Animal Companions, Special Mounts, Summoned Creatures, Familiars, Cohorts... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Animal Companions, Special Mounts, Summoned Creatures, Familiars, Cohorts... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Crimson_Concerto
02-27-06, 07:26 PM One of my players in an upcoming campaign raised an interesting question. He plans on being a Druid and wonders if the point buy we are using (32) should also be applied to his Animal Companions as well. Upon hearing this, the Paladin player asked the same about his special mount, and the player who was thinking of playing a summoner asked whether this should also apply to his familiar and summoned creatures as well.

Now, I wanted to say yes, with limitations of course (such as the INT of animal campanions, familiars, and special mounts, or no-CON summoned creatures, for instance). These limitations would result in a lower point buy for them, of course, probably the subtraction of 5 points per ability scores restricted. However, I first wanted to ask the opinion of the more experienced DMs on this board, so I told them I would think about it and get back to them.

The only major problem with this is variable summoned monsters, but I know that player is making small, cheat sheets so that she doens't have to flip back and forthe through the monster manual, so as long as she does it right (I'll check over it myself afterwards), I see no problem. What do you think?

P.S. Sorry if this has been brought up a lot before, but I haven't seen any threads about this for as long as I've been a member of these boards, so I figured I would ask.
Heahengel
02-27-06, 08:07 PM To me a point buy as high as 32 is meant to set the PCs apart from normal people of the world. I am not sure I would extend that to all allies and summons. IIRC most monsters in the MM are built with the non-elite array. Maybe you could allow them to use the elite array instead for their animal companions etc? On the other hand, summons do get a bit weak at high point buys. I guess it depends on how powerful you want to make everything. A summon is meant to be an average monster of its type, so if the summons are 32 point buys, everything they see should be one as well.
Crimson_Concerto
02-27-06, 08:10 PM A summon is meant to be an average monster of its type, so if the summons are 32 point buys, everything they see should be one as well.Yeah, I make it clear to the PCs that whatever pointbuys or variants I have them use, all enemies use the same thing.
syntaxerror37
02-27-06, 08:14 PM Off hand, I wouldn't apply the point-buy to the summoned monsters. On the manner of mounts/animal companions/familliars, I may allow a 25-point buy but under the understanding the "bad guys" get nicer animals too. Actualy, the more I think about it, the more I like it. I may try that in a future game.
Heahengel
02-27-06, 08:42 PM Yeah, I make it clear to the PCs that whatever pointbuys or variants I have them use, all enemies use the same thing.
If everything they face has a 32 point buy then I think it is perfectly reasonable to give the same to the player's allies and summons. As for handling racial stat bonuses - on page 290 of the MM, it says:
Monsters are assumed to have completely average . . . ability scores - a 10 or 11 in each ability, as modified by their racial bonuses.
So I would say that a wolf, for example, has +2 Str, +4 Dex, +4 Con, -8 Int, +2 Wis, -4 Cha, cannot have Int greater than 2, and then let them apply those modifiers (and any others from their animal companion abilities, etc) to a 32 point buy. Maybe for creatures with a non-score, I would give them 2 points less (to represent an average score in that stat), or 5 points less (to represent the average score for a 32 point buy).
Hariman
02-28-06, 02:32 AM The rules say to use the standard statistics for all the special mounts/summons/animal companions/familiars as a base. Your player is either unfamiliar with the rules for animal companions or he is trying to pull a fast one on you. (I recommend giving the player the benefit of the doubt. No use in accusing him of rules abuse when he probably just wants a better animal companion.)

Read though the SRD rules on animal companions here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#theDruidsAnimalCompanion)

The base statistics are used for ability scores, plus adjustments from druid level. Nowhere does it say that Animal Companions are made using the point buy system.

With the original change to a point buy animal companion "ruled" out, the other change requests are negated as unnecessary.

Familiars follow similar rules to determine ability scores. Summons are average creatures of the creature called. And a Paladin's mount also follows the same pattern for determining ability scores.

Do you really want to have to re-stat every enemy summon to compensate for extra powerful player summons/animal companions/familiars/special mounts?

