| | | | | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Professional Fan of DDM
Shoe
Sergeant
804 Posts
    
 | | 01/02/2006 5:18 PM |
| I use 28-point point buy for all my current games.
The first 3.0 game I played in (in a 3.0 playtest group) did 25-point point buy - which was a bit of a shock coming from constant 2e play. In 2nd Ed, stats only meant something once they got to around 15 or so -- an 8 or 10 was just about as effective as a 14. In 2e, I was used to playing PCs with 3 or 4 15+ stats. So when we started with the "standard array" (15,14,13,12,10,8 - or so) it initially seemed like we were getting shafted. But I came to realize that the game still worked, and was fun to play, and the stat bumps at every 4th level helped even out the experience. It seems that those that feel the need to have lots of 16-18 stats on the same PC may still have the 2e mindset.
In 2e, we "rolled" stats (until late in that product's cycle). I use quotes because, while every character was legitimately rolled (typically 4d6 drop lowest), each set of stats was culled from a page of reject stats -- or the player wouldn't count any rolls until he got an 18. Eventually, I got sick of seeing characters with 17's and 18's all over (18(70+) strength) with only a token 15, that I instituted an 85-point maximum total for ability scores, with each extra line of strength counting as one point. It effectively became a point-buy system.
So, yeah, ... Point Buy. I'm still amazed, by the way, at those that play with 35, 40, or even higher point buy. But I guess that's because I learned 3e the "hard way" with 25-points. | |
Professional Fan of DDM | |
| The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
13069 Posts
Mud Lick, Kentucky
| | 01/02/2006 6:04 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Vrecknidj
I was looking at my old Basic book yesterday and thought that the method in there was pretty cool. Roll 3d6, that's your Strength. Roll it again, that's your Intelligence, etc. through all six scores.After you have your scores, you pick a class that's suited to the scores. Wacky.
Wacky indeed.
My problem with this method is that it can possibly take away one of the most fun aspects of D&D, picking the character class you want to play. If the die rolls determine what you can and can't play, it takes away from the game experience, IMO. | |
WotC - making me wish more and more every day for a return to the TSR days. :(
I fought the snark and the snark won. I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!
Some of my favorite Maxminis quotes
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
Could somebody explain Snatch to me? I understand the basics, but not how to enter/use it. - Posted by orcmonk220
G's the man. - Posted By greyhaze on 11/11/2008 8:58 AM
I dont mind butting heads every once in a while. It makes thing interesting. Thats why I'd be heartbroken if Ghendar ever left - Posted By Count Dooku on 04/03/2006 11:58 AM
| |
|
PatEllis15
Commander
4463 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 12:14 PM |
| To Roll Play or to Role Play, that is the question (at least one of them...)?
I've had to many problems with LEGAL, random generated charaters who were out of wack, not to mention the ILLEGAl ones that were presented to me.
My preference is for 4d6 7 times, dropping the lowest die, and the lowest result, arrange as you see fit.
What I couldn't stand was the stat bloat of 2nd edition. Like Shoe, seeing all those 18's became WAY to commonplace. I grew up wtih 3d6, and built your character based on the results. Thing is, character creation took about 10 minutes, so I'd have a 3 ring binder full of characters read to use.
Having those low stats helped to accentuate that you were just a hair better off than the common "man". That fits with Greyhawk, but not so much with higher powered/magic campaigns like the Forgotten Realms.
At the end of the day, I want to be able to use the the CR and EL info from the DMG and MM. Having skewed stats for some characters was a REAL hassle to get things rebalanced.
I now use point buy, and I'm happy with it (9 times in 10 28 points, 1 in 10 we might use 32). The key is to have a mature group of players, who aren't looking to recreate World of Warcraft. Sure you can min max yourself to be the perfect fighter or wizard, or what have you, but it's up to the players to PLAY their characters accordingly. My current group has a min/maxed 1/2 Orc Barbarian Cleric, but he is DAMNED dumb, and gets himself into all kinds of trouble because of that. He really plays that 6 intelligence, and lives with it. He doesn't brush it aside and ignore it.
Likewise the group is filled with more mundane characters who are all closer to average, with no 18's, and nothing below a 9... Why? Because they WANTED to play that kind of character....
Pat E | |
"Games evolve. Otherwise we'd still be pushing rocks around the dirt. What do you think the cavemen said when some dude showed up with sticks?" - Chairman7w | |
|
rhane
Underboss
1412 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 1:16 PM |
| | I like point-buy, because I typically like to develop my concept and write my background BEFORE I start on the mechanics. Rolling kind of forces you to do it the other way. | |
Rhane
"The focus is sharp in the city..."
