Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Luega 09-05-05, 10:33 AM	So, I'm starting a new campaign soon, set in the Forgotten Realms. But I'm having some problems deciding on what character generation method I should use. First off, I'm a huge fan of the good old Elite array. That way I know where I have my players. Some of them, particularly one, have some tendencies towards munchkingsininism... eh, you know what I mean. Second, rolling for stats are out. Maybe I should allow a point buy. 25 or 28? I think that 30 is too high. I prefer that my players are slightly, um, weak. That way, even the lowly goblin presents a challenge more in line with it's CR (goblins aren't really CR 1/2 against warriors with 18 STR and CON). Any suggestions? And what method of character generation do you use the most? Do you prefer slightly underpowered heroes, or strong-as-hell champions of the multiverse?
VirgilCaine 09-05-05, 10:41 AM	I can see how rolling is annoying. I usually like it as a PC. Now that I have a wizard PC with something like 18, 17, 16, 12, 11, 5. It the 5 that's annoying, not the 18.
Old_One 09-05-05, 10:43 AM	Well we have been using 4d6 drop the lowest and its variations for some 4 years now and didn't have any problems with it so far. The only thing I don't like is tha varinat wich makes you take the stats in the order thaey have been roled.
Luega 09-05-05, 10:47 AM	Well, by using the Elite array or a close-to-standard point buy, racial modifiers becomes more meaningful, and skill bonuses seem to count more, and so on.
Hochiu 09-05-05, 10:51 AM	As long as you dont do what a friend of mine did, that being: DM: Oh. You can't have that 18 that you just rolled legally infront of me without dropping the lowest one yet. :noway: Me: ...why not? :eek: DM: Its too high. Me: ..Um..what? What do you mean its "too high"? :ahem: DM: Well, not EVERYONE is going to have strength that high or a wisdom that high. You need to be more like a NORMAL person. Me: Uh.huh...you do realize that the point of the adventurers and player characters is to BE the heroes and be seperate from the masses? Thats WHY they can advance in levels. They're SUPPOSED to be better. :twitch: DM: I don't care. It's too high. Infact, reroll that 16 too. Thats too high as well. Me: ... :censored: you. --- Suffice to say, we never played that game.
Luega 09-05-05, 10:59 AM	Ha ha, that's... well I don't know what that is, but it's not good. Funny though. Well, it's not that I don't want my players to be heroes, but I feel that rolling for stats is too random. I prefer a more standardized approach. In a previous campaign I ran, everyone but the cleric had great stats. The poor cleric didn't just have not-great stats, he had lousy stats (well he had stats comparable to a 24 point buy more or less, while the others had aproximately 32 point buy).
Cyric 09-05-05, 11:05 AM	Depends on the size of the group for me, 4 or more players roll 4d6 drop the lowest and arrange to taste. Less than 4 I allow 4d6 reroll 1's and 2's and arange to taste. Produces some pretty powerful characters but it allows me to throw more challenging encounters at them.
CycloneRanger 09-05-05, 11:59 AM	I generally use 4d6 discard lowest, or a 25-point point buy system. Only rarely do super-uber-man PCs actually come up; most are more average or have weaknesses to balance them (I did see, once, a Barbarian with four 17s and a fifteen, but he died in a pit trap after opening the first door of a dungeon). The point-buy assures you of the PCs power level (unless you have morons for players), even though it generates slightly weaker scores overall (this is made up for by the ultimate customization ability). 28-point point buy might be fine as well; but I haven't used it. I'd avoid anything higher than that.