Although I don't think it would be too unbalancing to allow a +1 to one stat of choice to Familiars, Animal Companions and Special Mounts. BUT NOT to summons. Summons are called at random from we don't know where.

EDIT: I forgot Cohorts. Cohorts should be made with a point buy of less than what the party was made with. They are the product of a feat, not another character to play. I'd recommend a 28 or 26 point point buy to keep him within shouting distance. (My DM gave the party 32 and my cohort 22 points. OUCH.) Remember, Leadership is a feat that is supposed to be on par with power attack and other feats.
Crimson_Concerto
02-28-06, 04:36 PM The rules say to use the standard statistics for all the special mounts/summons/animal companions/familiars as a base. Your player is either unfamiliar with the rules for animal companions or he is trying to pull a fast one on you. (I recommend giving the player the benefit of the doubt. No use in accusing him of rules abuse when he probably just wants a better animal companion.)After reading that entry in the srd, the only thing that I see it says is that it's "completely typical for its kind except as noted below," but that's just it. Everything the PCs face from the BBEG to the deer they're hunting for dinner is using the same point buy (which is probably why the player asked to begin with). Why should the Animal Companion be excluded from this benifit?

Do you really want to have to re-stat every enemy summon to compensate for extra powerful player summons/animal companions/familiars/special mounts?Nah, all summons of the same type of creature would have the same stats. The summoner had to make those little cheat sheets to automatically adjust for Augmented Summoning anyways, so she says she doesn't mind making adjustments before we being (which is in about a week, so I still have a few days before giving them a definite decision).

I'm not concerned about whether or not it takes extra work if the rules don't specifically say you're supposed to, because I always change up the enemy stats anyways, and there's nothing really prohibiting one from generating their companions' scores this way. My only real concern is to keep the game balanced*, and I'm considering allowing everything to use the same point buy for exactly that purpose. If it turns out this is in fact not balanced, could somebody explain to me why?

*You see, normally we just roll 4D6 (dropping the lowest), so since the average of that come out to be 11, our DM could simply pull creature stats as written from the book and have it be balanced with what the PCs rolled. Because my PCs wanted to use a point buy (and a high one, at that), I said okay as long as the enemies could use the same thing to keep it balanced (as the average of a 32 point buy is about a 13 or 14?), and we all agreed.
Bruunwald
02-28-06, 04:50 PM All of those things, with the exception possibly of NPC hirelings, specifically indicate that they are to be taken from the MM, DMG, or whatever book they appear in and modified for their purpose (familiar or mount, etc.).

That means their stats ought to be the same as those in the MM. You shouldn't be rolling or statting them out.

Put it to you this way: My wife's 11th-level paladin has a celestial pegasus as a special mount. Have you ever statted a celestial pegasus paladin mount for an 11th-level character? If I had applied a 32-point buy to that creature, before applying modifiers for size, etc., not to mention the paladin-granted abilities, it could probably wipe out the entire party with one hoof tied behind its back if it wanted to, and then still have the juice to go after the demon they were fighting.

Okay, that's a slight (only slight) exaggeration ;) . But I can't think of anything more game breaking, time consuming and boring altogether and at once, than the idea of rolling up new stats for every summoned creature, familiar or special mount. Sheesh! Munchkins! All pencils down! Please pass your tests to the person in the front.
cypherx
02-28-06, 08:36 PM be wary, my artificer can have animal companions, undead, and soon will have bound monsters.

the total hit dice of her allies that she controls is 22, 22 hit dice in three critters.

but yeah, that is ok.
Heahengel
02-28-06, 09:25 PM I think the key point hee is that he is already applying a 32 point buy to every monster that the party fights. The average creature in his world is based on a 32 point buy. Therefore it would be unbalanced for him to not allow animal companions, familiars, mounts and summons to also enjoy that benefit. As his players have a summon 'cheat sheet' it won't take any in game time up, so why not?

