What's the big deal with point buy?

[airwalkrr]

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.

This comparison is simple to make with a fighter but is more complicated with a rogue or a wizard or a cleric. A key difference between a 10th level wizard and an 11th level wizard is 6th level spells. Having an 18 base Intelligence rather than a 14 is not going to give the 10th level wizard 6th level spells. His spells are harder to resist, he gets more skill points, and he gets a bonus 3rd and 4th level spell, but those are the only benefits. It does not translate to the key strength of the wizard, which is namely the highest level spells he can cast. Given the choice, I would rather cast chain lightning than cone of cold with a higher save DC (by 1). Why? Chain lightning is a more versatile spell that gives me a better opportunity to target those foes I want to target and ignore those I do not want to target. And that is a bad example. Compare the efficacy of wall of force (5th) to wall of iron. Wall of iron can be used offensively (drop it on a target) and is so thick it essentially lasts as long as the short duration of wall of force. That makes it a better spell in many respects. Or compare dominate person to geas. Geas does not allow a save (although you have to cast it outside combat) and dominate person grants an additional save whenever you try to compel the subject to do something outside its nature. Plus, geas can last forever under the right conditions. I could go on and on, but the fact is an 11th level wizard even with lower ability scores, will be superior to a 10th level wizard all other things being equal.

So the comparison does not work as well with other classes as it does with the fighter.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I think the key thing is this:

Even WITH random rolls, a 3e character takes quite some time to generate, especially if you're generating them higher than first level.

This time spent generating a character is, for the most part, time that is of lesser enjoyment than playing the game itself.

In early editions, a dead character could be replaced in seconds. Roll your 6x3d6, pick a class, optionally have the DM give you spells which you'd never have chosen, and you're done. If you rolled all 3s, you'd die and replace the character in a few seconds while everyone else takes a loo break.

Nowadays this isn't going to happen. If your character sucks, chances are you still want to avoid having to make a new one.

So the guy with crud stats is penalised twice over - once for having bad stats and a less effective character, twice for having to sit out to make new characters.

And, of course, if you're using rolled stats, you probably can't let your players go off and make characters in advance. You have to vet all the rolls, and even if you do then you don't want to encourage a lemming train that ends in an all-18's uber-character.

Point buy means that there is no "maybe I'll get better rolls next time" incentive to suicide.

 

[Mieric]

This comparison is simple to make with a fighter but is more complicated with a rogue or a wizard or a cleric. A key difference between a 10th level wizard and an 11th level wizard is 6th level spells. Having an 18 base Intelligence rather than a 14 is not going to give the 10th level wizard 6th level spells. His spells are harder to resist, he gets more skill points, and he gets a bonus 3rd and 4th level spell, but those are the only benefits. It does not translate to the key strength of the wizard, which is namely the highest level spells he can cast.

<snip>

I could go on and on, but the fact is an 11th level wizard even with lower ability scores, will be superior to a 10th level wizard all other things being equal.

So the comparison does not work as well with other classes as it does with the fighter.

Intelligence does affect the level of spells the wizard can cast.

The minimum Intelligence score needed to cast a wizard spell is 10 + the spell’s level.

Using the two wizards from your post:

10th Level Wizard - 18 Intelligence

1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th level bonus spells
Can cast 5th level spells (in accordance with his level)

11th Level Wizard - 14 Intelligence

1st & 2nd level bonus spells
Can't cast anything higher than 4th level spells (misses out on 5th and 6th level spells).

 

[Nellisir]

11th Level Wizard - 14 Intelligence

1st & 2nd level bonus spells
Can't cast anything higher than 4th level spells (misses out on 5th and 6th level spells).

I think he still gets the spell slots as a consolation prize. He just can't hack the "real" spells.

