you drew the short end of the stick

[orsal]

"Because in one two-minute span, when we all sat down to roll ability scores, 4d6 drop the lowest, you rolled the crappiest. And now you are stuck with that forever, and everyone else deserves to outshine you."

That's fine -- but that's not point buy. That's dice rolling. And as a matter of fact, that is my preferred method of character generation. Sometimes you get good characters, sometimes you get weak characters, but always you get the challenge of making the most of whatever you rolled. That's the way I like my games.

But some DMs prefer another method, such as point buy. If the DM wants to go with point buy, I'm OK with that. But if the DM wants to go with point buy, and different point counts for different players, and the DM rather than the players decides who gets how many points -- that's the situation described in the first post in this thread, and that's the situation I'm having difficulty rationalizing.

 

[orsal]

I also use point buy to allow player's to roll up their characters in offtime between sessions. We only get to play every two weeks, so short of the very first session dedicated to character generation we prefer to not spend valuable sesssion time rolling up characters. Point buy allows this to happen without the need for the DM to watch the dice rolls.

The other way to achieve the same effect is to play with people who are more interested in playing the game fairly and honestly than in getting super-powerful characters they can boast about. Then you can trust them not to cheat without having to look over their shoulders.

 

[Ogre Mage]

Of course I think the idea of 36 point characters is ridiculous to begin with, but that's another discussion entirely.

For me, 36 would be the upper limit of what I'd be comfortable with, and only then in a high power/magic setting like FR. My general guidelines are:

28 Point Buy: Average PCs
32 Point Buy: Tougher PCs
36 Point Buy: High powered PCs

 

[Coredump]

. But if the DM wants to go with point buy, and different point counts for different players, and the DM rather than the players decides who gets how many points -- that's the situation described in the first post in this thread, and that's the situation I'm having difficulty rationalizing.

Not exactly. What was said was:So, in another thread a poster made what he callsa bold claim ( and I agree) that 36 point buy and 25 point buy could be played in the same campaign without much difference. You are not being forced to...
And even then it was not quite a good statement of the original discussion (from another thread.) What if the DM said you could take the Elite Array (16,15,14,13,12,11 = 36pt) or you could do 25pt any way you wanted.

The question is if it would make sucha large balance issue??

 

[Coredump]

Okay, I am going to take a cheap shot, I am going to use Crothians own words against him.

From another thread
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=129250&page=2&pp=40

Crothian made some comments that I think illustrate my point here very well.


First is regarding Paladin abilities, and being effective with some low stats. Bold is my emphasis.

None of that has anything to do with stats. Ability to wear plate is a feat, ability ro use the weapon is also a feat and combined with the best BAB makes them good at it, and being able to take hits is in their good d10 HD.

Stats will make them a bit better at these things, but not prevent them from doing it.

Talking about str and melee combat

Yes, it is strength dependant. That is why strength adds to attack and damage rolls. But a bad strength score does not gaureentee a lose, the chances of one are incresed by some. But the differences between a 17 and a 10 are only +3, and when rolling a d20 +3 is not that great. It helps but is not enough to ensure victory all the time when without the +3 the character was always going to loose.

And he gives some personal examples

We had a game with a character with an 8 con. the game went over ten levels, sure she had some problems but she was not ineffective. Most people though are just unwilling to even give them a fair chance.

Heck, in my current group we have a cleric with an 8 con. Yet the first death was the 15 con fighter. THe cleric knows his limitations and plays smart so he lived.

and finally

Stats don't make people heroes, their actions do

So, if a +3 difference is strength "is not that great", and in his example (10-17) that *is* the difference between 25 and 36 point buy.... then it seems like the two characters could easily co-exist in the same game. One would do a bit better than the other....but not by that much.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Uh, no that is not the same thing at all. It is only a matter of a few thousand XP and you will be, at worst, a level behind your fellow PCs. Of course your DM was being a dick to bring in a 1st level PC to a 5th level game to bgin with.

He's actually a good friend of mine. Do you know him?

Anyway, it sure felt similar when my character was getting his ass kicked.

I think this shows a different manner of gaming than I am used to. I hate inter party conflict that end up with one side dead and the other side crowing about how 'el33t' they are. But to each their ow...

This was a one-time occurrence, and believe me, it's easier to laugh about it 15 years later than it was when it happened.

I doubt there's even a hint of "el33t"ism in it, since I had to look at that word for about two minutes to figure out what you're on about.

Oh. The people wanting a balanced group (the one and only reason to use point buy) are the weak role players. Right. Cling to that.

Methinks thou do protest too much...

I wasn't really making a proclamation, Psychic Warrior. If you reread the line right after the one you quoted out of context, it might make more sense.

Take a chill pill, brother, you're going all Dork Fever on me.

 

[orsal]

Not exactly. What was said was:So, in another thread a poster made what he callsa bold claim ( and I agree) that 36 point buy and 25 point buy could be played in the same campaign without much difference. You are not being forced to...
And even then it was not quite a good statement of the original discussion (from another thread.) What if the DM said you could take the Elite Array (16,15,14,13,12,11 = 36pt) or you could do 25pt any way you wanted.

The question is if it would make sucha large balance issue??

And I think I made it clear in my first post on the subject that for me there wouldn't be a significant balance issue, but there would be a totally different kind of issue.

As for your suggested variation (specified elite array or arbitrary 25 pt character) -- as long as it's the same choice offered to all players, fine by me.

 

[drothgery]

I wouldn't even consider it. Massive stat imbalances created by random rolling are bad enough (especially when coupled with limitted access to magic, which makes covering up weakness more difficult), but creating them delibrately seems insane.

 

[Crothian]

Okay, I am going to take a cheap shot, I am going to use Crothians own words against him.

Nice try, if only you knew

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

That's fine -- but that's not point buy. That's dice rolling. And as a matter of fact, that is my preferred method of character generation. Sometimes you get good characters, sometimes you get weak characters, but always you get the challenge of making the most of whatever you rolled. That's the way I like my games.

So if you roll crappy, you're stuck with it, and that's OK-- that's a challenge.

But if the DM starts you out with fewer points, that's not fair. Got it.

What if the DM rolled everyone's stats beforehand, in secret? And your "random" rolls always seemed to add up to about a 25-point buy and everyone else always seemed to add up to 32-36?

But some DMs prefer another method, such as point buy. If the DM wants to go with point buy, I'm OK with that. But if the DM wants to go with point buy, and different point counts for different players, and the DM rather than the players decides who gets how many points -- that's the situation described in the first post in this thread, and that's the situation I'm having difficulty rationalizing.

Just... amazing. The psychology at work.