Abillity points [Archive] - Wizards Community

Abillity points [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Axehammer
03-13-06, 10:06 AM I was working with a player (not in my campain) freind of mine on a short adverture and he came up with the idea of alowing characters to use the folowing scores (13-18) in any order they might wish to simplify character creation.

18=4
17=3
16=3
15=2
14=2
13=1

his reasoning for this being you have high points that all players want and low that balance. other then being a bit over powering i have a gut feeling that this is a bad idea for some other reason but cant seem to figure out what. his resoning is good as far as simplifying but there is just something wrong i just cant put my finger on what do you guys think?

if you dont like my spelling i hope you get over it. but if not tough orc skulls.
Athos
03-13-06, 10:13 AM Theres lots wrong with that, lot's, first off is too powerful, in lots of way. one 18, 17 , 16 are all great scores, charichter don't need 3 great scores, at all, especially since they won't have any bad scores, the wors is a +1 followed my a +2. that means everything is stong, all there saves, AC, skills, I'd have such a group face a CR 2 higher than there group just to show them a challenge. and like I said it's not even the strong scroes, its the lack of weak scores, no weaknesses to expoit, especiallt if the players know what there doing.

just a staight bad Idea
Board_Rider
03-13-06, 10:45 AM I would allow this and tell them that their effective ECL is now +2.

But honestly, stick with a 32 PB method and run with that.
Seeker95
03-13-06, 11:28 AM his reasoning for this being you have high points that all players want and low that balance.And exactly where is the "low" that you say provides balance?
Gort32
03-13-06, 11:49 AM FIgure, an Elite Array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 and corrosponds to a balanced 25 point buy which everything in the rest of the game is based on. Going any higher than 25 points changes nearly every die roll and encounter in a very subtle way. Going quite a bit higher than 25 points should incurr a level adjustment, although 28 points seems to be a popular choice - a tiny bit higher than most NPCs while still not affecting too many rolls too much.
The Grig Fiddler
03-13-06, 12:32 PM I have a question for those who see this as way overpowered.
If a player rolled stats like these or even better ones, would you give him/her lvl adjustment.

The character Im currently playing with has two 18s, a 20, two16s,and a 14.

That is with 3 points added on to some of them like the 20, but even without those points its still pretty high.

BTW I didnt cheat my DM watched me roll them all.
Thelandrach
03-13-06, 01:25 PM Players who have rolled that well is one of the reasons why I'm using a point buy in my next campaign. Players who rolled that well on three stats, and 7 or less on the other three, and still insisted on playing grotesque yet oddly lame characters are the other reason.
TheChilliGod
03-13-06, 01:45 PM So... That array the OP mentioned... It's equivalent to a 58 point buy. That is over twice the normal allowed for standard point buys, even tougher point buys.

I would allow this and tell them that their effective ECL is now +2.

But honestly, stick with a 32 PB method and run with that. Since my campaign's PC's have stats roughly equivalent, if not slightly less, to the OP's, (which were obtained by abuse of a poor DM's misunderstanding of the 4d6 system [Thought you get 3 sets of 6 and pick the best; bad mistake]), what sort of 'point buy' amount would be the threshold for an ECL of +1 and +2?
Alan Smithee
03-13-06, 01:47 PM We use the default array (aka elite array) in our campaign and it works great!

I see that more and more gaming groups have completely abandoned rolling ability scores for characters. Good. The game is meant to be more than a character design contest. If you find that your PC needs more than the default array or a 25 pt buy then you are probably doing something wrong.
Sir Knight
03-13-06, 02:28 PM Wow, and I thought going from 32 to 36 was a HUGE leap! Dang, 58 points?!

Even rolling 4d6 (ditch lowest) we usually end up with 40 pt characters. That is just insanely high.

I run a tougher campaign so I use the Iron Heroes 36 point buy method (basically it is what they use). Normally I use 28 or 32 depending on the campaign. But wow, that is insane!

Remember, commoners have 10s in everything. I have a Paladin with 14s and to the common folk he looks like a God.
Alan Smithee
03-13-06, 02:52 PM Stop the ability score inflation now!

I urge everyone to use the default array: 15,14,13,12,10,8.

Just try it.

Try it with published adventures - you'll find the encounters more challenging and enjoyable. You will also find that there is not such a huge gulf between PC's and NPC's. I think that this helps add to the "believability" (whatever that could mean in a fantasy game).

It helps the suspension of disbelief if the NPC's in the book are on the same level as the PC's and encourages better role-playing.
Board_Rider
03-13-06, 03:43 PM If a player rolled stats like these or even better ones, would you give him/her lvl adjustment.