Shadowmagyk 09-05-05, 01:57 PM	Point-buy = Cookie Cutter I have played with the point-buy system, and the stats of each character in the group were almost the same. I dont like this. I have played at a 32, 35, and 40-point-buy, and it doesnt matter which stats we used, we still had a hard time with the baddies that we were facing. Point-buy lets a DM know the basic outline of a character, and does not have to worry with differences in power levels. I dont think that stats equate to great differences in power level, but that is just me. I always allow my players to use the Standard Creation (4D6, Drop Low), and I also allow them to re-roll 1's. This does not completely prevent lower stats (one can still have a 6), but it also allows for a greater chance of higher stats, AND greater variances in the characters. There has never been a problem with this. It also means that the baddies can use this method. Yes, I still use the monsters as they are in the DMG, but I will change them, too. By using my method, I can customize the baddies, creatures, etc. This also keeps the players on their toes because the monsters are not always the same, which is another problem with point-buy: the monsters' stats are based upon the idea that the PCs are a certain, consistent power level. Having said all this, I like running high-powered games.
Antioch 09-05-05, 02:03 PM	My preference for generation, whether newbie players or end-game war engines, is point buy 25. Really, its not your ability scores that defines how powerful you are, but how you play your class. I've long since hated players thinking their characters were worthless because they didnt have an 18 (or more than one), and that they got a 9. This stigma is very, very stupid and so I've been weaning my characters out of rolling. They have more control over it, but cant ovepower themselves, so it works for me.
Shadowmagyk 09-05-05, 02:13 PM	<snip> Really, its not your ability scores that defines how powerful you are, but how you play your class. I've long since hated players thinking their characters were worthless because they didnt have an 18 (or more than one), and that they got a 9. This stigma is very, very stupid <snip> I agree with this, as you can see from my signature. However, I feel that the point-buy system creates characters that tend to look the same. However, this is where the concept of "role-playing" comes in to play. A number of people that I have DMed are more interested in "roll-playing," so they want those crunchy numbers. If I had a group that was focused solely upon the "role" aspect, then I would be more tolerant of the point-buy. However, my group dynamic is not that way, so they must be appeased. It is all about having fun, in the end. I guess that should be the answer to the OP's question - whatever makes for an enjoyable game is the method that should be used. Sometimes, the DM has to suck it up, and put in a little more work to make the game enjoyable, but it will be worth it when the group has fun.
Antioch 09-05-05, 02:23 PM	When creating a random PC, I typically start by slapping all the numbers to 10, giving me 13 points to work with. Typically I will then up the ability scores that matter most, usually to...15. Then I think briefly on what the rest should be based on whatever concept I may have brewing. If nothing else needs changing, I up the rest to 16 or so if I can afford it. My earth elemental paladin ended up with something like this by the time I quit playing him: Str 24, Dex 8, Con 16, Int 6, Wis 13, Cha 10. I figured he would be slow (physically and mentally) like any other elemental, but very perceptive, especially since being forced to this plane where everything was new. I could have upped his stats (especially so that he could get more skill points and also beef up his AC since I was the party tank) but really, it just didnt make sense for the character. The high Str was due to the monster levels I took.
Ravenseye 09-05-05, 02:24 PM	I've never had a huge problem with rolling 4d6 six times, and dropping the lowest. I want it done at the table in front of me. That way when a player rolls up a true 18 they really appreciate it more. That's the way the game is designed. If you want a supercharacter do it differently. Personally I like characters with weaknesses. It really affects how you play the game.
Shadowmagyk 09-05-05, 02:28 PM	Personally I like characters with weaknesses. It really affects how you play the game. No matter how powerful a PC is, there is always a weakness. It is even more so when they are powerful because they tend to focus on one area. When you focus on one area, you neglect other areas. This is the concept behind the Specialist Wizard.
allenchan 09-05-05, 02:47 PM	I use a static array for my FR adventures. Its high powered (18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8), but guarentee's every PC will be amazing at one thing, and horrible bad at another thing or two. The stats make for about a +1 CR to the group, but other then that I've never had a problem and its always fun.
H-D 09-05-05, 03:12 PM	Our DM uses a system that works pretty well for us. We use the typical "4d6, drop lowest, re-roll all 1s" bit, but our ability socres aren't allowed to have a total modifier higher than what the DM sets, before Racial Mods. So you roll your 4d6 sets and then add up the modifiers that those scores would give you. If they're higher than they should be, you adjust the numbers down a bit. If they're lower, you can re-roll the whole thing. We usually play +6 to +8, total. We've never player higher than +10. It has worked well.