Have/Want List
Reference thread
Avatar Thread
| |
|
aron1
Sergeant
415 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 2:40 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Zenako
My problem with the point buy systems that have been used is that you tend to end up with very stereotypical charactitures. Strong fighters are seldom wise or smart, and vice a versa. The system strongly encourages pumping prime stats up as much as is reasonable.
Interesting. Maybe my group is farther from the average than I thought, but we tend to push most stats up to 14 (the top of the 1pt per stat range) before we boost the "main" attribute towards an 18. We end up with lots of characters with 16 14 14 14 12 9 or the like. We've found that it's much more beneficial for the fighter to pass on the extra +1 to hit and damage of an 18 STR so that he can have an extra 6 attribute points in his "lesser" attributes. An extra +3 to INT or WIS will give the fighter many more Skill points each level or a higher WILL save and a higher inate Spot and Listen check (which we use CONSTANTLY).
Maybe it's because my DM has a habit of forcing all players to use every stat fairly frequently that we've all begun to optimize to his game style rather than the standard? We've still min/maxed our characters, just not in the typical way. | |
Champion of the Thoqqua | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 5:43 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Shoe
I use 28-point point buy for all my current games.
The first 3.0 game I played in (in a 3.0 playtest group) did 25-point point buy - which was a bit of a shock coming from constant 2e play. In 2nd Ed, stats only meant something once they got to around 15 or so -- an 8 or 10 was just about as effective as a 14. In 2e, I was used to playing PCs with 3 or 4 15+ stats. So when we started with the "standard array" (15,14,13,12,10,8 - or so) it initially seemed like we were getting shafted. But I came to realize that the game still worked, and was fun to play, and the stat bumps at every 4th level helped even out the experience. It seems that those that feel the need to have lots of 16-18 stats on the same PC may still have the 2e mindset.
In 2e, we "rolled" stats (until late in that product's cycle). I use quotes because, while every character was legitimately rolled (typically 4d6 drop lowest), each set of stats was culled from a page of reject stats -- or the player wouldn't count any rolls until he got an 18. Eventually, I got sick of seeing characters with 17's and 18's all over (18(70+) strength) with only a token 15, that I instituted an 85-point maximum total for ability scores, with each extra line of strength counting as one point. It effectively became a point-buy system.
So, yeah, ... Point Buy. I'm still amazed, by the way, at those that play with 35, 40, or even higher point buy. But I guess that's because I learned 3e the "hard way" with 25-points.
35 or 40 is crazy. You can make an acceptable character of any class at 28, but I think 25 is a little too hard on the multi-stat classes, particularly paladin and monk. If you intend for the characters to progress into epic levels, even 28 point buy can make feat prerequisites difficult to achieve. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
| 
Zenako
Commander
3472 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 9:59 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by aron1
quote:
Originally posted by Zenako
My problem with the point buy systems that have been used is that you tend to end up with very stereotypical charactitures. Strong fighters are seldom wise or smart, and vice a versa. The system strongly encourages pumping prime stats up as much as is reasonable.
Interesting. Maybe my group is farther from the average than I thought, but we tend to push most stats up to 14 (the top of the 1pt per stat range) before we boost the "main" attribute towards an 18. We end up with lots of characters with 16 14 14 14 12 9 or the like. We've found that it's much more beneficial for the fighter to pass on the extra +1 to hit and damage of an 18 STR so that he can have an extra 6 attribute points in his "lesser" attributes. An extra +3 to INT or WIS will give the fighter many more Skill points each level or a higher WILL save and a higher inate Spot and Listen check (which we use CONSTANTLY).
Maybe it's because my DM has a habit of forcing all players to use every stat fairly frequently that we've all begun to optimize to his game style rather than the standard? We've still min/maxed our characters, just not in the typical way.
Well I did say reasonable. As you indicate there are quite a few stats that make tons of sense to raise them to certain levels and not spend more points to make them better. I mean, I saw VERY few characters with odd stats, it made little sense (this was before 3.0 and the option to soon raise a stat point). Note how in your sample matrix it is all even stats except for one. It was the rare character with an exceptional stat, and it was also the rare character that had any bad stats.
I am playing a cleric now with a 6 CHA. I don't turn undead so much as draw them in...grin.
STR 13
DEX 13
CON 11
INT 14
WIS 15
CHA 6
That was the matrix I rolled and the group kinda needed a cleric for the party. I chose to be a Priest of Artemis, a loner woodsman cleric who has the tact of a boar, but is rather wise and smart.
Playing a character with a pronounced tweak from the norm is often an enjoyable exercise and that is the kind of character you often find missing in most point buy campaigns from my experience. | |
Built the addition for this addiction, now on to the "gaming table" project....
http://www.maxminis.com/hw_list.asp?user=Zenako last updated 29 May 2006
Set Status: in a nutshell = all of all
In Process trades 0), (Sig last updated 05/29/06) 300 plus Completed Trades -
If I seem scarce at times...blame DDO - Sarlona | |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 10:43 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Zenako
CHA 6
I chose to be a Priest of Artemis, a loner woodsman cleric who has the tact of a boar, but is rather wise and smart.