Yes I would.
Since my campaign's PC's have stats roughly equivalent, if not slightly less, to the OP's, (which were obtained by abuse of a poor DM's misunderstanding of the 4d6 system [Thought you get 3 sets of 6 and pick the best; bad mistake]), what sort of 'point buy' amount would be the threshold for an ECL of +1 and +2?
Basically what I do is offer up a 32PB method to my players. If this method is used I will inform then that I will treat the party as anc ECL+1 and each PC with an LA of +1 with regards to encounters only.

If the Players roll and they go above a 34PB equivalent (33 is negligable) then I tap the ECL/LA to +2. That is my cap. I let them know this and I also let them know that I think that the "CR System" is whacked. I go with what I know and I go with experience. Sometimes the party will encounter insanly easy things, sometimes they had better run.

In using this method the ol' BR has found that the players are less apt to cheating when rolling the dice and creating their characters at home. I tell them that I HOPE someone shows up with 6 18's (never has happened yet) because then that player has no excuse for not being able to play a class or take a feat; and I allow everything. I also look foward to challenging that uberness.

Players show up at my table with really balanced PCs after a few times of playing in my games. They enjoy themselves. They find out that being a munchkin usually is not all that rewarding. Everybody wins.
Sir Knight
03-14-06, 07:59 AM I urge everyone to use the default array: 15,14,13,12,10,8.
Just try it.

Been there, done that. I dislike it. I'm not a fan of all 18s either. I like them mid-range. We found that using the DEFAULT/STANDARD method of creating characters (rolling 4d6, drop lowest) you end up with 45 pt characters on average. The only reason that we don't roll for stats is because I prefer all PCs to start off on the same foot. So I use 32 point buy and for notable NPCs, I build them with the same 32 points. We find that monsters are still challenging and I usually add in a couple more or max monster HP or something if needed for additional challenge.

Our newest campaign will be lower magic and higher challenge (Iron Heroes style but using core rules) so I bumped them to a 36 point buy method. 32-36 is what we prefer and I don't think it is out of balance as my games are very challenging when they need to be.
AkaKageWarrior
03-14-06, 12:12 PM role-playing is about fun.
role-playing is about escaping real life. and your real stats.

ubt it's also about rolling dice.

the campaigns we're playing for some years now always started
with:
- roll 6 times 4 d6
- reroll 1s
- discard the lowest
- compare to the other players' results and adjust a little
so noone has much worse stats than someone else.

that way we're usually getting better results than the standard
15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
we like it that way, and we wanna play heroes*, so what?! ;)

but just saying I got 13 .. 18 is BORING!

AKW

* okay, you're not becoming a hero just because of good stats,
but it helps on the way... :D
Rocketboy13
03-14-06, 02:24 PM I have a question for those who see this as way overpowered.
If a player rolled stats like these or even better ones, would you give him/her lvl adjustment.

The character Im currently playing with has two 18s, a 20, two16s,and a 14.

That is with 3 points added on to some of them like the 20, but even without those points its still pretty high.

BTW I didnt cheat my DM watched me roll them all.
When you use prearranged stats it is specificly to avoid ridiculous stats from coming up to frequently, or conversely, to gear up players for a more high impact game by giving them a leg up.
If you are going to role the states than you don't really care to begin with.
I personally find the idea of having a character like your's that are on a team that does not reflect those high stats is not good. It is not fun when one player outshines the other players in terms of raw power. And that is why I, like many others, use point-buy or arranged stats. :)
OravennasBrother
03-14-06, 02:33 PM What constitutes "Good" attributes is very dependant on the campaign. Some Players (and DM's) believe that 14 is just a tiny bit above average. Those individuals see any attribute under 16 as "Weak." At the other extreme are those who believe that 90% of the entire adult population has 10 or 11 (before aging modifiers) in every single atribute. They see any attribute above 12 as highly gifted. A character with a 32 point buil of 14, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12, could seem ludicrously underpowered in the first campaign, while being almost a child of the gods in the second. IRL there are extremes - I know plenty of people who seem to have been given the short end of the stick, their physical attributes are uninspiring and their mental abilities are definitely sub-par, yet one of the smartest people I ever met was also a superb athlete who might have gone to the Olympics save for their concentration on academic endeavor.
D&D is a game for enjoyment, and if hte entire group enjoys playing characters far more capable than they could ever hope to be, then they should play those characters. If others want "average Joes" in exceptional situations then that is what they should play. I won't presume to say one style is better than the other.
I will however take exception with the idea that only gifted individuals are heroic. Many RL heroes fall in the ordinary Joe category, they simply chose actions which others admire.
Capt. Pixel
03-14-06, 07:42 PM :teach: What he said (and well, I might add)

We do the 4d6 rolls and have for years. Admittedly, we generate abilities higher than the Elite array but that doesn't present much of a problem.

