Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thadius 06-22-04, 07:31 PM	What would ya recommend for a high fantasy game, in terms of a starting number for the point buy system? I've not used this system before, and I'm interested in your thoughts! My thanks! Thad
Templar_Prime 06-22-04, 08:11 PM	Originally posted by Thadius What would ya recommend for a high fantasy game, in terms of a starting number for the point buy system? I've not used this system before, and I'm interested in your thoughts! My thanks! Thad I tend to avoid the point-buy system as presented in the rules, and instead give the players 78-96 'points' to allocate to stats on a 1-for-1 basis. As it it written, the point-buy system is horrible to say the least, given the increasing cost scale.
Korhal IV 06-22-04, 08:14 PM	I like the point-buy system a great deal, in contrast with Templar_Prime. 32 is a good number for a high-powered campaign; 40 is what my group used to use. It's pretty good, as it allows for people to have at least one 18 each, and that's pretty much the definition of "high powered". ;)
Jell_Moo 06-22-04, 08:23 PM	I have to disagree with Templar_Prime. Using the traditional point buy system allows you to customize your character, but makes you think long and hard about getting an 18 in your scores. If you really want to start off with a super high Str for example, you have to suffer with lower scores elsewhere. For traditional point buy, I tend to think that 30 or 32 point buy is good. It makes for a reasonably powerful starting character, but is far from overpowering. In my experience, this is the point buy spread that generally allows for the widest variety of classes, without making characters that will blow through low level encounters. Monks and Paladins, for example, really struggle when anything under 30 point buy is used. Monks in particular are a class that really need those sweet stats. Anything over 32, however, tends to make early encounters a breeze. Characters with few stat requirements, like Fighters, Druids and Wizards, will be very hard to stop.
Templar_Prime 06-22-04, 08:29 PM	Originally posted by Jell_Moo I have to disagree with Templar_Prime. Using the traditional point buy system allows you to customize your character, but makes you think long and hard about getting an 18 in your scores. If you really want to start off with a super high Str for example, you have to suffer with lower scores elsewhere. That happens anyway using any point-based system. The only thing you do with the point-buy is penalize players using classes that require more than one 'prime' stat (which, really, is everything but the fighter, rogue, and wizard).
q'afuu 06-22-04, 08:37 PM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime The only thing you do with the point-buy is penalize players using classes that require more than one 'prime' stat (which, really, is everything but the fighter, rogue, and wizard). IMO, that's not true. Those classes are able to make better use of more rounded stats too, bringing them up to par with classes who get to focus on a single stat. The Monk class is probably the most stat intensive, but it also allows a character to get the most use out of all those stats. As to the original question: what do you mean by 'high fantasy'? Heroic, fantastic, high magic, low magic, ... ? I usually go with a value of 28-30 points.
Jell_Moo 06-22-04, 09:06 PM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime That happens anyway using any point-based system. The only thing you do with the point-buy is penalize players using classes that require more than one 'prime' stat (which, really, is everything but the fighter, rogue, and wizard). I find the big difference to be that with traditional point buy, you have to really want that 18 when it takes up more than half your available points. With traditional point buy if the fighter wants to start with an 18 Str, he pays for it. He now has less than half his points left to spend on everything else (which can be expensive if he wants things like combat reflexes and improved trip for example). With a 1 for 1 system, geting an 18 in a single score doesn't cost much more than a 16. Considering that Cha is pretty much always a dump stat, with an 80 point spread you could get an 18 in Str and Con, and then have a Dex of 14, Int of 13, Wis of 12 and Cha of 5. That would be an amazing starting Fighter. With a 1 for 1 buy, you simply don't suffer a thing for a max starting score. That is why I like traditional point buy, those top notch scores are possible, but you suffer elsewhere which allows for a less uber starting character.
Templar_Prime 06-22-04, 09:13 PM	Originally posted by Jell_Moo With a 1 for 1 system, geting an 18 in a single score doesn't cost much more than a 16. Considering that Cha is pretty much always a dump stat, with an 80 point spread you could get an 18 in Str and Con, and then have a Dex of 14, Int of 13, Wis of 12 and Cha of 5. That would be an amazing starting Fighter. With a 1 for 1 buy, you simply don't suffer a thing for a max starting score. That is why I like traditional point buy, those top notch scores are possible, but you suffer elsewhere which allows for a less uber starting character. Sure, you could do that. You would have a very poor selection of skills and the social aptitude of your average chat-room troll, but you could do that. And a smart GM would deliver a lesson about overspecilization by arranging encounters so combat is the last and worst thing that could happen. An CHA is rarely a dump stat anymore (was in ADD2nd). Sorcerers, Paladins (which I'm very fond of), and Bards gain benifits from high Charisma scores, and other classes (such as clerics) have secondary benifits to that score and skills related to it.