You might say he's a boorish boarish bore. (Now if his name was "Bors," that would be something!) | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
|
Can of the Cave Beer
Commander
2838 Posts
| | 01/03/2006 11:43 PM |
| Iron Man D&D? Wow, you guys must roll TRUCK-LOADS better than I do. Of course, I think I held the record for "most 1s in succession" in my last group. I believe it was 3 or 4 turns in a row...
Typically, I use the 4d6 and drop to determine stats and arrange how you like--sometimes I use multiple sets and pick the best set and go fromt there. Still, I almost always end up with at least one score in the single digits, and that irks me.
And I would never force a player to accept a name-the-stat-then-roll-for-it type of generation. That's just asking for problems IMO. There may not be winning or losing in this game, but everyone should still be having fun more often than not. | |
Champion of the Werewolf Lord, Knight of Anything Duergar, and Squire of Things Gnollish
List reset with the start of previews for each new set...got Chainmail®? | |
|
Wayne
Underboss
1371 Posts
| | 01/04/2006 1:47 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Vrecknidj
I thought once about requiring all my players to start with three 10s and three 11s, and then allowing them to add a point to an ability score at every level for a while.
The more I read this, the more the idea intrigues me.
I think I'm going to give a try (slightly modified) with my next campaign.
(1) Start with 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. You are a mostly average person, with tremendous potential.
(2) Add racial adjustments, if any.
(3) Add 1 point to any stat each level.
(4) No stat can go higher than an unmodified 18 if more than two stats are below 11. (E.g., a half-orc couldn't take his Strength to 21, or his Intelligence to 17.)
A human fighter could have a Strength of 18 at 6th level, or a Strength of 16, a Con of 14, and a Dex of 13. (Or any other combination that added up to, at most, a +4.)
At 20th level, that human fighter would have a +11 (not counting items or wishes), and be truly legendary).
The DM would have to balance encounters very carefully until 6th level or so ... a standard encounter at low levels will be much tougher for characters generated this way. But the interesting choices and steady development would make the trouble worthwhile, I think.
Any comments or thoughts? | |
Jeff "Wayne Laredo" Wilder | Email | Have/Want List | Trade Policies | Are You an Ethical Trader?
| |
|
Sir Bozak The Damned
Commander
2854 Posts
Québec
| | 01/04/2006 1:59 AM |
| I use 5d4's and reroll all 1's. Makes for a possibility of a starting 20 or 22 with certain
races and ends up doing a 14 average and two players rolled 4 times a 14 out of 6 rolls, so
not as overpowered as one would think. Only one of my 4 players ended up with a natural 20 and another player a 19. A few 18-15's and 12-13's, but mostly 14, which is still a +2. I still prefer the 2nd Edition stat bonuses and tables, but appreciate the flexibility of 3.5
and the even footing on character classes XP, as well as pathetic scores like 12 still giving you a bonus, although you are in the lesser class for your race. | |
Please donate BLOOD at http://www.monstersgame.co.uk/ac=vid&vid=11018554
Champion Of Kaz the Minotaur Knight of ALL Draconians. Squire Of ALL Constructs
The number ONE fanatic Of Dread Guards ! I own 66 !!! And the GMR1 !!!
119 completed trades so far...NB called shot: Medusa | |
|
Pale Rider
Underboss
1023 Posts
London, Ontario, Canada
| | 01/04/2006 9:33 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
35 or 40 is crazy. You can make an acceptable character of any class at 28, but I think 25 is a little too hard on the multi-stat classes, particularly paladin and monk. If you intend for the characters to progress into epic levels, even 28 point buy can make feat prerequisites difficult to achieve.
35 point buy is what I use in one of my games. It just barely allowed the players to have an 18 to start. I really don't like point buy and I think there is too much 'weight' given to having an 18. The typical character (and by typical I mean most of them) looked like this
18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 10 + racial adjustments.
Is that really too powerful or "crazy"? I don't think so but maybe others do... | |
Completed Trades: Crescent Hawk, Vimes, demagogue, vidman, Eric is God, Strachan Fireblade, FungiMuncher, Dudeeehm, Shasack, gausse, kyrin, nyjastul69
Champion of the Remorhaz | |
|
Sir Bozak The Damned
Commander
2854 Posts
Québec
| | 01/04/2006 12:10 PM |
| Actually, I find that weak and would probably not play a character with those stats, pending
racial bonuses. | |
Please donate BLOOD at http://www.monstersgame.co.uk/ac=vid&vid=11018554
Champion Of Kaz the Minotaur Knight of ALL Draconians. Squire Of ALL Constructs
The number ONE fanatic Of Dread Guards ! I own 66 !!! And the GMR1 !!!