The players get to play truly 'Heroic' PCs and game balance is just a matter of giving the monsters the occasional 'edge' in extra HD or some prep spells.
:cool:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Axehammer 03-13-06, 10:06 AM	I was working with a player (not in my campain) freind of mine on a short adverture and he came up with the idea of alowing characters to use the folowing scores (13-18) in any order they might wish to simplify character creation. 18=4 17=3 16=3 15=2 14=2 13=1 his reasoning for this being you have high points that all players want and low that balance. other then being a bit over powering i have a gut feeling that this is a bad idea for some other reason but cant seem to figure out what. his resoning is good as far as simplifying but there is just something wrong i just cant put my finger on what do you guys think? if you dont like my spelling i hope you get over it. but if not tough orc skulls.
Athos 03-13-06, 10:13 AM	Theres lots wrong with that, lot's, first off is too powerful, in lots of way. one 18, 17 , 16 are all great scores, charichter don't need 3 great scores, at all, especially since they won't have any bad scores, the wors is a +1 followed my a +2. that means everything is stong, all there saves, AC, skills, I'd have such a group face a CR 2 higher than there group just to show them a challenge. and like I said it's not even the strong scroes, its the lack of weak scores, no weaknesses to expoit, especiallt if the players know what there doing. just a staight bad Idea
Board_Rider 03-13-06, 10:45 AM	I would allow this and tell them that their effective ECL is now +2. But honestly, stick with a 32 PB method and run with that.
Seeker95 03-13-06, 11:28 AM	his reasoning for this being you have high points that all players want and low that balance.And exactly where is the "low" that you say provides balance?
Gort32 03-13-06, 11:49 AM	FIgure, an Elite Array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 and corrosponds to a balanced 25 point buy which everything in the rest of the game is based on. Going any higher than 25 points changes nearly every die roll and encounter in a very subtle way. Going quite a bit higher than 25 points should incurr a level adjustment, although 28 points seems to be a popular choice - a tiny bit higher than most NPCs while still not affecting too many rolls too much.
The Grig Fiddler 03-13-06, 12:32 PM	I have a question for those who see this as way overpowered. If a player rolled stats like these or even better ones, would you give him/her lvl adjustment. The character Im currently playing with has two 18s, a 20, two16s,and a 14. That is with 3 points added on to some of them like the 20, but even without those points its still pretty high. BTW I didnt cheat my DM watched me roll them all.
Thelandrach 03-13-06, 01:25 PM	Players who have rolled that well is one of the reasons why I'm using a point buy in my next campaign. Players who rolled that well on three stats, and 7 or less on the other three, and still insisted on playing grotesque yet oddly lame characters are the other reason.
TheChilliGod 03-13-06, 01:45 PM	So... That array the OP mentioned... It's equivalent to a 58 point buy. That is over twice the normal allowed for standard point buys, even tougher point buys. I would allow this and tell them that their effective ECL is now +2. But honestly, stick with a 32 PB method and run with that. Since my campaign's PC's have stats roughly equivalent, if not slightly less, to the OP's, (which were obtained by abuse of a poor DM's misunderstanding of the 4d6 system [Thought you get 3 sets of 6 and pick the best; bad mistake]), what sort of 'point buy' amount would be the threshold for an ECL of +1 and +2?
Alan Smithee 03-13-06, 01:47 PM	We use the default array (aka elite array) in our campaign and it works great! I see that more and more gaming groups have completely abandoned rolling ability scores for characters. Good. The game is meant to be more than a character design contest. If you find that your PC needs more than the default array or a 25 pt buy then you are probably doing something wrong.
Sir Knight 03-13-06, 02:28 PM	Wow, and I thought going from 32 to 36 was a HUGE leap! Dang, 58 points?! Even rolling 4d6 (ditch lowest) we usually end up with 40 pt characters. That is just insanely high. I run a tougher campaign so I use the Iron Heroes 36 point buy method (basically it is what they use). Normally I use 28 or 32 depending on the campaign. But wow, that is insane! Remember, commoners have 10s in everything. I have a Paladin with 14s and to the common folk he looks like a God.
Alan Smithee 03-13-06, 02:52 PM	Stop the ability score inflation now! I urge everyone to use the default array: 15,14,13,12,10,8. Just try it. Try it with published adventures - you'll find the encounters more challenging and enjoyable. You will also find that there is not such a huge gulf between PC's and NPC's. I think that this helps add to the "believability" (whatever that could mean in a fantasy game). It helps the suspension of disbelief if the NPC's in the book are on the same level as the PC's and encourages better role-playing.