Guy Humual 09-05-05, 03:47 PM	So, I'm starting a new campaign soon, set in the Forgotten Realms. But I'm having some problems deciding on what character generation method I should use. First off, I'm a huge fan of the good old Elite array. That way I know where I have my players. Some of them, particularly one, have some tendencies towards munchkingsininism... eh, you know what I mean. Second, rolling for stats are out. Maybe I should allow a point buy. 25 or 28? I think that 30 is too high. I prefer that my players are slightly, um, weak. That way, even the lowly goblin presents a challenge more in line with it's CR (goblins aren't really CR 1/2 against warriors with 18 STR and CON). Any suggestions? And what method of character generation do you use the most? Do you prefer slightly underpowered heroes, or strong-as-hell champions of the multiverse? I really like the point buy system myself. I'd go with 28 points myself if I was starting a new campaign, it puts you power level on par with most RPGA standards, and it gives the players a little more wiggle room for their stats.
Cantankerous 09-05-05, 07:12 PM	Really, the book says it all. 22 = Challenging, 25 = Normal, 28 = Tougher & 32 = High Powered. The Elite Array, of course, IS a simple 25 Pt. Buy. You won't be seeing any 18s from it baring miracles of Player stupidity. Isshia
Nom 09-05-05, 07:24 PM	If I had a group that was focused solely upon the "role" aspect, then I would be more tolerant of the point-buy.OK, that surprises me. I would have thought that a "role" focused group could use whatever method they liked (since they don't pay that much attention to the mechanics), whereas a more gamey group should use a point-buy since (claimed) homogeneity is less important than game balance. Though as far as I can tell "samey-ness" in PB is more a failing of the tool-users than the tool. As in "homogeneous" = "I haven't figured out more than one way to build an effective and interesting character". Ultimately, I'd strongly recommend either 25 PB or elite array (I prefer the flexibility of PB). Why? Because the rest of the game is balanced around the assumption that this is what you are using. On these boards, the answer to questions such as "why are my PCs overpowered" and "why don't CRs work" is almost always one of "your PCs stats are too much over 25", "your PCs exceed the wealth per level guidelines", "you are ignoring LAs" or "you have used non-core material without checking it first". I started with 30, and have since toned down to 25. To me, it feels that I'm achieving more when I have relatively scarce starting resources and need to work up from there. If you are unhappy with the power level of your PCs (which the OP seemingly isn't), then the game already provides a mechanism to alter that. It's called the "level". Rather than start at level 1 with overpowered ability scores, just start at level 4 with appropriate scores. You'll have the same overall power but be less skewed and therefore less susceptible to "walk-over or die" encounter balancing issues.
Shadowmagyk 09-05-05, 07:48 PM	Quote: If I had a group that was focused solely upon the "role" aspect, then I would be more tolerant of the point-buy. OK, that surprises me. I would have thought that a "role" focused group could use whatever method they liked (since they don't pay that much attention to the mechanics), whereas a more gamey group should use a point-buy since (claimed) homogeneity is less important than game balance. What I was meaning to say is that, with a "role"-playing group, it really doesnt matter what are the stats. I do not enjoy point-buy, but in a game that is focused upon the "roles," the stats do not matter. This group will not care about the mechanics of the game. In my experience, with a "roll"-playing group, crunchy numbers are the focus, so it requires that the DM allow more for the game to appease the group. Of course, I could be a jackass, and force a point-buy, but the players will not be as happy as if they had better stats and options because of the stats. If the players are not happy, then there is not point in playing the game. I think that I clarified myself... :confused:
allenchan 09-05-05, 08:24 PM	What I was meaning to say is that, with a "role"-playing group, it really doesnt matter what are the stats. I do not enjoy point-buy, but in a game that is focused upon the "roles," the stats do not matter. This group will not care about the mechanics of the game. In my experience, with a "roll"-playing group, crunchy numbers are the focus, so it requires that the DM allow more for the game to appease the group. Of course, I could be a jackass, and force a point-buy, but the players will not be as happy as if they had better stats and options because of the stats. If the players are not happy, then there is not point in playing the game. I think that I clarified myself... :confused: "Roll"-players enjoy point buy because they can specificly tailor their stats to the build they desire. All the "roll"-players I met would much rather have a high PB then 4d6.