119 completed trades so far...NB called shot: Medusa | |
|
Vash
Underboss
1995 Posts
| | 01/04/2006 12:24 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
quote:
Originally posted by Vrecknidj
I thought once about requiring all my players to start with three 10s and three 11s, and then allowing them to add a point to an ability score at every level for a while.
The more I read this, the more the idea intrigues me.
I think I'm going to give a try (slightly modified) with my next campaign.
(1) Start with 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. You are a mostly average person, with tremendous potential.
(2) Add racial adjustments, if any.
(3) Add 1 point to any stat each level.
(4) No stat can go higher than an unmodified 18 if more than two stats are below 11. (E.g., a half-orc couldn't take his Strength to 21, or his Intelligence to 17.)
A human fighter could have a Strength of 18 at 6th level, or a Strength of 16, a Con of 14, and a Dex of 13. (Or any other combination that added up to, at most, a +4.)
At 20th level, that human fighter would have a +11 (not counting items or wishes), and be truly legendary).
The DM would have to balance encounters very carefully until 6th level or so ... a standard encounter at low levels will be much tougher for characters generated this way. But the interesting choices and steady development would make the trouble worthwhile, I think.
Any comments or thoughts?
I really really like this honestly. It has a very similar feel to a lot of video game RPGs and MMOs with their skill tree systems. I've been toying with a way to do something similar but I couldnt figure out a balance for it. I myself may use this the next time I DM. | |
Champion of the Alhoon and my called shot for Unhallowed
Blood War Called Shot: Phoenix
Trade withe me! | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/04/2006 2:15 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Pale Rider
quote:
Originally posted by IanB
35 or 40 is crazy. You can make an acceptable character of any class at 28, but I think 25 is a little too hard on the multi-stat classes, particularly paladin and monk. If you intend for the characters to progress into epic levels, even 28 point buy can make feat prerequisites difficult to achieve.
35 point buy is what I use in one of my games. It just barely allowed the players to have an 18 to start. I really don't like point buy and I think there is too much 'weight' given to having an 18. The typical character (and by typical I mean most of them) looked like this
18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 10 + racial adjustments.
Is that really too powerful or "crazy"? I don't think so but maybe others do...
Yeah, I think it is a bit over the top. Guaranteeing an 18 to every spellcaster with no real cost?
Granted I think the matrix system we're using in one of our games can be a little nuts too. It definitely turns out supermen sometimes, they're just not necessarily the supermen people would pick if they could order the stats exactly the way they want. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
Pale Rider
Underboss
1023 Posts
London, Ontario, Canada
| | 01/04/2006 5:14 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
Yeah, I think it is a bit over the top. Guaranteeing an 18 to every spellcaster with no real cost?
Granted I think the matrix system we're using in one of our games can be a little nuts too. It definitely turns out supermen sometimes, they're just not necessarily the supermen people would pick if they could order the stats exactly the way they want.
Wow. Your definition of over the top just doesn't mesh with mine I guess. | |
Completed Trades: Crescent Hawk, Vimes, demagogue, vidman, Eric is God, Strachan Fireblade, FungiMuncher, Dudeeehm, Shasack, gausse, kyrin, nyjastul69
Champion of the Remorhaz | |
|
Aramus
Warrior
181 Posts
| | 01/04/2006 6:05 PM |
| | We use the point buy 32 i believe | |
Play and have fun, this hobby is an escape from the harsh realities of life | |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
10493 Posts
United States
| | 01/05/2006 11:21 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Wayne
quote:
Originally posted by Vrecknidj
I thought once about requiring all my players to start with three 10s and three 11s, and then allowing them to add a point to an ability score at every level for a while.
The more I read this, the more the idea intrigues me.
I think I'm going to give a try (slightly modified) with my next campaign.
(1) Start with 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. You are a mostly average person, with tremendous potential.
(2) Add racial adjustments, if any.
(3) Add 1 point to any stat each level.
(4) No stat can go higher than an unmodified 18 if more than two stats are below 11. (E.g., a half-orc couldn't take his Strength to 21, or his Intelligence to 17.)
A human fighter could have a Strength of 18 at 6th level, or a Strength of 16, a Con of 14, and a Dex of 13. (Or any other combination that added up to, at most, a +4.)
At 20th level, that human fighter would have a +11 (not counting items or wishes), and be truly legendary).
The DM would have to balance encounters very carefully until 6th level or so ... a standard encounter at low levels will be much tougher for characters generated this way. But the interesting choices and steady development would make the trouble worthwhile, I think.