One other thing you should think of - how far from 'racial norm' should the party be able to take their allies? With a 32 pb base, the normal creature would have stats like 14 14 13 13 13 13 as a base. Would you let your players use stats like 18 16 14 8 8 8 as a base for an ally? That might unbalance things a bit. Maybe you should give them a 32 pb array to use, like the elite array, as the base for creatures. This would allow them to do a bit of customizing. Something like: 16 15 14 12 10 10.
Zerchai
02-28-06, 10:27 PM I like the idea of using point buy for animal companions/special mounts/cohorts, etc, but this could get pretty scary.

As for your summoner, I'd suggest the conjurer variant out of Unearthed Arcana instead of restatting them, and it should still do a lot to make your summoner *very* happy.

Check it out here if you don't have a copy of Unearthed Arcana handy.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm
Hariman
03-01-06, 02:09 PM After reading that entry in the srd, the only thing that I see it says is that it's "completely typical for its kind except as noted below," but that's just it. Everything the PCs face from the BBEG to the deer they're hunting for dinner is using the same point buy (which is probably why the player asked to begin with). Why should the Animal Companion be excluded from this benifit?

That changes everything. Now I'm all for the Point Buy for Animal Companions, Special Mounts, Summoned Creatures, Familiars, Cohorts etc.

If the NPCs and monsters are getting the point buy boost, then the PC and their summons NEED that boost to keep up. Although I would probably have each player stat out the monster/cohort on their own.

For summons, I believe you said that they are the same stats for each of the same monster. I would reduce the point buy by 4 to 6 for monsters that are "missing" a stat. (Con-less undead, Int-shy animals, etc.)

I didn't realise that the NPCs and Monsters were stronger than normal, that changes everything. So now I say yes, but take 4 or 6 points off of the point buy for undead, animals and other "this stat is always low" monsters.
Purkake
03-01-06, 02:17 PM The 32 point buy kinda loses its meaning if everyone gets it, doesn't it? You could just as well add a +2 bonus to ANY roll you make...

Why not just play 25 point buy and leave the monsters as they are? And also try adding 32 point buy to a 1 hd critter... it can kill a 1st level character like noone's business.

For example a regular housecat has the following ability mods: Str -8, Dex +4, Con +0, Int 2, Wis +2, Cha -4

So lets add the 32 point buy: Str 6, Dex 20, Con 14, Int 2, Wis 16, Cha 6.
Now try pitting it against your avarage commoner(even with 32 pb) the poor joe doesn't stand a chance...
Sir Knight
03-01-06, 03:01 PM I vote "NO" on 32. :) Use the stats from the MM.
Purkake
03-01-06, 03:35 PM Vote no on point 32 :D
Bruunwald
03-01-06, 04:12 PM I think the key point hee is that he is already applying a 32 point buy to every monster that the party fights. The average creature in his world is based on a 32 point buy. Therefore it would be unbalanced for him to not allow animal companions, familiars, mounts and summons to also enjoy that benefit. As his players have a summon 'cheat sheet' it won't take any in game time up, so why not?

I disagree in general with the 32-point-buy theme, and I still personally think that the bonuses said animals get from becoming familiars, companions and paladin mounts will send them shooting up into the stratosphere in terms of game breakingness.

But your point is a valid one in the sense that if everything is going to be treated this way, then, well, everything ought to be treated this way.

But besides the fact that these people have a huge amount of work ahead of them, getting every single summonable creature in the game up to spec :rolleyes:, here's the part where it all gets silly.

If you are going to apply an over-the-top character generation method to every living creature in the campaign, then who are you comparing your power to? Nobody. So doing so becomes superfluous and silly. The amount of extra damage your new PC is capable of dealing is offset by the ridiculously high Constitution modifier of his foe. You may as well be playing a normal core game, by the book for all the difference it makes. The point becomes the childish desire to walk into the local hobby shop with bragging rights about your super-strong Conan clone.

This sort of posturing is to my mind, the worst behavior of the worst element of the game. It's like wearing a large johnson prosthesis in a room full of guys with large johnson prostheses. It's totally make-believe and phony in the first place, but with no basis for comparison, what's the point?