Ni! 09-05-05, 09:07 PM	I'm a diehard 25 PB fan. A) It lets you tailor the stats so they fit the concept B) You never have to worry about game balance C) My players tend to be idiots and whine at me untill I cave and let them reroll because they got one bad roll. Its realy freaking annoying.
Shadowmagyk 09-05-05, 10:06 PM	"Roll"-players enjoy point buy because they can specificly tailor their stats to the build they desire. All the "roll"-players I met would much rather have a high PB then 4d6. I guess that there are different types of "roll"-players. I have only seen the type that I have described.
IceFractal 09-06-05, 05:20 AM	25 PB works ok, but personally I prefer 28 PB. The three points are a slight difference, but one that lets you fill out the character a bit with secondary strengths. With 25 points, you have to focus almost all your points on your prime abilities if you hope to survive long, but with 28, you get a little bit more room to play around and make charismatic fighters or strong wizards.
Luega 09-06-05, 06:50 AM	Heh, that's true. In an Eberron game I ran a while back I used 28 PtB. One of the players then pointed out that it was "only three points more than the standard 25". I then said that if it's "only" three points, then we could just use the standard 25 points, I mean, if the three points doesn't really matter. Suddenly, 28 PtB was great, yessiree, no problems at all. No, I have nearly a decade of experience in DMing, and I'm quite aware of the different power levels that stem from high or low ability scores. What I really wanted to know, though it might not have been so obvious from my first post due to bad phrasing, was what constitutes as "high power stats" in your games? Do you prefer a standard or slightly-higher-than-standard PtB, or do you roll for stats? So far it sems pretty close between the 25/28 PtB and the 4d6 roll. Not too many variations though. And, by the way, I think I'm going for the 28 PtB in my upcomming campaign.
Tedly224 09-06-05, 07:02 AM	I'm a fan of the 28 point buy for the games I run. One of the things I hated about rolling statistics is that you can have your real life friends show up, get excited about the game and making characters, and then check out what they get. By absolutely no fault of their own, one of the players will end up with the least out of the group in what they can use to make a character and... It's disheartening. It's uneven. But it wasn't until I looked this thread over that I saw a small reason to go with rolling the stats. You're right. It does tend to lend to cookie cutter character building. And that is a bad thing, and you're right to point it out. Still, I'd rather accept that small flaw and move on. The players for the game for the vast majority of their encounters will face creatures with "cookie cutter" stat builds. The only thing making them different from each other most of the time will be hit points rolled. So that part matches the player characters well enough. In the end a few posters have said "a character's success isn't due to stats they have" and I mostly agree with that. So I guess that's really the important thing.
Mirage_1 09-06-05, 07:24 AM	I use a static array for my FR adventures. Its high powered (18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8), but guarentee's every PC will be amazing at one thing, and horrible bad at another thing or two. The stats make for about a +1 CR to the group, but other then that I've never had a problem and its always fun. I use something similar, but allow high score to be dropped so that low scores can be raised, so far it has worked great.
FreeTheSlaves 09-06-05, 08:20 AM	I hate rolled stats because of the extra work it brings. Inevitably someone gets the shaft & rolls something horrible, & this only gets magnified by comparison to the best set of scores or if it is at a greater difference to the group average. My current campaign has an effective 20pt buy runt hanging with an average party pt buy score of 29/30, & the highest being 47pt buy. The whole point of rolling is you get what you roll & noone even wants to reroll, & I'm left having to balance the party which I am doing. As to the original post I'd look at the dmg descriptions for guidance. 25pt buy is a little thin while 28 does allow a bit of padding. 32pt buy allows a good spread or some strong spikes. I think the 5d6dl would equate to 32 roughly.