Geethree 06-22-04, 10:03 PM	If you want strong characters, use at least 32 point buy (which is what I use in any given game, personally). Adjust to taste if that doesn't suit you.
Karlindel 06-22-04, 10:18 PM	I personally find the point buys given in the DMG work very well. I like the fact that players need to think long and hard about whether to go for that 18 in their primary stat. I find 25 point buy leads to a limited character mix, as the more stat intensive classes(Monk and Paladin) are not even worth considering. It's not bad, but I find it a bit stifling, and I prefer more heroic games. Also, it makes an 18 almost impossible to get. I have yet to see anyone buy an 18 stat in 25 point buy. 28 point buy I think is just right. A character pays for an 18, but can survive with one if they're willing to accept the consequences. At this level, the Monk and Paladin are worth looking at, although they will still be rare(and should be, as both are meant to be secondary characters, rather than fill the role of one of the primary 4 classes). 32 point buy is good for a high-powered game. I find that it tends to lead to more similar character stats, though. People tend to buy what they would with the 25 point buy, and then shore up their weaknesses. It tends to make people's lower stats go up, rather than make their primary stat higher, although you will see a few people spend the extra points to get that 18. Those are the standard point buys. I think the 28-32 range is right for most campaigns. I personally think that 25 is too low as it tends to lead to mediocre characters, and 32 is just a bit too high. That's why I always use the 28 point buy in my campaigns.
SmallPumpkinMan 06-22-04, 10:49 PM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime Sure, you could do that. You would have a very poor selection of skills and the social aptitude of your average chat-room troll, but you could do that. And a smart GM would deliver a lesson about overspecilization by arranging encounters so combat is the last and worst thing that could happen. An CHA is rarely a dump stat anymore (was in ADD2nd). Sorcerers, Paladins (which I'm very fond of), and Bards gain benifits from high Charisma scores, and other classes (such as clerics) have secondary benifits to that score and skills related to it. umn, no :D Chr is a dump stat for fighters, full stop. If you're a fighter-type with no social skills, the difference between 10 Chr and 5 Chr is non-existant. so have a bunch of social encounters, so what? the Sorcorer with 18 chr who dumped his str gets to show off, or the Paladin who dumped his int. The fighter isn't any worse off than he would of been putting his chr at 10. secondly, if you have to do that, what you're doing is overcompensating IG for an OOG problem which you've created in the first place. 25-30 point buy, as it stands in the book, compared to one for one, promotes well rounded characters, meaning you should have less need to pettily put players in situations specifically designed to **** them off.
Jell_Moo 06-22-04, 10:56 PM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime Sure, you could do that. You would have a very poor selection of skills and the social aptitude of your average chat-room troll, but you could do that. Fighters have a garbage skill list anyway, and have no practical use for Cha at all. The stats listed in my post allow a fighter to cover all traditional fighter bases, he can tank, he can make multiple AoOs, he can trip, etc... And a smart GM would deliver a lesson about overspecilization by arranging encounters so combat is the last and worst thing that could happen. That wouldn't be a smart DM, that would be a vindictive one. Why play a fighter in a campaign where combat is a horribly bad thing? Fighting is the one thing that a fighter does well (heck, even that is debateable). Making a campaign where combat is undesirable and allowing me to play a pure melee character without a hint of warning is a sure fire way to get me to leave the game. An CHA is rarely a dump stat anymore (was in ADD2nd). Sorcerers, Paladins (which I'm very fond of), and Bards gain benifits from high Charisma scores, and other classes (such as clerics) have secondary benifits to that score and skills related to it. Of course Cha is a dump stat. It is a dump stat for Barbarians, Monks, Fighters, Rangers, and Wizards. They recieve no mechanical bonus for having a high Cha score. Druids and Rogues don't really need to have a high Cha either. Heck, even Clerics can survive with an average Cha score. It's a sad truth that every class has at least 1 stat which is a 'dump' stat. For quite a few classes, it is Cha, simply because that unless the character has a class feature dependant on Cha, it offers very little. Outside of Paladins, Bards, and Sorcerers, no class really needs a high Cha score.