Powergaming in the first place is silly and masturbatory. It's not real gold. Those are not real weapons and armor. That Strength score won't impress anybody down at Gold's Gym. The only powergame that would impress me, would be where the monsters are and the PCs aren't. The kind where a guy takes his 13, 10, 12, 10, 9, 9 1st-level fighter out alone, scouting for 200-point-buy dragons. Facing down a challenge is impressive. Size for show is juvenile.
Hariman
03-02-06, 01:14 PM I'd say the biggest argument against an accross the board 32 point point buy is time.

Bruunwald is right about this change taking a massive amount of time to apply. So you might want to just use the regular statistics to save time.

Oh, and Bruunwald, "Powergaming" covers legitimate players who just want a more effective character too. I "Powergamed" my hexblade recently by petitioning the DM to let me switch Monkey Grip for Power Attack. This change was to increase his effectiveness in battle.

You actually "Powergame" when you choose a set of feats over 20 levels and match ability scores to those feats to make your character stronger. What is being talked about here is running an ultra high power campaign.
Bruunwald
03-02-06, 01:24 PM Oh, and Bruunwald, "Powergaming" covers legitimate players who just want a more effective character too. I "Powergamed" my hexblade recently by petitioning the DM to let me switch Monkey Grip for Power Attack. This change was to increase his effectiveness in battle.

You actually "Powergame" when you choose a set of feats over 20 levels and match ability scores to those feats to make your character stronger. What is being talked about here is running an ultra high power campaign.

A powergame is where the DM and the players all agree to have more power than they would be allowed using normal guidelines. Such as overpowered point-buy systems or powerful weapons at low levels (think a 3rd-level fighter with a +3 longsword). Now, this is a constant argument on these boards, but we have been calling what I just said powergaming since I was about fifteen, and I was fifteen in 1985 and have been playing since 1981.

What you're talking about is more like, but not strictly, min/maxing. Min/maxing is when you consider stats, class, race and feats to create a character who will excel in his profession and take best advantage of his strengths. Most of us do that without even thinking about it.

In fact, planning out feats for twenty levels isn't really even min/maxing, to my mind. It's just careful planning. It certainly isn't powergaming.
Hariman
03-02-06, 01:38 PM A powergame is where the DM and the players all agree to have more power than they would be allowed using normal guidelines. Such as overpowered point-buy systems or powerful weapons at low levels (think a 3rd-level fighter with a +3 longsword). Now, this is a constant argument on these boards, but we have been calling what I just said powergaming since I was about fifteen, and I was fifteen in 1985 and have been playing since 1981.

What you're talking about is more like, but not strictly, min/maxing. Min/maxing is when you consider stats, class, race and feats to create a character who will excel in his profession and take best advantage of his strengths. Most of us do that without even thinking about it.

In fact, planning out feats for twenty levels isn't really even min/maxing, to my mind. It's just careful planning. It certainly isn't powergaming.

Point taken.
Crimson_Concerto
03-02-06, 04:41 PM A powergame is where the DM and the players all agree to have more power than they would be allowed using normal guidelines. Such as overpowered point-buy systems...See, that's it right there. The PCs wanted to play a a little more powerfully than normal for once, so I agreed as long as they understood the enemies would do the same. If the enemies all have the same amount of power as the PCs, can it really be called a powergame? :confused: Sure, they get a bit higher stats, but it really evens back down when you compare them to their enemies, doesn't it? What's wrong with that? :confused:

Let me try asking this a different way:

Let's say I gave all my PCs the elite array and all the enemies the elite array as well. Since the elite array hase a total mod of higher than 0, and all of these co-adventurers I'm talking about are considered to have a total mod of 0 (before racial adjustments), should I let them benifit from the elite array as well?

And what's with this anathema to modifying monster stats? It's not that hard, it takes like no time, and it makes each enemy a little more unique, like you can't expect the Bugbear you're fighting here to have the same HP or AC as the one your partner's fighting over there, which is much more realistic as well.

Still, ignoring how dumb and boring you may think doing that is, if my group wants to go though the trouble, what's the harm? :confused: I have yet to hear anybody say it's unbalanced and tell me why. They only say it makes these co-adventurers more powerful, which is no more powerful than regular PCs or NPCs and apparently makes this exactly what Bruunwald is saying it is, a "powergame."