Nom 09-06-05, 08:29 AM	25 PB works ok, but personally I prefer 28 PB. The three points are a slight difference, but one that lets you fill out the character a bit with secondary strengths. With 25 points, you have to focus almost all your points on your prime abilities if you hope to survive long, but with 28, you get a little bit more room to play around and make charismatic fighters or strong wizards.This may sound a little peverse, but the main reason I prefer 25 over 28 is that you don't have enough points to overly focus on your prime abilities, unless you want to cripple your character. Against EL standard challenges, you can get by just fine with no score over 14 (maybe 15 for a primary caster). With 25 points, you can have a 16, but will feel it in your other scores. You can theoretically have an 18, but in practice distributing a mere 9 points among the other 5 scores is crippling. With 28 points, you can comfortably have a 16 (25->28 raises a 14 to a 16 once you include the odd point) and can just manage a 3 score wonder (18,14,14,8,8,8) or other equally silly build. For me, the biggest advantage of dropping from 30 to 25 was that I actually had to make tough decisions about where he would be good and where he would be mediocre, and about what feat pre-reqs I was willing to not afford. At 30, I could afford anything I needed. Finally, I still don't buy the cookie-cutter argument. I've never yet had a player who statted out their concept in the same way I would have statted out the same concept. Admittedly, the rough shape is the same, but the rough shape is the same no matter what score generation method you use (unless it's 'roll in order' or something equally restrictive); only the exact values vary.
Luega 09-06-05, 08:40 AM	Great minds think alike. Your argument about having to make tough decisions as to where you should put you points is most compelling. You have just convinced me to use the standard 25 PtB instead of the 28 PtB. Edit: Realizing that my post made absolutely no sense, I changed it. Changes is italicized.
Solik 09-06-05, 10:10 AM	The people arguing that stats have little effect are misguided. There is a very interesting article on this exact subject up in Regdar's. The essay demonstrates how high-powered buys lead to (on average) shorter combats with less need for tactics. It's a real eye-opener. I went from a 4d6 / reroll 1's to a 26-point-buy system immediately after viewing it. Since then, we've had two battles, and both of them were much more involved than anything we ever had with the former builds.
gleep 09-06-05, 10:12 AM	My houserule is that I allow the players to use whatever method they want. They're not even limited to the methods in the DMG, they can make something up if they want. The only limitation is that they have to all agree on the method. Creating characters is part of the fun of the game. I see no reason that I have to control that aspect overly much. Afterall, as the DM, I get the rest of the Universe. :D --gleep
Cantankerous 09-06-05, 10:48 AM	Its high powered (18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8), but guarentee's every PC will be amazing at one thing, and horrible bad at another thing or two. Amazing at a couple of things; almost unholy at one and to balance this? Slightly, and I stress SLIGHTLY below average at one. Ten is still average isn't it? Was there a basic change to the way the game was structured when I wasn't looking? The 12 is as far removed from average as that 8 is. The 14 is already the second highest score in an ELITE array, the 16 betters anything from the standard ELITE array and the 18 blows it totally away. Now, I'm not arguing a singular DM's right to structure their campaign as they see fit, but calling an 8 and a 10 "horrible bad at another thing or two", is EXACTLY like calling a 12, "awesome". Neither is a fitting description within the purview of the game. Does anyone here with a 30 or higher point buy game bother to upgrade all the opponents comensurately? Or atleast upgrade them to Elite? Isshia
Luega 09-06-05, 11:00 AM	So, I just finished reding that essay in the Repositorum (this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=477756)). It really opened my eyes. He has some interesting viewpoints, and is able to back them up with sound arguments and experiments. I would really recomend that you read this, especially since you've just read this thread. My admiration for the "humble" 25 PtB has only increased.
