What's the big deal with point buy?

[Olaf the Stout]

I personally have never used point buy. I am seriously considering it for the next game that I run though, just to see if it's any better or worse than rolling. Of course a lot depends on what you set the point value at.

I think sometimes the random roll method can result in PC's with very different power levels at the lower levels, especially if one person rolls really well and another rolls really poorly. I normally allow my players a bit of leeway if they roll poorly or the rolls that they get don't allow them to play the character that they wanted to. I don't necessarily let them increase their rolls, more likely just move one number up and another one down.

Olaf the Stout

 

[QuaziquestGM]

why? the most important stat for a barberain is WIS, followed by CON.

 

[Mouseferatu]

"I have the worst luck at rolling dice so it's unfair to make me roll my ability scores."
(There is no statistical evidence that luck exists. I recognize bad dice exist, but they aren't as common as everyone thinks. Usually flaws on a die have an unremarkable effect upon the randomness of that die's rolls.)

So? Who cares about statistical evidence? A player who feels he has bad luck isn't going to accept "Well, it was statistics" if he gets a bad character. He's just going to be stuck with a character he doesn't like, and that's simply not fun.

"Whoever rolls the highest is going to end up dominating the whole campaign. That's not fair at all. I want to be able to have the spotlight sometimes too."
(Ability scores are not the be-all, end-all in 3e. Although they are arguably more significant at lower levels, the higher you get in level, the less ability scores matter because things like magic, skills, class abilities, and feats easily make up for those deficiencies. A well-built character with average ability scores will be better in most cases than a poorly built character with better ability scores, but two equally well-built characters with differing ability scores rarely have an appreciable power difference.)

I have to disagree with your base assertion here. Ability scores stick with you forever, and anything that Bob-With-All-12s can get to bump up his score, so can Joe-With-All-17s. Compare two fighters, for instance. A fighter with 16-18 in Strength and Con is effectively a higher level than a fighter with 12s in both those stats. And I can tell you from personal experience that level makes no difference in this regard. The guy with the high stats will remain an effective level or so above the guy without 'em.

Me? I prefer the best of both worlds. I have the group roll stats, and then everyone gets stats more or less equal to whoever rolled highest.

 

[Victim]

what your DM dosent trust you when you say you rolled 18 18 18 18 18 17 at home before the game session ?

Well, the op mentioned that, with the ability to police his player's rolls, he saw little need for point buy in his home games. But watching people roll isn't particularly practical if character gen occurs outside the normal gaming session. And considering how long it takes some people in my group to finish up their characters even with the ability to get many things done beforehand. Forcing everyone to start from scratch in session might be a disaster.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

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.

So, in terms of answer to my question, that's a "No, players do not have the right to play what they want."

Cool. I think that using stat rolls to guide players into trying new ideas out is a good route to take.

I just also happen to agree with the idea of letting players play what they want.

Depending on the game and circumstance, different approaches work differently. However, if there is an increase in the popularity of point buy (something I'm not sure of), maybe it's pointing out somthing about the people who play?

Anyone else? Do players have the right to make the characters they want?

As a point buy fan (I don't play nearly enoug to be low on ideas), I'd just like to throw out some of the things that I've played previously, and would play in the future. I've played a wilds surviving, car driving, gun toting medic (think ranger cleric in an apolyaptic setting). I've played a stuck up wizard specializing in terrain control magic. I've played a self-centerd bard on the run from his family. I've played a fast handed rogue with no real idea of ownership (just as likely to give stuff away as steal it--stuff is transient). I wanted to play an over-the hill fighter in the midst of a mid life crisis. I've also wanted to be a shield weilding defender my clan (think defensively specialized barbarian), and a starry eyed youth whos inexpierence is belied by a personal wisdom and inner strength of personality (the paladin).

So, as a staunch defender of point buy, allow me to be an anecdotal exception.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

True. That's a bummer of a roll, just technically above the limit for a do-over (+8 in bonuses, -6 in penalties). But you know, I think it would still be workable. Str 16, Dex 5, Con 9, Int 6, Wis 13, Cha 18. True, you'd be kind of slow in thought and action, but very persuasive, with nice saving throws. In the end, numbers are just numbers. Assuming you adventured that long, you could take a Dex increase at level 4 and a Con increase at level 8.

Yeah, that roll was just barely above the limit with a wide spread. I could have made a just playable paladin (easy to hit + lower HP just rankles me), or I could make a pretty awesome wizard. So I went with the awesome wizard.

And to you stats are just numbers. To me they're an integral part of the character and a discreet quantification of who and what he is. It's a personal issue, but the stats I have on paper drastically change the character I play and how I play him. That's why I prefer as much control over the numbers as possible.

However, I'm not saying that random rolls are bad. I played a pretty awesome and fairly memorable wizard from the ashes of the character I didn't get.

 

[arscott]

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.

Now you're arguing against yourself. Earlier, you were saying that it's perfectly possible to play almost any character with almost any stats--that just because your paladin doesn't have the right distribution of stats, doesn't mean that you can't still play a paladin. Now you're arguing that rolling wil prevent Mikey from playing a paladin over and over again.

Besides, the variance of point buy can cut both ways. If I'm someone who always plays blasty wizard, and decide to play a monk just this once, what's going to happen when I roll one 18 and a bunch of 11s?

I'm all for encouraging people to play various character types. But choosing random rolls just for that reason is a case of 'policy through inefficiency'--That is, structuring a rule in such a way that creates a problem, because one particular symptom of the problem is an effect you find desireable.

Policy through inefficiency is bad design because other symptoms of the problem you create are often less desirable, and either need to be addressed (causing complications and general rules bloat) or simply left to fester.

That's not to say that I view rolled stats as a problem. I simply disagree with your position that they're the true path, and that point-buy is somehow the easy way and/or too nice to the players.

I think stat generation is an important tool that can be used to set the flavor of the campaign, just as the DMG suggests: In my Dark•Matter campaign (modern day occult investigators), I intentionally used a point-buy with fewer points than the players were used to. This helped send the message that D&D style solutions aren't neccessarily appropriate, and that players should consider taking a more conservative approach. Because of point-buy's diminishing returns, combined with scarce resources, It also encouraged players to create characers that were more well-rounded, rather than excelling in one or two particular areas.

In the Dark Sun game I plan to start next year, players will roll their stats, but without the safety-net reroll. The world of athas is harsh, and there's little room for concepts like fairness or forgiveness, so a random roll with no room for mistakes is highly appropriate.

 

[Deuce Traveler]

Welcome to the 'fairness' culture. Makes you want to puke, doesn't it?

 

[Melan]

If you really wish to blow their minds, mention rolling ability scores in order. After their jaws have dropped, concede that „okay, okay, you can roll two series”.

Seriously, this is just another outward sign of the whole „ PCs are significant and precious by virtue of being a PC” school of thought (a.k.a. „protagonism”) - as opposed to the „PCs may become significant and precious by surviving and doing heroic stuff” baseline that used to be dominant. The same is apparent in thinking about PC death, the destruction of equipment (by rust monsters, for example), the shift from splats in the hands of the DM to splats in the hands of the players… a lot of different things.

All that ends in a culture clash. It is hard to say whether you will be able to reconcile the different attitudes in the group. I could easily do it with my former group (as they mostly shared my preferences, at least subconsciously), but had to give huge concessions to the current one... and in the end, I burned out and stopped DMing, because the players weren’t playing the game I was DMing. To tell the truth, I am quite pessimistic right now, but again, who knows.

 

[Gold Roger]

It's a simple matter of preferences.

I like point buy because it opens up the ability to truly create the original character you want, ensures that everyone starts at the same powerlevel, scale the power of the game, etc.

Doesn't mean you have to like it, but it seems you think I shouldn't like it :\