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Crimson_Concerto 02-27-06, 07:26 PM	One of my players in an upcoming campaign raised an interesting question. He plans on being a Druid and wonders if the point buy we are using (32) should also be applied to his Animal Companions as well. Upon hearing this, the Paladin player asked the same about his special mount, and the player who was thinking of playing a summoner asked whether this should also apply to his familiar and summoned creatures as well. Now, I wanted to say yes, with limitations of course (such as the INT of animal campanions, familiars, and special mounts, or no-CON summoned creatures, for instance). These limitations would result in a lower point buy for them, of course, probably the subtraction of 5 points per ability scores restricted. However, I first wanted to ask the opinion of the more experienced DMs on this board, so I told them I would think about it and get back to them. The only major problem with this is variable summoned monsters, but I know that player is making small, cheat sheets so that she doens't have to flip back and forthe through the monster manual, so as long as she does it right (I'll check over it myself afterwards), I see no problem. What do you think? P.S. Sorry if this has been brought up a lot before, but I haven't seen any threads about this for as long as I've been a member of these boards, so I figured I would ask.
Heahengel 02-27-06, 08:07 PM	To me a point buy as high as 32 is meant to set the PCs apart from normal people of the world. I am not sure I would extend that to all allies and summons. IIRC most monsters in the MM are built with the non-elite array. Maybe you could allow them to use the elite array instead for their animal companions etc? On the other hand, summons do get a bit weak at high point buys. I guess it depends on how powerful you want to make everything. A summon is meant to be an average monster of its type, so if the summons are 32 point buys, everything they see should be one as well.
Crimson_Concerto 02-27-06, 08:10 PM	A summon is meant to be an average monster of its type, so if the summons are 32 point buys, everything they see should be one as well.Yeah, I make it clear to the PCs that whatever pointbuys or variants I have them use, all enemies use the same thing.
syntaxerror37 02-27-06, 08:14 PM	Off hand, I wouldn't apply the point-buy to the summoned monsters. On the manner of mounts/animal companions/familliars, I may allow a 25-point buy but under the understanding the "bad guys" get nicer animals too. Actualy, the more I think about it, the more I like it. I may try that in a future game.
Heahengel 02-27-06, 08:42 PM	Yeah, I make it clear to the PCs that whatever pointbuys or variants I have them use, all enemies use the same thing. If everything they face has a 32 point buy then I think it is perfectly reasonable to give the same to the player's allies and summons. As for handling racial stat bonuses - on page 290 of the MM, it says: Monsters are assumed to have completely average . . . ability scores - a 10 or 11 in each ability, as modified by their racial bonuses. So I would say that a wolf, for example, has +2 Str, +4 Dex, +4 Con, -8 Int, +2 Wis, -4 Cha, cannot have Int greater than 2, and then let them apply those modifiers (and any others from their animal companion abilities, etc) to a 32 point buy. Maybe for creatures with a non-score, I would give them 2 points less (to represent an average score in that stat), or 5 points less (to represent the average score for a 32 point buy).
Hariman 02-28-06, 02:32 AM	The rules say to use the standard statistics for all the special mounts/summons/animal companions/familiars as a base. Your player is either unfamiliar with the rules for animal companions or he is trying to pull a fast one on you. (I recommend giving the player the benefit of the doubt. No use in accusing him of rules abuse when he probably just wants a better animal companion.) Read though the SRD rules on animal companions here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/druid.htm#theDruidsAnimalCompanion) The base statistics are used for ability scores, plus adjustments from druid level. Nowhere does it say that Animal Companions are made using the point buy system. With the original change to a point buy animal companion "ruled" out, the other change requests are negated as unnecessary. Familiars follow similar rules to determine ability scores. Summons are average creatures of the creature called. And a Paladin's mount also follows the same pattern for determining ability scores. Do you really want to have to re-stat every enemy summon to compensate for extra powerful player summons/animal companions/familiars/special mounts? Although I don't think it would be too unbalancing to allow a +1 to one stat of choice to Familiars, Animal Companions and Special Mounts. BUT NOT to summons. Summons are called at random from we don't know where. EDIT: I forgot Cohorts. Cohorts should be made with a point buy of less than what the party was made with. They are the product of a feat, not another character to play. I'd recommend a 28 or 26 point point buy to keep him within shouting distance. (My DM gave the party 32 and my cohort 22 points. OUCH.) Remember, Leadership is a feat that is supposed to be on par with power attack and other feats.