Any comments or thoughts?
This is roughly what I'm after. I like the idea of incremental advancement. When 3.0 came out, I really liked the way Skills, Feats and Ability adjustments were handled. But, the more I played, the more I liked the idea of starting with lower scores and making the ability adjustments more frequent. Some of my players suggested just going with a lower point-buy and getting a stat bump every even level, but I really like the idea of starting off closer to the typical commoner, and then slowly rising to the position of town hero--and having this reflected through the stats. Some may balk at an individual's abilities becoming dramatically better over the sometimes-short period of rapid level growth. But I like it. I like the heroism that it reflects.
The idea you have of starting 8 through 13 is okay, but it's just a different picture of the three 10s and three 11s I was after. I suppose anything in between would be okay, so long as the net modifier was 0 and there were no +2 modifiers (before racial adjustments).
I strongly agree that there needs to be some kind of rule governing where the ability points can be added, so that we don't have a bunch of fighters with 25 Dex, Str and Con but only 10 Int, Wis and Cha. I like the idea of the well-rounded hero and I'd like to push for it, even if only a little. (One way is to limit the modifier range. If, for example, the difference between the highest modifier and lowest modifier has to be 4 or lower, this would force some advancement of the lower scores.)
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
|
Sir Bozak The Damned
Commander
2854 Posts
Québec
| | 01/05/2006 11:35 AM |
| Charisma, to fighters, thieves,mages,druids and barbarians has always been the "dump pile" of D&D games.Me and almost every one of my players has placed their lamest stat there. It simply is not useful to most of those players.
Just yesterday, my hopes of playing a Minotaur were dashed but with the 4d6 7 times system, I managed to get 18,18,16,16,14 and 13. As an half-orc barbarian only ( the master even refused orcs...), my stats were pretty high, much higher than my comrades who wanted me to
play their tank anyways ( Druid and Sorceror ) and once I level ( we start at level one, which I hate as well...), I will do Fighter until I can become a Bear Warrior.
So, I like the idea of having a limit on stats, but would only keep the wisdom as a necessary dumping pool for fighter types. My 13 INT and 11 CHA are more than enough and a 16
Wisdom for a Barbarian is great for Will saves :) | |
Please donate BLOOD at http://www.monstersgame.co.uk/ac=vid&vid=11018554
Champion Of Kaz the Minotaur Knight of ALL Draconians. Squire Of ALL Constructs
The number ONE fanatic Of Dread Guards ! I own 66 !!! And the GMR1 !!!
119 completed trades so far...NB called shot: Medusa | |
|
mordantos
Underboss
1210 Posts
| | 01/05/2006 2:58 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Pale Rider
Your definition of over the top just doesn't mesh with mine
I certainly think "over the top" is a subjective term. Some people want Heroes with feet of clay, some want Heroes who can leap tall building and many want something in between.
Growing up on old school 3D6 "suck it up", 18s were a holy grail. It also made the classes with high prereqs rarer. And I liked picking my class after looking at my stats- Did I want to force them into my first choice or go with what the stats lended themselves to?
Since I like playing most of the classes, I had no problem being "guided" into a particular class. By the same token, I've had a blast playing a fighter with average STR, CON & DEX but good INT and CHR (who was retired after a very long and successful career).
Now, that said, I can powergame with the best of them [}:)] | | | |
|
Monsoon28
Underboss
2313 Posts
Toronto
| | 01/12/2006 9:00 PM |
| I do have to say, point-buy does even the playing field. I've been blessed when it comes to rolling characters.
My first two character in 3.0 both had something ridiculous like 86+ points each, admittedly that made the monk definitely worth playing (I think that one had 91 points)! That was using the very simple 4d6 drop one system. Even in old school Basic D&D I've had plenty of char. with 17-18 stats on a straight 3d6 no rerolls.
So when I see others around the table sulking because the character just isn't as Ubër as mine, I totally see why point-buy might be preferrable.
Shoe makes some good points about the 2ed mind set, and I agree for the most part, but spellcasters really do 'need' those high stats for spell access and DC's and then there are the bonus spells. This is why in any point buy game I've played where I'm the wizard I'll gladly take the hit in order to start with a 17-18 Int. | |
"I was sittin' here eatin' my muffin, drinkin' my coffee, replayin' the incident in my head, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity." - Jules Winnfield
Sales/Trades Bad (1): Ironfist Boulderbender
Trades/Sales completed (8.): Danthl, Dafrca, Garyaxe, qillan_dvra, realmaster, Vandal_Savage, cavedweller, unearthed arcana.
