What's the big deal with point buy?

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I don't let players roll, point buy is mandatory in games I run.

I don't do it to protect players from poor rolls, I use it to protect the campaign from overpowered, overlucky rolls, in creating characters so powerful they overshadow the entire campaign, and are by blessing of high ability scores, effectively a level or more higher than the rest of the party.

IME this is more of a player problem than a dice vs. point-buy problem. Good players should be aware of the dangers of high stats in making them prone to hogging the spotlight and seeking to dominate other players and characters. Good players should also be aware that characters that are played and valued solely for their uberstats get boring if they too greatly overshadow play. DM's should be aware that it is every bit as sensible to limit random rolls that are too high as to allow rerolls for those that are too low to be viable. Players that revel in high stats to the point that they become a problem are generally players whose characters will be problematic even if their stats are LOW.

All characters, at creation, should be created equal.

But that is impossible. Two characters of the same class, race, etc. created using the same point-buy totals can be VASTLY different in power levels, future potential, playability, etc. Heck, two characters that are absolutely identical in everything at the outset can be vastly different in those areas in just a level or two depending on feats chosen, play styles, player attitude, and more. While point-buy makes strides in the direction of greater equity where greater equity is needed beyond what would normally be, it is NOT a guarantee of equity and should not be credited as it so often is as being a cure-all when what it really does is closer to merely masking other problems (generally being player problems IME.)

Random die-rolling character creation is a relic of a bygone era, when you would also roll to see if your character had psionic talent, roll for 1st level hit points, roll for everything.

Amusing, though untrue since while point-buy is quite popular on ENworld polls it is probably a good decade or so away from being genuinely in danger of reducing die-rolled stas to "relic" status.

(I know some DM's that made PC's roll for everything from family background, social strata, if the character is currently wanted for any crimes, sexual orientation, hair color, eye color, virtually every aspect of the character be randomly determined).

Heck that used to be TYPICAL IME. It was also before anyone really knew better. Yet I still look back on those days quite fondly and ultimately do not think it is as outrageous as you make it out to be.

Once the game begins, in combat and such, yes, there is a random element, but I don't see why character creation itself, especially something as fundamental as ability scores, should be so random.

Because creativity is not just found in being able to assemble a character when you have access to everything you want. Sometimes it's more creative if you're assembling a character that is inspired by the limitations that you have to work with.

Don't let that stop you from using point-buy if that's really what you prefer, but again it is NOT the be-all end-all that you insist it is. The very fact that people are stating they do NOT prefer it should be enough to make that clear.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Heh, its like I've been saying all along. The system is just the system. Any fault (regarding point-buy and rolling methods) typically lies with the players. Can you have fun with both systems? Sure. Will they likely both be around for a while with people vehemently defending each one? Sure.

So don't complain about broken systems ... complain about players abusing whatever system is used.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Wouldn't it make sense for you to handicap yourself when playing with others that are not as experienced? The best way to do that is via a point buy, where you get fewer points and everyone else gets more. If you were to roll for stats, and you came out way ahead of the rest of the group, (like my 70-20 scenario, pro got 70, newb got 20) how would that be fair?

This is an improper comparison. If you are accepting the idea of handicapping yourself with a lower point-buy total then you ALSO would accept the idea of handicapping yourself by refusing to accept high randomly rolled totals. Yes?

And for the people that say stats don't matter, I completely disagree. Stats affect every roll that character makes. Yes, you can min/max and all that, but the fact remains, one has less than the other, so things are harder on him...for his entire character life.

One will ALWAYS have less than the other. Even with absolutely identical characters the playing style/attitude of the player and in-game choices of action for the character will make the characters different. You cannot FORCE equality where every element in the game is designed to create variety and therfore INequality. More to the point - I don't think you should even attempt to force equality of characters. Inequality creates tension and conflict. As long as this is kept where it is supposed to be (tension and conflict between characters rather than players) it is better for roleplaying than forcing greater equity.