 

[Hussar]

This comparison is simple to make with a fighter but is more complicated with a rogue or a wizard or a cleric. A key difference between a 10th level wizard and an 11th level wizard is 6th level spells. Having an 18 base Intelligence rather than a 14 is not going to give the 10th level wizard 6th level spells. His spells are harder to resist, he gets more skill points, and he gets a bonus 3rd and 4th level spell, but those are the only benefits. It does not translate to the key strength of the wizard, which is namely the highest level spells he can cast. Given the choice, I would rather cast chain lightning than cone of cold with a higher save DC (by 1). Why? Chain lightning is a more versatile spell that gives me a better opportunity to target those foes I want to target and ignore those I do not want to target. And that is a bad example. Compare the efficacy of wall of force (5th) to wall of iron. Wall of iron can be used offensively (drop it on a target) and is so thick it essentially lasts as long as the short duration of wall of force. That makes it a better spell in many respects. Or compare dominate person to geas. Geas does not allow a save (although you have to cast it outside combat) and dominate person grants an additional save whenever you try to compel the subject to do something outside its nature. Plus, geas can last forever under the right conditions. I could go on and on, but the fact is an 11th level wizard even with lower ability scores, will be superior to a 10th level wizard all other things being equal.

So the comparison does not work as well with other classes as it does with the fighter.

I do see your point, but, then reverse the comparison. Take an odd level and compare it to an even one. A 7th level 35 point buy wizard has almost equal number of spells as an 8th level 25 point buy wizard. He's got an extra 3rd and 4th, which is actually exactly the same. Additionally, all his spells are +2 to DC, or the equivalent of several feats. Plus he's got a couple of extra hit dice worth of hit points, his Dex is better, giving him a better Ref save and attack bonus. Yes, at the next level, the 25 point character maybe pulls a little ahead (assuming he can actually CAST his spells as was mentioned) but, he's still way down on HP's, AC, skills, and Saving Throws. Is a single higher level spell really worth all that? Once a day? Not likely. These bonuses come in EVERY combat. That single higher level spell only comes in once.

There can be no real denying it, IMO. A 10-15 point advantage is worth about one level. You gain the hit points, saving throws, attack bonuses and skill points of a higher level character. About the only thing you miss out on is the bennie which comes with that level, which varies greatly from class to class. And the advantages outweigh that single bennie considerably.

 

[wayne62682]

The only downside that I see to Point Buy is that especially with the low ones (although I don't believe that crap about the game being balanced at 25 points) it forces you to essentially spend ALL of your attribute bonuses on your primary stat.. assuming that you have only one.

Assuming the Elite Array (which is the baseline) for a single-classed Wizard, you NEED to put every last one of your attribute bonuses into Intelligence or you'll never get 9th level spells (barring items that increase, but then you're relying only on this item and giving the DM an incentive to screw you over by taking it out of the equation). So... I guess I do see where it can encourage min-maxing.

I still prefer point buy for the simple reason that I like to build a concept and assign stats that fit the concept, not roll randomly for stats and then make up a concept that fits around the stats like in the olden days. Back then I could have a great idea for a paladin or monk or whatever, but when I roll it's "Too bad, you didn't roll that 17 Charisma, no Paladin for you" and then I can't even play what I wanted to. Even now, where there are no more prerequisites (thank god) for base classes, I can end up with mediocre rolls and thus STILL not be able to do my concept in game. If the game is about player choice and the players having fun, why keep using an outdated relic instead of allowing the players to control what they play?

 

[Cor Azer]

One thing I haven't really seen mentioned about the difference in point-buy versus rolling stats is the concept of "scrapping" a set of rolled stats.

When using point-buy, I do up my stats as I see fit, and that's that.

When rolling, and generate my attributes (using whatever manner), and then if they're not good enough (based on varying criteria), I can roll them again.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with rolling stats (and like I said before, I let my players choose whichever method they prefer), but if a system has a rules/guidelines built into it for redoing "unplayable" stats, then maybe the system doesn't meet everyone's needs. It's for those players that point-buy is for, in my opinion.

It's not a "your way is wrong, mine is right" debate. You like butterscotch ripple, I'm more of a strawberry sorbet person. Different strokes is all.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

When rolling, and generate my attributes (using whatever manner), and then if they're not good enough (based on varying criteria), I can roll them again.

By what definition of "not good enough"? The written definition of at least total +1 mod and a score of at least X (I don't recall what that number is right now)?

A character that has one 14 and the rest 10s is valid by this guideline. So is the all 18s character. These two characters, while both being legal - really shouldn't be in the same game. The runt with the 10s won't have much to contribute beside the uber-guy. That issue is what point-but eliminates.

