conan d20? Interesting approach, how is that working out?

I ultimately decided against methods that add a significant power boost in favor of a strategy (mentioned in my previous post) that smoothes out the "incompetance" factor. Call me old fashioned, but I still like the power curve. I just still like idea of PCs starting out weak and vulnerable.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

I still like the array I use: 9, 11, 11, 13, 15 & 17.

 

[kamosa]

Point buy = cookie cutter characters

I tried point buy as a player and as GM in couple campaigns. What I found was that it was great the first time, a little tired the second time and by the third or fourth character generating session I was sick of seeing the same damn character generated. A 16, two 14, a 13 and a 12 and 10 seemed to be around where it broke down to for every character. I just got tired of the same "balanced, but boring" characters.

I find when players roll they tend to be more excited by a good roll for character points than a good predictable distribution of points.

So, I rolled back to rolling for stats. My experience is that the players have a wider variety of scores and have more chances for an extrodinary score (either low or high) then they did before. As a result, I think my current crop of characters is a well, a better bunch of characters.

I understand it isn't as fair as point buy, but if anything, 3.5 has taught me that more fair doesn't always equate to more fun.