Bulabase 06-22-04, 11:06 PM	I have found that characters created with a 28 point buy are balanced and fun to play. You will suffer from some low scores if you want an 18, but can easily have good scores in each stat. I have also played with 32 point buy. It is easier to get out of ability penalties with 32 point buy. Both are good, but I prefer 28 point buy. Don't use 25 unless you really want to challenge your players and yourself (through their frustration).
q'afuu 06-23-04, 07:08 AM	Originally posted by Jell_Moo They recieve no mechanical bonus for having a high Cha score. Bollocks. Most classes have clas skills that are modified by Cha. There are quite a few monster abilities against which the save is Cha based. Every character over 6th level is eligible for the Leadership feat.
Lord Psynister 06-23-04, 08:24 AM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime Sure, you could do that. You would have a very poor selection of skills and the social aptitude of your average chat-room troll, but you could do that. And a smart GM would deliver a lesson about overspecilization by arranging encounters so combat is the last and worst thing that could happen. An CHA is rarely a dump stat anymore (was in ADD2nd). Sorcerers, Paladins (which I'm very fond of), and Bards gain benifits from high Charisma scores, and other classes (such as clerics) have secondary benifits to that score and skills related to it. Well, not everybody wants to play a social character every time they play the game. And how you handle a low charisma is entirely up to you. Charisma covers a wide variety of things. It could very well be that you've got one of the most sociable characters the world has ever seen. He might also be uglier than even Blargodularager, deity of Disease and Deformity could imagine. A "smart GM"? I'm getting tired of seeing this phrase pop up. What a GM does in his own game is for him to decide. By your example there, I guess if it takes a "smart GM" to screw one of his players, then it must take a "stupid GM" to just accept the fact that one of his players is doing a bit of min/maxing and just keep the game going, making sure that it stays fun for everybody. Sound about right? I don't have any problem at all with the DM throwing the low CHA character into a social setting from time to time to give him a bit of grief over having chosen to dump his CHA, but changing your game up just to screw the guy for it? That's rediculous. A smart GM? No, a GM that likes to have his fun at his player's expense. Now, YMMV, but I've had groups full of players ranging from munchkins of the greatest extreme, to 8 year old kids, all of which could take different levels of criticism and being "picked on". If your players can handle it with ease, and many of them can, then go ahead and throw the low CHA into the middle of a social situation, you can throw the low STR character into an arm wrestling competition, and stick the low INT/WIS character into a room full of puzzles. Sometimes doing things like that add enough challenge that your characters get a kick out of it, and sometimes you only ensure that next week you'll have one less PC. From what I've seen, CHA is still the most common dump stat of them all. It's not the dump stat for every class, but neither is anything else.
Thadius 06-23-04, 10:58 AM	Wow! Thanks for the great input! I thought my choice would be easy! :behold: By high powered, giving the players the ability to get at least an 18 in a stat. Normally, I have my groups roll, but since this will be a message based game with who know how many players, I figure I can have better control with this than some idiot emailing me a character with four 18's. My other idea was to just have pre-set characters to pick, but I think that looses some of the fun. Thadius Again, my thanks!
Krelios 06-23-04, 11:04 AM	I have found that characters created with a 28 point buy are balanced and fun to play. You will suffer from some low scores if you want an 18, but can easily have good scores in each stat. I have also played with 32 point buy. It is easier to get out of ability penalties with 32 point buy. Both are good, but I prefer 28 point buy. Don't use 25 unless you really want to challenge your players and yourself (through their frustration).32 point buy is tough enough on Clerics and Paladins with MAD (multiple ability dependency). 32 point buy lets you get a 15 in your casting stat, a 13 in STR, CON, INT and CHA, and that leaves you with an 11 if you don't want negatives. The 13s are important for combat feats and turning, so you can't really afford to go lower than that--a 28 point buy makes playing a cleric or paladin unreasonably more difficult than the rolling method (which I still prefer). To be quite honest, I will be using a new system for ability score generation in all my future games. 6+2d6. It yields scores between 8 and 18, with an average score of 13.
eggplantm 06-23-04, 11:27 AM	I've never used point but per say but I have used a assignment method where PC place the following numbers: 16, 15, 14, 13, 11, 9 anywhere they want. I'm not sure what this equates to point buy wise as I've never used that system but I assume it is pretty high.