Shadowmagyk 09-06-05, 11:03 AM	Does anyone here with a 30 or higher point buy game bother to upgrade all the opponents comensurately? Or atleast upgrade them to Elite? I dont use the point-buy system, but I do change the monsters. I dont do this all the time, though. Sometimes, I just send more numbers, other times, I change the abilities, and I will also add class levels to the monsters. This is why I dont mind high stats. I dont change the monsters or bad guys to mirror the PCs. I also vary the difficulty of my encounters. I will also add encounters that will kill the PCs, but it is there job to know when to run.
janusthinker 09-06-05, 03:18 PM	Does anyone here with a 30 or higher point buy game bother to upgrade all the opponents comensurately? Or atleast upgrade them to Elite? Undoubtedly this will sound hideous, but my group tends to play much higher-powered campaigns than average: using a program to generate stats, you can reroll repeatedly (a max of 40 times per character). Virtually no one starts without a base 18 in something, and the average usually works out to the equivalent of a 45-point buy. That said, yes, we do upgrade opponents. Not every single monster, but anything with class levels is quite on par with PCs, and lots of unique monsters as well (if you bother to give a monster a history or memorable role in the world, why not take the time to re-stat properly, I say...). We also restrict resurrection heavily, so it counterbalances the PCs power rather notably.
LefferDP 09-06-05, 04:29 PM	Something interesting I'm trying out is rolling 4d6 drop 1 ability stats 30 times and letting the party of 5 players decide how to distribute them amongst themselves. This keeps people from being too weak but insures a few of them wind up with some sub 10 ability scores which make wonderfully flawed characters. This tends to ensure one player isn't godly strong while the others have horrible scores, in general it evens out a bit. They are supposed to be a party after all, not individuals.
q'afuu 09-06-05, 04:53 PM	The Elite Array, of course, IS a simple 25 Pt. Buy. You won't be seeing any 18s from it baring miracles of Player stupidity. 18, 13, 10, 10, 8, 8 makes for an excellent wizard (Int, Con, Str, Dex, Wis, Cha resp, you can play around a bit with those 2 points in Str too if you want). Nothing miraculous or stupid about it. The thing with PB is that it favours certain classes over others. Normal PB values favour one-stat classes like the wizard (18 in the main stat, a decent secondary stat and the rest can be dumped). Very high (make that stellar, as in 40+) PB values favour classes that otherwise suffer from MAD, like the paladin and monk classes (almost every stat gives a significant class-dependant benefit, whereas other classes only gain the regular benefits from most of the stats). The happy medium seems to be around 34-36, but that's IMO much too high for a decent game of D&D. I personally like rolling better, but give my players the choice: 28 points or standard 4d6 drop lowest (which comes down to a little over 29 points, btw).
DmMagnus 09-06-05, 05:11 PM	I use 4d6, (eliminate the worst roll). I like rolling for stats! you see this is how i think: Not everyone are the same. Some people are medium good at almost everything, some people suck at almost everything but are very good looking (this people usually turn out to be models:P). Some are very smart but weak and so on.... The point buy system is to unrealistic, some times you get sucky rolls but turn out to love the character anyway. Some times you get super stats but find out that you didn`t like this one as much as the last you had! Stats isn`t everything!
allenchan 09-06-05, 05:40 PM	Does anyone here with a 30 or higher point buy game bother to upgrade all the opponents comensurately? Or atleast upgrade them to Elite? Isshia Yes. All NPCs and unique monsters use the same stat array before racial modifiers as the PCs. I also only run NPCs with PC classes and prestige class levels, no Warrior or Aristocrat.
allenchan 09-06-05, 05:42 PM	18, 13, 10, 10, 8, 8 makes for an excellent wizard (Int, Con, Str, Dex, Wis, Cha resp, you can play around a bit with those 2 points in Str too if you want). Nothing miraculous or stupid about it. The thing with PB is that it favours certain classes over others. Normal PB values favour one-stat classes like the wizard (18 in the main stat, a decent secondary stat and the rest can be dumped). Very high (make that stellar, as in 40+) PB values favour classes that otherwise suffer from MAD, like the paladin and monk classes (almost every stat gives a significant class-dependant benefit, whereas other classes only gain the regular benefits from most of the stats). The happy medium seems to be around 34-36, but that's IMO much too high for a decent game of D&D. I personally like rolling better, but give my players the choice: 28 points or standard 4d6 drop lowest (which comes down to a little over 29 points, btw). I agree, and if I were playing in your campaign, I'd take the point buy if I was going to play a wizard or druid, and Id roll for prett much everything else.