Champion of Gem Dragons, VINDICATED Squire of Duergar Commander, Knight of the Astral Stalker.
| |
|
Sir Bozak The Damned
Commander
2854 Posts
Québec
| | 01/13/2006 11:50 AM |
| My personal opinion is that every character should have a natural 18 in his base stat. STR for warrior/barbarian, INT for mage, WIS for cleric/druid, DEX ror rogues, CHA for sorceror/paladin, etc. A character is supposed to be an above-average humanoid or monster that can aspire to becomming a legend and is, most likely already a local hero so
the high stats justify how much higher PC's are over the "normal" characteristics. One or two weak points is enough I think. ( even Mialee dumped her worst stat on CHA...) | |
Please donate BLOOD at http://www.monstersgame.co.uk/ac=vid&vid=11018554
Champion Of Kaz the Minotaur Knight of ALL Draconians. Squire Of ALL Constructs
The number ONE fanatic Of Dread Guards ! I own 66 !!! And the GMR1 !!!
119 completed trades so far...NB called shot: Medusa | |
| The Great
Choco Monster
Ghendar
Warlord
13069 Posts
Mud Lick, Kentucky
| | 01/13/2006 12:01 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Sir Bozak The Damned
My personal opinion is that every character should have a natural 18 in his base stat. STR for warrior/barbarian, INT for mage, WIS for cleric/druid, DEX ror rogues, CHA for sorceror/paladin, etc. A character is supposed to be an above-average humanoid or monster that can aspire to becomming a legend and is, most likely already a local hero so
the high stats justify how much higher PC's are over the "normal" characteristics. One or two weak points is enough I think. ( even Mialee dumped her worst stat on CHA...)
I agree that adventurers should have stats higher (much higher in some cases) than the average shlep farmer, however that every pc must have a nat 18 in their primary attribute, to borrow and old term, is something I don't agree with.
For instance, if every wizard has a nat 18 int, you don't find that to be unrealistic? Not all wizards are created equal. Fantasy literature is littered with examples of one wizard being clearly more powerful than another. All of them having 18's for Int would nullify that variety somewhat. Not completely, but somewhat.
My own philosophy on the matter. Not trying to tell you how to play the game. | |
WotC - making me wish more and more every day for a return to the TSR days. :(
I fought the snark and the snark won. I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!
Some of my favorite Maxminis quotes
I actually love to be swallowed. - Posted By gss_000 on 09/04/2007 2:32 PM
Could somebody explain Snatch to me? I understand the basics, but not how to enter/use it. - Posted by orcmonk220
G's the man. - Posted By greyhaze on 11/11/2008 8:58 AM
I dont mind butting heads every once in a while. It makes thing interesting. Thats why I'd be heartbroken if Ghendar ever left - Posted By Count Dooku on 04/03/2006 11:58 AM
| |
|
Malin Lug
Sergeant
742 Posts
| | 01/13/2006 12:34 PM |
| In our current campaign, we used 4d6 drop the lowest. I am playing a warrior that started with a 16 Str and a 12 Con. Not nescessarily ideal but I also had a 16 Int and 16 Wis. The lower HP has hurt at times but it has turned out to be a very fun character to play. I have had to focus more on not getting hit than being a tank. Point buy systems are fine, rolling is fine, it really just depends on what the group wants to do. If your group wants to have the characters running around in red capes and leaping tall buildings in a single bound... so be it. But the GM should compensate the monsters accordingly (+4 STR, +4 Con etc.)
Every time someone talks about their game where they start with two 18s, 2 16s and no stat below a 14, it makes me wince. It is just like when people talk about having a deck of many things and a young gold dragon cohort starting out. It is not the type of game I like to play in, but some people have fun with it. Each group needs to decide on the power level that they want to play in and make up the characters accoringly.
| |
"Are you not entertained?" 
Champion of the Common Bar Wench
| |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 01/13/2006 12:50 PM |
| The problem with point buy is that it favors certain classes.
Different classes favor different ability scores. Further, different classes favor a different number of ability scores. To be effective, a sorcerer only needs a high charisma (although he certainly gets use out of high constitution, dexterity and intelligence). However, a monk really needs a high wisdom, dexterity, strength and constitution to be able to handle himself on the front line.
Accordingly, when you build a character with point buy, one class is nearly reaching its full potential with 28 points (by dumping 16 into getting one stat to an 18), while another is barely scratching the surface by splitting the points over so many stats.
As a result, I'm in favor of using a modification of one of the 4d6(best 3) methods. My current favorite is:
Roll 4d6 and use the sum of the best 3 for strength. Repeat for dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, charisma and comeliness. You may switch one pair of ability scores. Figure out the point buy equivalency for the 6 primary stats (ie; an 18 is worth 16, a 17 is worth 13, a 16 is worth 10, an 8 or below is worth 0, ...)[Note: exclude comeliness]. If the total stat buy equivalency for the are below 22, or above 42, discard the rolls and roll again.