Crimson_Concerto 02-28-06, 04:36 PM	The rules say to use the standard statistics for all the special mounts/summons/animal companions/familiars as a base. Your player is either unfamiliar with the rules for animal companions or he is trying to pull a fast one on you. (I recommend giving the player the benefit of the doubt. No use in accusing him of rules abuse when he probably just wants a better animal companion.)After reading that entry in the srd, the only thing that I see it says is that it's "completely typical for its kind except as noted below," but that's just it. Everything the PCs face from the BBEG to the deer they're hunting for dinner is using the same point buy (which is probably why the player asked to begin with). Why should the Animal Companion be excluded from this benifit? Do you really want to have to re-stat every enemy summon to compensate for extra powerful player summons/animal companions/familiars/special mounts?Nah, all summons of the same type of creature would have the same stats. The summoner had to make those little cheat sheets to automatically adjust for Augmented Summoning anyways, so she says she doesn't mind making adjustments before we being (which is in about a week, so I still have a few days before giving them a definite decision). I'm not concerned about whether or not it takes extra work if the rules don't specifically say you're supposed to, because I always change up the enemy stats anyways, and there's nothing really prohibiting one from generating their companions' scores this way. My only real concern is to keep the game balanced, and I'm considering allowing everything to use the same point buy for exactly that purpose. If it turns out this is in fact not balanced, could somebody explain to me why? You see, normally we just roll 4D6 (dropping the lowest), so since the average of that come out to be 11, our DM could simply pull creature stats as written from the book and have it be balanced with what the PCs rolled. Because my PCs wanted to use a point buy (and a high one, at that), I said okay as long as the enemies could use the same thing to keep it balanced (as the average of a 32 point buy is about a 13 or 14?), and we all agreed.
Bruunwald 02-28-06, 04:50 PM	All of those things, with the exception possibly of NPC hirelings, specifically indicate that they are to be taken from the MM, DMG, or whatever book they appear in and modified for their purpose (familiar or mount, etc.). That means their stats ought to be the same as those in the MM. You shouldn't be rolling or statting them out. Put it to you this way: My wife's 11th-level paladin has a celestial pegasus as a special mount. Have you ever statted a celestial pegasus paladin mount for an 11th-level character? If I had applied a 32-point buy to that creature, before applying modifiers for size, etc., not to mention the paladin-granted abilities, it could probably wipe out the entire party with one hoof tied behind its back if it wanted to, and then still have the juice to go after the demon they were fighting. Okay, that's a slight (only slight) exaggeration ;) . But I can't think of anything more game breaking, time consuming and boring altogether and at once, than the idea of rolling up new stats for every summoned creature, familiar or special mount. Sheesh! Munchkins! All pencils down! Please pass your tests to the person in the front.
cypherx 02-28-06, 08:36 PM	be wary, my artificer can have animal companions, undead, and soon will have bound monsters. the total hit dice of her allies that she controls is 22, 22 hit dice in three critters. but yeah, that is ok.
Heahengel 02-28-06, 09:25 PM	I think the key point hee is that he is already applying a 32 point buy to every monster that the party fights. The average creature in his world is based on a 32 point buy. Therefore it would be unbalanced for him to not allow animal companions, familiars, mounts and summons to also enjoy that benefit. As his players have a summon 'cheat sheet' it won't take any in game time up, so why not? One other thing you should think of - how far from 'racial norm' should the party be able to take their allies? With a 32 pb base, the normal creature would have stats like 14 14 13 13 13 13 as a base. Would you let your players use stats like 18 16 14 8 8 8 as a base for an ally? That might unbalance things a bit. Maybe you should give them a 32 pb array to use, like the elite array, as the base for creatures. This would allow them to do a bit of customizing. Something like: 16 15 14 12 10 10.