Board_Rider 03-13-06, 03:43 PM	If a player rolled stats like these or even better ones, would you give him/her lvl adjustment. Yes I would. Since my campaign's PC's have stats roughly equivalent, if not slightly less, to the OP's, (which were obtained by abuse of a poor DM's misunderstanding of the 4d6 system [Thought you get 3 sets of 6 and pick the best; bad mistake]), what sort of 'point buy' amount would be the threshold for an ECL of +1 and +2? Basically what I do is offer up a 32PB method to my players. If this method is used I will inform then that I will treat the party as anc ECL+1 and each PC with an LA of +1 with regards to encounters only. If the Players roll and they go above a 34PB equivalent (33 is negligable) then I tap the ECL/LA to +2. That is my cap. I let them know this and I also let them know that I think that the "CR System" is whacked. I go with what I know and I go with experience. Sometimes the party will encounter insanly easy things, sometimes they had better run. In using this method the ol' BR has found that the players are less apt to cheating when rolling the dice and creating their characters at home. I tell them that I HOPE someone shows up with 6 18's (never has happened yet) because then that player has no excuse for not being able to play a class or take a feat; and I allow everything. I also look foward to challenging that uberness. Players show up at my table with really balanced PCs after a few times of playing in my games. They enjoy themselves. They find out that being a munchkin usually is not all that rewarding. Everybody wins.
Sir Knight 03-14-06, 07:59 AM	I urge everyone to use the default array: 15,14,13,12,10,8. Just try it. Been there, done that. I dislike it. I'm not a fan of all 18s either. I like them mid-range. We found that using the DEFAULT/STANDARD method of creating characters (rolling 4d6, drop lowest) you end up with 45 pt characters on average. The only reason that we don't roll for stats is because I prefer all PCs to start off on the same foot. So I use 32 point buy and for notable NPCs, I build them with the same 32 points. We find that monsters are still challenging and I usually add in a couple more or max monster HP or something if needed for additional challenge. Our newest campaign will be lower magic and higher challenge (Iron Heroes style but using core rules) so I bumped them to a 36 point buy method. 32-36 is what we prefer and I don't think it is out of balance as my games are very challenging when they need to be.
AkaKageWarrior 03-14-06, 12:12 PM	role-playing is about fun. role-playing is about escaping real life. and your real stats. ubt it's also about rolling dice. the campaigns we're playing for some years now always started with: - roll 6 times 4 d6 - reroll 1s - discard the lowest - compare to the other players' results and adjust a little so noone has much worse stats than someone else. that way we're usually getting better results than the standard 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. we like it that way, and we wanna play heroes, so what?! ;) but just saying I got 13 .. 18 is BORING! AKW okay, you're not becoming a hero just because of good stats, but it helps on the way... :D
Rocketboy13 03-14-06, 02:24 PM	I have a question for those who see this as way overpowered. If a player rolled stats like these or even better ones, would you give him/her lvl adjustment. The character Im currently playing with has two 18s, a 20, two16s,and a 14. That is with 3 points added on to some of them like the 20, but even without those points its still pretty high. BTW I didnt cheat my DM watched me roll them all. When you use prearranged stats it is specificly to avoid ridiculous stats from coming up to frequently, or conversely, to gear up players for a more high impact game by giving them a leg up. If you are going to role the states than you don't really care to begin with. I personally find the idea of having a character like your's that are on a team that does not reflect those high stats is not good. It is not fun when one player outshines the other players in terms of raw power. And that is why I, like many others, use point-buy or arranged stats. :)
OravennasBrother 03-14-06, 02:33 PM	What constitutes "Good" attributes is very dependant on the campaign. Some Players (and DM's) believe that 14 is just a tiny bit above average. Those individuals see any attribute under 16 as "Weak." At the other extreme are those who believe that 90% of the entire adult population has 10 or 11 (before aging modifiers) in every single atribute. They see any attribute above 12 as highly gifted. A character with a 32 point buil of 14, 14, 14, 14, 12, 12, could seem ludicrously underpowered in the first campaign, while being almost a child of the gods in the second. IRL there are extremes - I know plenty of people who seem to have been given the short end of the stick, their physical attributes are uninspiring and their mental abilities are definitely sub-par, yet one of the smartest people I ever met was also a superb athlete who might have gone to the Olympics save for their concentration on academic endeavor. D&D is a game for enjoyment, and if hte entire group enjoys playing characters far more capable than they could ever hope to be, then they should play those characters. If others want "average Joes" in exceptional situations then that is what they should play. I won't presume to say one style is better than the other. I will however take exception with the idea that only gifted individuals are heroic. Many RL heroes fall in the ordinary Joe category, they simply chose actions which others admire.
Capt. Pixel 03-14-06, 07:42 PM	:teach: What he said (and well, I might add) We do the 4d6 rolls and have for years. Admittedly, we generate abilities higher than the Elite array but that doesn't present much of a problem. The players get to play truly 'Heroic' PCs and game balance is just a matter of giving the monsters the occasional 'edge' in extra HD or some prep spells. :cool: