I'm going to be putting up a Looking For Group advert in the next week or two, and as I'm currently working out what to include within that, I keep coming back to some of the basics of character creation, which quickly touches on how the players will generate their ability scores. Now, I'm preferential to point buy for a lot of the same reasons I'm partial to static Hit Points on level up: I hate rolling 1's and getting all 18's or always maxing my hit die feels like a cheat. But simultaneously, I'm not too happy with the 25 point buy as it feels to me like it provides an array of choices that make the Player Character Joe Average. And Player Character's IMO should be the exceptional sort. While they may not be Batman, they should feel like they have a raw potential that would make even the mighty think twice before dismissing them. I also prefer a higher spread of ability scores because it provides a greater allowance and encouragement to pick up Feats. I'm actually fine with (even a fan of) the idea of character's occasionally getting Downtime Training where they can get Tool Training, Skill Training, or Feats that are not part of the regular level up process, but I don't feel like that's a good enough solution and also that it's not something that should even be done as often as 4 or 5 times per level.
Either way, the point is that I'm very strongly for a point buy, but not the standard. So here's what I have and I'm curious about what experienced DM's and Player's think and feel about it, imagining if they were to see the option suggested by their own current DM or group. Thanks to everyone in advance.
Starting Attributes: 8 in everything. Points Available to Spend: 37. Point buy cost (see below)
8 cost of 0
9 cost of 1
10 cost of 2
11 cost of 3
12 cost of 4
13 cost of 5
14 cost of 7
15 cost of 9
16 cost of 11
17 cost of 14
18 cost of 18
I'm considering an arbitrary cap of buying 17 prior to Racial or Feat bonuses (etc.) but pretend that's not the case currently. With this you can get a few of the example arrays presented, before Racial or Feat bonuses.
I'd be careful with allowing someone to buy an 18. 17 is generally the limit for at-generation scores in any game I've seen that didn't allow for totally random rolls and which was also stable and playable. Like you said, starting at level 1 with a 20 is honestly almost as bad a feeling as having to burn every single ASI you ever get on stat points just to keep up.
More and more these days, I'm a fan of simply assigning scores. **** point buy, **** standard array, **** rolling. Give players the overall point level you want the game to run on. Say "72-point array" or "75-point array" or even "77-point array", and say "any combination of stats which adds up to the target number is valid". Put upper limits on it, such as "no starting raw score higher than 16/17 and/or no ability score at 20 from level 1". And I honestly encourage a DM who's using such a system to put in a caveat stating "at least one score must be below 10 at level 1, after assigning species bonuses or bonuses from level 1 feats". Force players to pick a weakness - it's been awesome in our games watching everybody trying to game around their weak stat, or in a couple of notable cases wallow in that weak stat.
Get the randomness and the weirdness of point buy, where you're penalized for wanting stats above "Village Derpyboi", and just use a fixed target value. 72 for games you want to be roughly in line with the in-the-book math, 75 for games where characters have an edge on the in-the-book math, 77 or 78 for characters who feel heroic against the in-the-book math. Heh, or 70, 68, or the like if you want your characters to feel weakened and be forced to struggle with a cruel and dangerous world for a campaign on the other end of the balance spectrum.
Really. Once you try skipping the middleman and just say "Give me an array that meets these criteria and you can play it", you'll never want to go back to all these other wonk-ass systems again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm going to be putting up a Looking For Group advert in the next week or two, and as I'm currently working out what to include within that, I keep coming back to some of the basics of character creation, which quickly touches on how the players will generate their ability scores. Now, I'm preferential to point buy for a lot of the same reasons I'm partial to static Hit Points on level up: I hate rolling 1's and getting all 18's or always maxing my hit die feels like a cheat. But simultaneously, I'm not too happy with the 25 point buy as it feels to me like it provides an array of choices that make the Player Character Joe Average. And Player Character's IMO should be the exceptional sort. While they may not be Batman, they should feel like they have a raw potential that would make even the mighty think twice before dismissing them. I also prefer a higher spread of ability scores because it provides a greater allowance and encouragement to pick up Feats. I'm actually fine with (even a fan of) the idea of character's occasionally getting Downtime Training where they can get Tool Training, Skill Training, or Feats that are not part of the regular level up process, but I don't feel like that's a good enough solution and also that it's not something that should even be done as often as 4 or 5 times per level.
Either way, the point is that I'm very strongly for a point buy, but not the standard. So here's what I have and I'm curious about what experienced DM's and Player's think and feel about it, imagining if they were to see the option suggested by their own current DM or group. Thanks to everyone in advance.
Starting Attributes: 8 in everything. Points Available to Spend: 37. Point buy cost (see below)
I'm considering an arbitrary cap of buying 17 prior to Racial or Feat bonuses (etc.) but pretend that's not the case currently. With this you can get a few of the example arrays presented, before Racial or Feat bonuses.
I'd be careful with allowing someone to buy an 18. 17 is generally the limit for at-generation scores in any game I've seen that didn't allow for totally random rolls and which was also stable and playable. Like you said, starting at level 1 with a 20 is honestly almost as bad a feeling as having to burn every single ASI you ever get on stat points just to keep up.
More and more these days, I'm a fan of simply assigning scores. **** point buy, **** standard array, **** rolling. Give players the overall point level you want the game to run on. Say "72-point array" or "75-point array" or even "77-point array", and say "any combination of stats which adds up to the target number is valid". Put upper limits on it, such as "no starting raw score higher than 16/17 and/or no ability score at 20 from level 1". And I honestly encourage a DM who's using such a system to put in a caveat stating "at least one score must be below 10 at level 1, after assigning species bonuses or bonuses from level 1 feats". Force players to pick a weakness - it's been awesome in our games watching everybody trying to game around their weak stat, or in a couple of notable cases wallow in that weak stat.
Get the randomness and the weirdness of point buy, where you're penalized for wanting stats above "Village Derpyboi", and just use a fixed target value. 72 for games you want to be roughly in line with the in-the-book math, 75 for games where characters have an edge on the in-the-book math, 77 or 78 for characters who feel heroic against the in-the-book math. Heh, or 70, 68, or the like if you want your characters to feel weakened and be forced to struggle with a cruel and dangerous world for a campaign on the other end of the balance spectrum.
Really. Once you try skipping the middleman and just say "Give me an array that meets these criteria and you can play it", you'll never want to go back to all these other wonk-ass systems again.
Please do not contact or message me.