Zerchai 02-28-06, 10:27 PM	I like the idea of using point buy for animal companions/special mounts/cohorts, etc, but this could get pretty scary. As for your summoner, I'd suggest the conjurer variant out of Unearthed Arcana instead of restatting them, and it should still do a lot to make your summoner very happy. Check it out here if you don't have a copy of Unearthed Arcana handy. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm
Hariman 03-01-06, 02:09 PM	After reading that entry in the srd, the only thing that I see it says is that it's "completely typical for its kind except as noted below," but that's just it. Everything the PCs face from the BBEG to the deer they're hunting for dinner is using the same point buy (which is probably why the player asked to begin with). Why should the Animal Companion be excluded from this benifit? That changes everything. Now I'm all for the Point Buy for Animal Companions, Special Mounts, Summoned Creatures, Familiars, Cohorts etc. If the NPCs and monsters are getting the point buy boost, then the PC and their summons NEED that boost to keep up. Although I would probably have each player stat out the monster/cohort on their own. For summons, I believe you said that they are the same stats for each of the same monster. I would reduce the point buy by 4 to 6 for monsters that are "missing" a stat. (Con-less undead, Int-shy animals, etc.) I didn't realise that the NPCs and Monsters were stronger than normal, that changes everything. So now I say yes, but take 4 or 6 points off of the point buy for undead, animals and other "this stat is always low" monsters.
Purkake 03-01-06, 02:17 PM	The 32 point buy kinda loses its meaning if everyone gets it, doesn't it? You could just as well add a +2 bonus to ANY roll you make... Why not just play 25 point buy and leave the monsters as they are? And also try adding 32 point buy to a 1 hd critter... it can kill a 1st level character like noone's business. For example a regular housecat has the following ability mods: Str -8, Dex +4, Con +0, Int 2, Wis +2, Cha -4 So lets add the 32 point buy: Str 6, Dex 20, Con 14, Int 2, Wis 16, Cha 6. Now try pitting it against your avarage commoner(even with 32 pb) the poor joe doesn't stand a chance...
Sir Knight 03-01-06, 03:01 PM	I vote "NO" on 32. :) Use the stats from the MM.
Purkake 03-01-06, 03:35 PM	Vote no on point 32 :D
Bruunwald 03-01-06, 04:12 PM	I think the key point hee is that he is already applying a 32 point buy to every monster that the party fights. The average creature in his world is based on a 32 point buy. Therefore it would be unbalanced for him to not allow animal companions, familiars, mounts and summons to also enjoy that benefit. As his players have a summon 'cheat sheet' it won't take any in game time up, so why not? I disagree in general with the 32-point-buy theme, and I still personally think that the bonuses said animals get from becoming familiars, companions and paladin mounts will send them shooting up into the stratosphere in terms of game breakingness. But your point is a valid one in the sense that if everything is going to be treated this way, then, well, everything ought to be treated this way. But besides the fact that these people have a huge amount of work ahead of them, getting every single summonable creature in the game up to spec :rolleyes:, here's the part where it all gets silly. If you are going to apply an over-the-top character generation method to every living creature in the campaign, then who are you comparing your power to? Nobody. So doing so becomes superfluous and silly. The amount of extra damage your new PC is capable of dealing is offset by the ridiculously high Constitution modifier of his foe. You may as well be playing a normal core game, by the book for all the difference it makes. The point becomes the childish desire to walk into the local hobby shop with bragging rights about your super-strong Conan clone. This sort of posturing is to my mind, the worst behavior of the worst element of the game. It's like wearing a large johnson prosthesis in a room full of guys with large johnson prostheses. It's totally make-believe and phony in the first place, but with no basis for comparison, what's the point? Powergaming in the first place is silly and masturbatory. It's not real gold. Those are not real weapons and armor. That Strength score won't impress anybody down at Gold's Gym. The only powergame that would impress me, would be where the monsters are and the PCs aren't. The kind where a guy takes his 13, 10, 12, 10, 9, 9 1st-level fighter out alone, scouting for 200-point-buy dragons. Facing down a challenge is impressive. Size for show is juvenile.