Jell_Moo 06-23-04, 12:01 PM	Originally posted by q'afuu Bollocks. Most classes have clas skills that are modified by Cha. There are quite a few monster abilities against which the save is Cha based. Every character over 6th level is eligible for the Leadership feat. Fighters have two: Handle Animal and Intimidate. That's it. Neither one is particularly effective for a fighter. If you go through the list of abilities, the one that offers the least to a fighter is easily Cha. Barbarians have the same two. Is is worth it for the more heavily stat reliant barbarian to up his Cha rather then, say, Dex? Of course not. Dex gives him a boost to AC, a boost to reflex saves, a boost to initiative, and a boost to hit with ranged weapons. Should he trade all that to be better at two skills he'll seldom use? I have never played in a game where leadership has been allowed, so it isn't fair I comment on that one. Unless a class has a specific feature tied to Cha, it offers mechanically less than any other stat. Even if a class has a lot of class skills (like a Rogue for example), he still doesn't need a great Cha. The sheer amount of skill points he has to play with pretty much assures him that he'll be fine. If anything, he's much better pumping up Int and getting more skill points then he his pumping up Cha abd getting a benefit to a few of them.
q'afuu 06-23-04, 12:36 PM	Of course Cha is the stat most characters can most easily dump (unless, like me, the DM chooses to do something about it, like using more ability checks). But this: Originally posted by Jell_Moo They recieve no mechanical bonus for having a high Cha score. still isn't true. They may be small and easily neglected or even not matter for the specific character, but Cha has a mechanical effect on every class.
Jell_Moo 06-23-04, 01:04 PM	Originally posted by q'afuu Of course Cha is the stat most characters can most easily dump (unless, like me, the DM chooses to do something about it, like using more ability checks). But this: still isn't true. They may be small and easily neglected or even not matter for the specific character, but Cha has a mechanical effect on every class. Ok, fair enough. There is always a small (in some cases incredibly small) mechanical benefit to having a nice Cha. However, when compared to each and every other score, the mechanical benefit is much lower unless that particular class has a class feature that is dependant on Cha.
q'afuu 06-23-04, 01:35 PM	Originally posted by Jell_Moo However, when compared to each and every other score, the mechanical benefit is much lower unless that particular class has a class feature that is dependant on Cha. I tend to feel the same way about Str. It's just that more classes have a feature dependent on Str (or at least need strength in general).
Sphyre 06-23-04, 03:36 PM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime I tend to avoid the point-buy system as presented in the rules, and instead give the players 78-96 'points' to allocate to stats on a 1-for-1 basis. As it it written, the point-buy system is horrible to say the least, given the increasing cost scale. 96 points? that's a 16 in every stat! I don't systems that discourage players from playing classes that are MAD (Multiple Ability Dependant) For that reason <32 Pointbuy doesn't sit well with me. 32+ pointbuy seems to allow you to well round your stats or if you're single ability dependant you can have an 18. Going with pointbuy tends to encourage spreading the points you out among multiple stats, rather than being able to put everything into 1, which is good for MAD if there's enough points to work with, at least I have spent my time with pointbuy but I have gone back to rolling with a twist. Since I run a tactically challenging campaign I do this: 4d6 drop the lowest die roll, 7 times. Your highest stat becomes an 18, whether it's a 10 or an 18. This helps even the party out on it's rolls, because those that rolled lower aren't completely less powerful than other party members because they still have that 18, and if you ROLLED an 18, you gain no additional benefit, because you're already rolling well. So far this is my favorite method so far, but it requires either trust or watching players roll stats, which depending on the group trust may ore may not be an issue. (With mine it isn't)
Haldrik 06-23-04, 05:24 PM	Sphyre: 4d6 drop the lowest die roll, 7 times. Your highest stat becomes an 18. Sounds good. I'll experiment with this one.