That said, if the DM says they are rolling stats and that he will limit the variance in character power level somehow (like how the method of the group rolling stats and then everyone using the same stat values)... I'm fine with that. My problem with rolling isn't the fear of not getting the stats I want - it's having a Runt along side an Uber.

 

[Diremede]

I think the big problem with random roll vs. point buy, is that pretty much all the monsters in the DMG and other supplements assume your playing a balanced character. If you take a look at most humanoid monsters stats, there seems to be a point buy system applied to them. Also with random roll you do have the possiblity of having a uber character. This was about 5 years ago, but in my gaming group we were all rolling characters with the DM and a guy actually rolled out three 18's, and I believe his lowest score was a 12. This was using the roll 4d6 throw out the lowest one, roll 6 times method. Now most everyone else in the group averaged a 10 or so with maybe a single 16 or 17 accompanied by a 12 or 14, fairly average characters with one really good stat, but nothing under 9 if memory serves me correctly.

Now you can say that stats aren't everything, but a character with three 18's has a lot going for them early on in the game, and in the long run as well, he will be better at more situations than pretty much anyone in the group. If assigned right say this character is a melee type character he will have better saving throws, a better chance to hit, he will do more damage, have more hit points, and a better armor class. Essentially this character will be better than his peers, and will perform better on a level by level basis.

With all this in mind some would say that isn't fair, but if your playing for realism, well life isn't fair, and some people are born "better" than others, either physically, mentally, or both. With all probability in real life if you were to group 6 random people together and took a measure of their strength, their constitution, their intelligence, their decision making skills (wisdom), and their charismatic attitude and looks, you would find that more likely than not one person in that group will excell at more things than the other five.

Its really just a game style all in all, and how the DM wants to run his game. With point buy, the DM can take control of the situation as he knows that all the characters are fairly equal in power and ability. This makes planning and game design easier. Also if you don't have a lot of game time, point buy enables the players to make their characters ahead of time, and you dont' have to worry about "lucky dice" if the player rolls up a character at home.

 

[Alceste]

This comparison is simple to make with a fighter but is more complicated with a rogue or a wizard or a cleric. A key difference between a 10th level wizard and an 11th level wizard is 6th level spells. Having an 18 base Intelligence rather than a 14 is not going to give the 10th level wizard 6th level spells. His spells are harder to resist, he gets more skill points, and he gets a bonus 3rd and 4th level spell, but those are the only benefits. It does not translate to the key strength of the wizard, which is namely the highest level spells he can cast. Given the choice, I would rather cast chain lightning than cone of cold with a higher save DC (by 1). Why? Chain lightning is a more versatile spell that gives me a better opportunity to target those foes I want to target and ignore those I do not want to target. And that is a bad example. Compare the efficacy of wall of force (5th) to wall of iron. Wall of iron can be used offensively (drop it on a target) and is so thick it essentially lasts as long as the short duration of wall of force. That makes it a better spell in many respects. Or compare dominate person to geas. Geas does not allow a save (although you have to cast it outside combat) and dominate person grants an additional save whenever you try to compel the subject to do something outside its nature. Plus, geas can last forever under the right conditions. I could go on and on, but the fact is an 11th level wizard even with lower ability scores, will be superior to a 10th level wizard all other things being equal.

So the comparison does not work as well with other classes as it does with the fighter.

You are leaving out the immense effect of con and other high ability scores for the 10th level wizard. With a high secondary score the hot rolling player will have seventy percent more hit points and better saves to boot. Ie player with 18, 18, 16, 12, 12, 8 vs 14, 12, 12, 10, 10, 8. With an 18 con the 10th level wizard will have an average of 67 hit points versus the 11th level wizard with a 12 con having 40. Not to mention the 10th level wizard will have a fort save of 7 versus the 11th level wizards fort save of 4. The difference in reflex/ init bonus is 6 reflex / 3 init bonus for the 10th level versus 4 reflex / 1 init bonus. Btw, the save / init difference is three feats right there. The tenth level wizard acts faster, saves better, and can take a lot more damage too. This is at 10th level. The difference at lower levels is even wider.