Hariman 03-02-06, 01:14 PM	I'd say the biggest argument against an accross the board 32 point point buy is time. Bruunwald is right about this change taking a massive amount of time to apply. So you might want to just use the regular statistics to save time. Oh, and Bruunwald, "Powergaming" covers legitimate players who just want a more effective character too. I "Powergamed" my hexblade recently by petitioning the DM to let me switch Monkey Grip for Power Attack. This change was to increase his effectiveness in battle. You actually "Powergame" when you choose a set of feats over 20 levels and match ability scores to those feats to make your character stronger. What is being talked about here is running an ultra high power campaign.
Bruunwald 03-02-06, 01:24 PM	Oh, and Bruunwald, "Powergaming" covers legitimate players who just want a more effective character too. I "Powergamed" my hexblade recently by petitioning the DM to let me switch Monkey Grip for Power Attack. This change was to increase his effectiveness in battle. You actually "Powergame" when you choose a set of feats over 20 levels and match ability scores to those feats to make your character stronger. What is being talked about here is running an ultra high power campaign. A powergame is where the DM and the players all agree to have more power than they would be allowed using normal guidelines. Such as overpowered point-buy systems or powerful weapons at low levels (think a 3rd-level fighter with a +3 longsword). Now, this is a constant argument on these boards, but we have been calling what I just said powergaming since I was about fifteen, and I was fifteen in 1985 and have been playing since 1981. What you're talking about is more like, but not strictly, min/maxing. Min/maxing is when you consider stats, class, race and feats to create a character who will excel in his profession and take best advantage of his strengths. Most of us do that without even thinking about it. In fact, planning out feats for twenty levels isn't really even min/maxing, to my mind. It's just careful planning. It certainly isn't powergaming.
Hariman 03-02-06, 01:38 PM	A powergame is where the DM and the players all agree to have more power than they would be allowed using normal guidelines. Such as overpowered point-buy systems or powerful weapons at low levels (think a 3rd-level fighter with a +3 longsword). Now, this is a constant argument on these boards, but we have been calling what I just said powergaming since I was about fifteen, and I was fifteen in 1985 and have been playing since 1981. What you're talking about is more like, but not strictly, min/maxing. Min/maxing is when you consider stats, class, race and feats to create a character who will excel in his profession and take best advantage of his strengths. Most of us do that without even thinking about it. In fact, planning out feats for twenty levels isn't really even min/maxing, to my mind. It's just careful planning. It certainly isn't powergaming. Point taken.
Crimson_Concerto 03-02-06, 04:41 PM	A powergame is where the DM and the players all agree to have more power than they would be allowed using normal guidelines. Such as overpowered point-buy systems...See, that's it right there. The PCs wanted to play a a little more powerfully than normal for once, so I agreed as long as they understood the enemies would do the same. If the enemies all have the same amount of power as the PCs, can it really be called a powergame? :confused: Sure, they get a bit higher stats, but it really evens back down when you compare them to their enemies, doesn't it? What's wrong with that? :confused: Let me try asking this a different way: Let's say I gave all my PCs the elite array and all the enemies the elite array as well. Since the elite array hase a total mod of higher than 0, and all of these co-adventurers I'm talking about are considered to have a total mod of 0 (before racial adjustments), should I let them benifit from the elite array as well? And what's with this anathema to modifying monster stats? It's not that hard, it takes like no time, and it makes each enemy a little more unique, like you can't expect the Bugbear you're fighting here to have the same HP or AC as the one your partner's fighting over there, which is much more realistic as well. Still, ignoring how dumb and boring you may think doing that is, if my group wants to go though the trouble, what's the harm? :confused: I have yet to hear anybody say it's unbalanced and tell me why. They only say it makes these co-adventurers more powerful, which is no more powerful than regular PCs or NPCs and apparently makes this exactly what Bruunwald is saying it is, a "powergame."