BlaineTog 06-23-04, 05:33 PM	Originally posted by q'afuu I tend to feel the same way about Str. It's just that more classes have a feature dependent on Str (or at least need strength in general). But a low Strength is always a major pain. If the DM enforces uncumberance, its a serious issue for Bards, Rogues, and Sorcerers. Whereas Charisma probably won't be all that important to anyone but the classes that have spellcasting or something thats dependent on it.
q'afuu 06-23-04, 05:40 PM	Encumbrance? Please. That's why there are pack animals, other party members, Bags of Holding and whatnot. That's hardly a problem that has to matter.
Bulabase 06-23-04, 06:58 PM	Why do so many players have their hearts set on having at least one stat at 18? Just what is so bad about a 16, or even a 15?
BlaineTog 06-23-04, 07:16 PM	Originally posted by q'afuu Encumbrance? Please. That's why there are pack animals, other party members, Bags of Holding and whatnot. That's hardly a problem that has to matter. IMX it really does. Bags of Holding are, themselves, quite heavy. Pack animals can't be lead everywhere and while other party members might work, there is just some stuff that you need to carry (bards and rogues, for example, have trouble with weapon and armor weight). Its also a bit of a hassle having other people carry your stuff. And after a dungeon crawl, pretty much everyone needs to be at full encumbrace to carry everything. Its not a huge problem, but its definatelly there. You have to at least invest in the animal (and ranks in Handle Animal) or the Bag of Holding. With Charisma, what problem do you have, exactly, that needs to be overcome?
q'afuu 06-23-04, 07:20 PM	Originally posted by Bulabase Why do so many players have their hearts set on having at least one stat at 18? Same reason so may players don't value skills unless they can keep them maxxed out, I guess - because it's the maximum, and that means no-one of comparable level and with comparable options (anything else would be considered cheating, I guess) can do better. People want to feel they're the best. Big whup. Being the best doesn't mean you can't loose. It just means you can't really win.
q'afuu 06-23-04, 07:33 PM	Originally posted by BlaineTog With Charisma, what problem do you have, exactly, that needs to be overcome? An Allip's Babble attack, a Hag's Weakness attack, a Basilisk's Petrifying Gaze, a Gauth's or Beholder's eye rays, a Lillend's spell-like abilities, ... I could name dozens more with a simple look through the MM. Oh, and during dungeon crawls my players never bother dragging anything along that'll only slow them down, unless I force them too. If in any way possible, they leave the loot where it is (or hide it themselves) and come back for it when they cleared out the dungeon.
BlaineTog 06-23-04, 07:40 PM	Originally posted by q'afuu An Allip's Babble attack, a Hag's Weakness attack, a Basilisk's Petrifying Gaze, a Gauth's or Beholder's eye rays, a Lillend's spell-like abilities, ... I could name dozens more with a simple look through the MM.Now I neither have a MM nor have I looked through one, but if I've got this right, you are saying that Charisma is a stat equal to the others because its used as the "casting" stat for most moneters' spell-=like and supernatural abilities? What does that have to do with the players? Oh, and during dungeon crawls my players never bother dragging anything along that'll only slow them down, unless I force them too. If in any way possible, they leave the loot where it is (or hide it themselves) and come back for it when they cleared out the dungeon.I like to carry it, just to make sure it doesn't get stolen or something. THe rogue/familiar/animal companion is usually scouting some ways ahead anyway, so we often have time to drop the stuff (quietly). To each his own, I suppose. The Bard and Rogue still have to deal with their armor/weapons, however. And while therer are certainly ways of getting over the problem of wieght (Mithral, for instance), it requires the players to put some effort into fixing it. Low Charisma is a problem that doesn't need fixing.
q'afuu 06-23-04, 08:10 PM	Originally posted by BlaineTog Now I neither have a MM nor have I looked through one, but if I've got this right, you are saying that Charisma is a stat equal to the others because its used as the "casting" stat for most moneters' spell-=like and supernatural abilities? What does that have to do with the players? Cha is the stat the save against those attacks/abilities is based on, actually. That's the case with most special monster attacks that allow a save: they're exactly like a normal Fort/Ref/Will save, only they use Cha instead of Con/Dex/Wis. It has everything to do with the players.