This avoids the problem of paladins that are always dumb, sorcerers that are always weak, etc ... it also keeps the PCs in the same ballpark in terms of efficiency. Players can put their best score in the best ability for their intended class. If a player rolls too well, he can often dump a great roll into comeliness to keep the character beneath 42 points ... | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the  indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
mordantos
Underboss
1210 Posts
| | 01/13/2006 2:17 PM |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Bozak The Damned
the high stats justify how much higher PC's are over the "normal"
The fact that PCs have (good) classes already puts them over the common man.
quote:
Originally posted by Ghendar
if every wizard has a nat 18 int, you don't find that to be unrealistic?
I have to agree with Ghendar on this.
Every adventurer starts out at the peak of human perfection is his forte?
The 3.5 system already allows you to perfect your characteristics as you advance, I see no reason to start PCs at the top.
| | | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/13/2006 2:20 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Sir Bozak The Damned
My personal opinion is that every character should have a natural 18 in his base stat. STR for warrior/barbarian, INT for mage, WIS for cleric/druid, DEX ror rogues, CHA for sorceror/paladin, etc. A character is supposed to be an above-average humanoid or monster that can aspire to becomming a legend and is, most likely already a local hero so
the high stats justify how much higher PC's are over the "normal" characteristics. One or two weak points is enough I think. ( even Mialee dumped her worst stat on CHA...)
I'm going to point you to this post the next time you complain that your PCs are too powerful or that the CR system doesn't work. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
| The Defenestrator
AesophDarkfable
Warlord
5628 Posts
| | 01/13/2006 3:31 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Bozak The Damned
My personal opinion is that every character should have a natural 18 in his base stat. STR for warrior/barbarian, INT for mage, WIS for cleric/druid, DEX ror rogues, CHA for sorceror/paladin, etc. A character is supposed to be an above-average humanoid or monster that can aspire to becomming a legend and is, most likely already a local hero so
the high stats justify how much higher PC's are over the "normal" characteristics. One or two weak points is enough I think. ( even Mialee dumped her worst stat on CHA...)
I'm going to point you to this post the next time you complain that your PCs are too powerful or that the CR system doesn't work.
Or point him to the above exchange.
quote:
35 point buy is what I use in one of my games. It just barely allowed the players to have an 18 to start. I really don't like point buy and I think there is too much 'weight' given to having an 18. The typical character (and by typical I mean most of them) looked like this
18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 10 + racial adjustments.
Is that really too powerful or "crazy"? I don't think so but maybe others do...
and his reply
quote:
Actually, I find that weak and would probably not play a character with those stats, pending
racial bonuses.
| |
Im out- find me on Hordelings if you want to chat. | |
|
jacksonm
Warlord
5560 Posts
River City
| | 01/13/2006 5:20 PM |
| Currently we've been using the power 5d6 drop the 2 worst dice and in order rolled method.
I was a big fan of the old 1st edition Unearther Arcana method where you could end up rolling up to 9d6 depending on what the key stats were for your selected class. :) | | | |
|
orcdoubleax
Sergeant
694 Posts
| | 01/14/2006 6:42 PM |
| I must say this tread has open my eyes to the great range of what people feel is an acceptable level for stats to be at.
I would happly play a fighter with 13,9,12,8,9,10
some would not be happy with 18,14,14,12,10,10
It seam so silly to me that people worry so much about how strong thier PC are or how much damage they can do. D&D is not a video game. It doesn't really matter how strong you are the DM will or at least should give you opp that are approprate to you.
I am always much more consired with you my character is, what is bases of his personality than his attributes. My charcter and the characters of the people I play with all have detail backgrounds and motivations long before they have character sheets.
| |
Yes I am Gelatinous.
www.gelatinousdudes.com
| |
|
taliesin
Underboss
1113 Posts
| | 01/14/2006 6:53 PM |
| | We roll 4d6, drop the lowest, then convert the stat into it's point-buy value. Then use point-buy method to fill in stats. In effect, we randomly generate our point-buys. | |
Champion of the Entire Monster Manual 1!
(Click link to see current progress!)
Uncommon Painting Competition 2 Winner | |
|
Lab Monkey
Commander
4136 Posts
| | 01/14/2006 7:48 PM |
| I literally had a player roll the following scores this afternoon using 4d6 drop the lowest:
16
17
14
18
15
10
Ugh. If we were using point buy, that would be 55 points! | |
Have: Cat; Want: Storm Giant
Champion of Anything Dragonlance
Before trading, please check the Disputed Trades Thread | |
|
Gnolaum
Sergeant
855 Posts
| | 01/17/2006 4:02 PM |
| Point buy.