There's no denying that having the stats to really lay down the smack is appealing, but in the long run I personally prefer a character with inherent random ability score "flaws" NOT of my choosing. As Mr. Spock said: "Having a thing is often not so satisfying as wanting a thing. It is not logical, but it is often true."

THAT is the difference between those who prefer point-buy and those who prefer random rolls for ability score generation.

 

[pogre]

In my experince, people who only play the characters that they want to play never really learn to play the game. Steve is always the elf archer or the elf monk. Jon is always the sneaky guy or the evil fighter. Sara is yet another Kender. They may become reasonably proficient with one class, or at playing one paticular character, but hand them anything else, even a pregen, and they have no clue what to do. I'm more impressed by people who can guide the survival and triumphs of a randomly rolled character than I am of people of have to cherry pick. The best players will occationally make it though a session in such a way that their Stats don't matter, becasue they never have to roll dice.

As for players' rights...the GM decides those. If everyone is rolling stats, then that is fair.

This is treading dangerously close to labeling such players as having "bad fun." I have had certain players in my campaign who enjoy playing basically the same character type over and over again. I think you can be an excellent player and still always go for the same schtick.

 

[FireLance]

IME this is more of a player problem than a dice vs. point-buy problem. Good players should be aware of the dangers of high stats in making them prone to hogging the spotlight and seeking to dominate other players and characters. Good players should also be aware that characters that are played and valued solely for their uberstats get boring if they too greatly overshadow play. DM's should be aware that it is every bit as sensible to limit random rolls that are too high as to allow rerolls for those that are too low to be viable. Players that revel in high stats to the point that they become a problem are generally players whose characters will be problematic even if their stats are LOW.

If high stats are as much a problem as low stats, perhaps the standard approach of 4d6 drop lowest six times, arrange as desired is just too variable?

Would a character generation method of say, 2d4+7 six times, arrange as desired be more palatable to those who prefer point buy while retaining the element of randomness for those who prefer rolling?

Is there anyone who dislikes this method because a character cannot start with an 18?

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Heh.

"Pick whatever stats you want or need. 3-18. Your choice. But total up how many points it would cost to make that character with point buy, subtract 32, and that's your Hubris score. Write that on your sheet so I can see it."

"Hubris? What's it for? Oh, you'll find out."

Now THIS, I absolutely love.

Well, technically, I'd probably let players know what they were getting into, because IMX they'd want to play along with it, whereas just saying this would spook them into using 32 point buy, tops.

How about starting a thread suggesting what to do with those points of Hubris...?

 

[airwalkrr]

Note, that only applies to weapons, and not wonderous items.

There are also Knowledge checks to identify magic items, but I probably assumed (apparently incorrectly) that the magic weapon glow applied to all items. This notwithstanding, detect magic is an easy spell to use, and with a duration of concentration, it is not hard to use it inconspicuously and then move into a more heavily populated area as long as you are keeping a low profile.

I've seen far too many poor campaigns where the star PC is so far ahead of the rest of the party that it's simply no fun.

That has never happened in any of my campaigns, at least not to that extent. I have run a large number of campaigns since I picked up DMing in 1998 and it has rarely been even a semblence of a problem. As I recently pointed out, the PC with the WORST ability scores is the star of my current campaign. I have no idea why it is so difficult to wrap your mind around the idea that ability scores are not as defining to a character as a caste system. The game rules are much more fluid than that.

I've also seen many DM's complain about how their party is blitzing through encounters that should be challenging without actually taking the time to realize that the PC's being played are effectively one or two levels higher due to high stats.

For the record, I am not one of those DMs. I know how to control the power level of my PCs and I do not have to do it by capping or "standardizing" their ability scores. I also recognize that over the course of a character's career, the ability scores he started with define him less and less. Compare a fighter with a 12 Str to a fighter with an 18. All other things being equal at 20th level and assuming he has a +5 weapon, +6 belt of giant strength, and Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Focus, his Strength has gone from contributing between 33% and 66% of his attack bonus to between 18% and 25% of his attack bonus. The discrepansy gets even bigger when the bard is singing to inspire courage, heroics, or greatness and the cleric has cast bless and prayer. High level characters are defined by their class levels, their magic, their equipment, and least of all their ability scores.