Jell_Moo 06-23-04, 08:19 PM	Originally posted by q'affu Cha is the stat the save against those attacks/abilities is based on, actually. That's the case with most special monster attacks that allow a save: they're exactly like a normal Fort/Ref/Will save, only they use Cha instead of Con/Dex/Wis. It has everything to do with the players. Maybe I'm completely misunderstanding what you're saying but... Those monsters use Cha as the stat which decides the effectiveness of the power. The players use their traditional stat (Dex, Con, Wis) when saving against that power. They do not use Cha. If I misunderstood you I'm sorry, but that seemed to be what you were saying.
q'afuu 06-23-04, 08:36 PM	Originally posted by Jell_Moo The players use their traditional stat (Dex, Con, Wis) when saving against that power. They do not use Cha. Quite right. Where did I get that then? D20 Modern?
Geethree 06-23-04, 10:09 PM	Now I neither have a MM nor have I looked through oneAre you serious?
Sphyre 06-23-04, 11:15 PM	Originally posted by Bulabase Why do so many players have their hearts set on having at least one stat at 18? Just what is so bad about a 16, or even a 15? Well at least for my campaign, I'd ideally like the challenge my players and by giving them one 18, it allows me to set up the strong encounters I so enjoy doing.
Haldrik 06-24-04, 01:23 AM	qafuu: An Allip's Babble attack, a Hag's Weakness attack, a Basilisk's Petrifying Gaze, a Gauth's or Beholder's eye rays, a Lillend's spell-like abilities, ... I could name dozens more with a simple look through the MM. And you would build your character around this?
BlaineTog 06-24-04, 02:01 AM	Originally posted by Geethree Are you serious? Dead serious. My previous DMs put them on the list of books the player's wern't allowed to touch. When I DMed, I generally just used NPCs (which I like more). EDIT: Plus I'm too cheap to buy one. I have looked through the SRD though. just not in great detail.
Templar_Prime 06-25-04, 01:39 AM	Originally posted by Bulabase Why do so many players have their hearts set on having at least one stat at 18? Just what is so bad about a 16, or even a 15? Survivability. Or, put another way, 'average' characters and people don't survive long. It's been my experience that if you don't have an 18 in your class's main stat (or at least 16 in each if there are multiple), and an 18 in Dex, you die. Quickly.
Ertai Planeswalker 06-25-04, 01:47 AM	You know, there's actually some logic in using your intelligence modifier instead of your wisdom modifier for saving vs illusion, and you charisma instead of wisdom for saves vs charm and compulsion effects...
yebvas 06-25-04, 03:37 AM	This is really a moot topic. Whatever the DM feels is right, is, well, right. In my current campain the DM allowed us 35 character atribute points, and we started our level 3. Something to note, however, the encounters have never been easy, and they never will be. The point of the game is to be a challenge, if it's not a challenge (I.E. You roll over everything) what fun is it? What sense of accomplishment do you get? I take great pride we have all made it to level 5, when no one in this DMs games has ever made it to that level. Not because he makes it impossible, but he forces you to use tactics to the extreme, and we barely survive some encounters.
Bulabase 06-25-04, 02:44 PM	Originally posted by Templar_Prime Survivability. Or, put another way, 'average' characters and people don't survive long. It's been my experience that if you don't have an 18 in your class's main stat (or at least 16 in each if there are multiple), and an 18 in Dex, you die. Quickly. I am not sure I agree with that statement. Since the advent of 3.0, I have not created a character with a natural 18 (before racial adjustments). I have not found this to be a significant impediment to the survivability of my characters. If you need an 18 in the primary stat, 16's in multiple stats and an 18 in Dex, I think the DM is overpowering the encounters. If that's the style you prefer, though, more power to you.
lom-lannos 06-26-04, 01:44 AM	As far as the entire conversation goes, 32 is ideal for a stronger campaign but we have discovered that at 1st level a 15 point system really makes it interesting. Yet on the other hand we are playing 3 classes that are easy to fill requirements (dwarven fighter, halfling rogue, and gnome wizard). Which reminds me do you all add the racial adjustments after assigning your ability points on the point system.
lom-lannos 06-26-04, 01:55 AM	Additionally, I know I just posted but I have the habbit of never maxxing out my characters with the 32 system I will never have an ability below 10 unless it helps character play such as a halfling rogue with an 8 wis. Either way if you measure characters by the way they duel (outside individual battles between PCs, not surew what other groups do this), I have dueled a cleric and a druid from1 - 10 level as a ranger same level and they consistantly win, but they play the max scores when I am more rounded.