36 points, each stat start @ 6. Each point will take you past 1 "," (8 = 1 pt, 14 = 7pts, 18 = 17 pts)
6,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,,15,,16,,,17,,,18,,,,19,,,,20
Don't have to worry about characters rolling uber stats when I'm not watching. | | | |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/17/2006 4:32 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Lab Monkey
I literally had a player roll the following scores this afternoon using 4d6 drop the lowest:
16
17
14
18
15
10
Ugh. If we were using point buy, that would be 55 points!
Yep, stuff like that is definitely a danger when rolling instead of using point-buy. I still prefer rolling, though, just because it tends to result in less generic characters.
Maybe my next game should be 3d6, in order, no rerolls... [}:)] | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 01/17/2006 6:09 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
...Maybe my next game should be 3d6, in order, no rerolls... [}:)]
FWIW - Although this can be fun, this is the hardest system to balance as a DM. When you have 5 characters, you're likely to end up with a few characters that are vastly more powerful than the others, and you're likely to end up with classes where none of the PCs have the ability scores to be effective in the class (ie; none of the PCs roll above a 12 for wisdom, so having a cleric is problematic.) That makes it hard to keep the PCs alive and challenged, as you have to avoid certain types of challenges, and you run the risk of offing one of the powerful PCs with a critical or spell, leaving the rest of the PCs far too overpowered.
What do people think of the following system:
The DM uses a point buy system to generate 100 different characters. Then, the DM lists those 100 sets of stats on a numbered chart. Each player rolls a % number. The percentage number indicates which set of stats the player gets to use to contruct his/her PC. Then, the PC can plug in two of the six numbers into the ability scores of his choice, while the remainder are randomly inserted. You can build the PC type of your choice, your numbers are still fairly random, and all the PCs are pretty balanced ...
| |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/17/2006 6:19 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by jgsugden
quote:
Originally posted by IanB
...Maybe my next game should be 3d6, in order, no rerolls... [}:)]
FWIW - Although this can be fun, this is the hardest system to balance as a DM. When you have 5 characters, you're likely to end up with a few characters that are vastly more powerful than the others, and you're likely to end up with classes where none of the PCs have the ability scores to be effective in the class (ie; none of the PCs roll above a 12 for wisdom, so having a cleric is problematic.) That makes it hard to keep the PCs alive and challenged, as you have to avoid certain types of challenges, and you run the risk of offing one of the powerful PCs with a critical or spell, leaving the rest of the PCs far too overpowered.
Oh, if I did this, it would be with the understanding that nobody should get attached to their character at all. Ever. | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
jgsugden
Commander
4320 Posts
Walnut Creek, CA
| | 01/18/2006 12:58 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by IanB
...Oh, if I did this, it would be with the understanding that nobody should get attached to their character at all. Ever.
Right. Not attached.
I can still name all the Midnight characters I played, in order, Ian. I don't think its possible for me to not get attached ... | |
Champion of Meepo _*_ Myztek on the Wizards Boards. _*_ (2206 DDM on 03/06/06)
Please note: The use of the indicates an attempt at humor ... often a bad attempt.
BAD EBAY SELLERS LIST (CLICK HERE): AVOID AT ALL COSTS
| |
|
IanB
Commander
3112 Posts
| | 01/18/2006 2:57 PM |
| I definitely cannot remember most of the 13 or so mostly-dead characters I played in Jim's summer game... that's the sort of thing I would be going for. (*&! brownie familiar! Tom's old 3d6 Yiddovan game was even worse as far as total party carnage goes, the only reason I remember a lot of those guys is because their deaths are all in his timeline still.
I remember a lot more about how those characters died than anything about the characters themselves... | |
Anson on WotC boards | |
|
Malin Lug
Sergeant
742 Posts
| | 01/18/2006 3:59 PM |
| Still can't compare to our old Call of Cthulhu campaign where the GM actually bought a rubber stamp that simply said DEAD. The stack of dead characters was measured in inches.
| |
"Are you not entertained?"
Champion of the Common Bar Wench
| |
|
notserious
Sneak
117 Posts
| | 01/18/2006 5:35 PM |
| hate to highjack this thread back to generation methods as opposed to who considers what overpowered (no I don't) - I haven't worked out the details yet, but I remember being very fond of the rolemaster (how many of you automatically re-spelled that roll-master) approach where you generated stats and then generated how those stats could improve as you levelled up. Thing was, the higher a stat started, the less it could improve.
Another approach to consider for those who would like to increase stats at every level, maybe as the stats get higher, you need to spend more levels to raise it (kinda like point buy) - that way, your fighter might have to choose whether to forgo a stat raise for a level or two to get STR up to 19, or raise other stats on each of those levels. | |
| |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. | |
|
|
|