 

[airwalkrr]

I don't let players roll, point buy is mandatory in games I run.

I don't do it to protect players from poor rolls, I use it to protect the campaign from overpowered, overlucky rolls, in creating characters so powerful they overshadow the entire campaign, and are by blessing of high ability scores, effectively a level or more higher than the rest of the party.

Then point buy is fine for you. As for me, I do not have this problem because I control the power level of my characters. I have never said point buy is horrible or bad for the game. It simply doesn't help me accomplish anything with the game that I want to accomplish, and I am tired of other DMs (and players for that matter) preaching to me about the merits of point buy when I have never seen a significant advantage to it in my games. Other DMs can do as they wish, but point buy is not innately superior by any stretch of the imagination.

Players are smart. They tend to figure out who needs magic items to augment their contributions to the party and who does not. Consequently, players who rolled higher often get last pick of magic items found. It is not unfair in the slightest, and this is but one of many ways my players have come up with to police their own power level. They recognize they will do better if everyone can contribute than if one person is the sole strand which holds them together and dole out equipment accordingly.

 

[airwalkrr]

And for the people that say stats don't matter, I completely disagree. Stats affect every roll that character makes. Yes, you can min/max and all that, but the fact remains, one has less than the other, so things are harder on him...for his entire character life.

This is a simple misrepresentation of the argument. I do not think anyone has ever claimed ability scores do not matter. Ability scores matter, but my position is that they do not matter as much as other aspects of your character. A fighter's base attack bonus is a much more integral part of his character than his Strength score after 5th level or so, and the disparity keeps growing after that because his Strength can never hope to keep up with his level. Consequently, a relatively minor discrepansy between "average" characters and "high-powered" characters as the DMG defines them in terms of ability scores is not going to have a significant impact on the game in the long run.

 

[Hussar]

There's no denying that having the stats to really lay down the smack is appealing, but in the long run I personally prefer a character with inherent random ability score "flaws" NOT of my choosing. As Mr. Spock said: "Having a thing is often not so satisfying as wanting a thing. It is not logical, but it is often true."

THAT is the difference between those who prefer point-buy and those who prefer random rolls for ability score generation.

THis is a bit of a false comparison though. Point buy characters aren't necessarily better at "laying down the smack" than rolled characters. In fact, IME, rolled characters are almost universally higher point characters than point buy simply because a one is cocked FAR more often than six.

Sure, characters will become different through play. That's a given. But, what's wrong with them all starting at the same point?

The difference between a 25 point character and a 35 point character is about one level. Take a look at a 35 point 4th level fighter and a 25 point 5th level fighter. The 4th level fighter is numerically almost identical (and possibly a little better) than the 5th level fighter. At 6th, the 25 point fighter pulls ahead due to a bonus feat and iterative attack, but, at 7th, they pull neck and neck again. The same is true for just about any class. I realize, that by 20th level, the point buy doesn't make much difference, but, up to about 10th or 11th, it makes about a 1 level difference. This is pretty large IMO.

I usually give this advice to DM's wanting to run low magic campaigns - use higher point buys to even out the party's abilities.

I guess that's my basic reason for using stat buy. It allows me, as DM, to guage the party's abilities much better. If I want to use very tough encounters, I can use a higher point buy. If I am not so concerned with combat encounters and am running a much higher rp game, then 25 point buys are perfectly acceptable.

I really do believe that much of the criticism leveled that 3e characters are so powerful stems from die rolled characters. It makes sense that a party with 35-40 point characters is going to steamroll standard encounters - they are equivalent to a level higher. The game, IME, just works a lot better with point buy. CR functions more easily because the party isn't over or underpowered. Classes and PrC's don't get out of hand as easily because the wahoo stuff requires such high stats that 25 point buy characters just can't qualify.

Not that die roll generation is bad. I used it for a long time and I understand the attraction. However, I've found that point buy just works so much better for me, that I would never go back to random generation. And, sorry Cro, letting my PC's pick their stats isn't going to happen either.