q'afuu 09-06-05, 06:48 PM	I agree, and if I were playing in your campaign, I'd take the point buy if I was going to play a wizard or druid, and Id roll for prett much everything else. That's pretty close to the reasoning most of my current batch of players go by: if you want a character who only wants one stat to be really high, pick the PB. Guaranteed 18 if you want one. Otherwise, pick the standard rolling method. You're probably going to roll close to that 28 points anyway, that 18 is not such a big deal and who knows, you might just get lucky. Even if you don't, a melee warrior with a 15 Str isn't all that much worse off than one with a 17 Str, for example. Not as good, but still good enough to feel like a worthy party member. If you have one wiz with a 15 Int and another one with a 17, the first one is probably going to consider that a much bigger discrepancy.
Nom 09-06-05, 08:11 PM	18, 13, 10, 10, 8, 8 makes for an excellent wizard (Int, Con, Str, Dex, Wis, Cha resp, you can play around a bit with those 2 points in Str too if you want). Nothing miraculous or stupid about it.However, you sacrifice +2 AC, Ref saves and Init, +2-3 Will saves, carrying capacity and social skills for that 18 (and thus +1-2 to spell DCs). You can make a one-trick wonder with 25 points, but it very clearly has only one trick, plus some severe liabilities. Once the total rises to (say) 30, the opportunity cost of an 18 drops dramatically.
LefferDP 09-06-05, 11:09 PM	However, you sacrifice +2 AC, Ref saves and Init, +2-3 Will saves, carrying capacity and social skills for that 18 (and thus +1-2 to spell DCs). You can make a one-trick wonder with 25 points, but it very clearly has only one trick, plus some severe liabilities. Once the total rises to (say) 30, the opportunity cost of an 18 drops dramatically. I'd say the Will lost is pretty much mitigated by the strong will save, especially once the character starts with the multiclassing. You're right about the AC and Ref saves though, most wizards I know really don't like to be hit.
q'afuu 09-07-05, 01:49 AM	However, you sacrifice +2 AC, Ref saves and Init, +2-3 Will saves, carrying capacity and social skills for that 18 (and thus +1-2 to spell DCs). Not really, unless instead of that 18 I'd be willing to go with a 15. +2 AC would cost 4 points, +2-3 Will saves another 4-6. That alone would drop the 18 to a 15. If I'd want to increase carrying capacity and social skills, I can't even afford that any more. I'm not saying other stats aren't useful. I'm saying such a build is perfectly acceptable, not a 'miracle of player stupidity'. Wizards can make do with low AC and all the rest, even if doing so carries an inherent risk. Many of the spells a wizard will take will offer a save (Sleep is a classic low-level choice). Boosting that save DC at the expense of AC is a reasonable decision.
allenchan 09-07-05, 02:05 AM	Wizards arent even the best one-stat wonders. That title is reserved for druids, who can have 8's in all their physical stats and never care because they're wildshaped into a legendary ape.
FreeTheSlaves 09-07-05, 02:08 AM	Please, please tell me Drizzt has not taken levels in the neoliberal capitalist class :rolleyes: Beware the engineers of society, I say, who would make everyone in all the world equal. Opportunity should be equal, must be equal, but achievement must remain individual. - Drizzt Do'Urden
q'afuu 09-07-05, 04:02 AM	Wizards arent even the best one-stat wonders. That title is reserved for druids, who can have 8's in all their physical stats and never care because they're wildshaped into a legendary ape. Well, not at level 1 they can't. ;)
Shadowmagyk 09-07-05, 10:31 PM	Please, please tell me Drizzt has not taken levels in the neoliberal capitalist class :rolleyes: That quote is from.... oh crap, I cant remember..... Anyway, it is part of when he is writing in his journal (in the books.)
FreeTheSlaves 09-07-05, 10:40 PM	I am just surprised that Drizzt would say something like that considering he came from such an matriarchal society marked by entrenched inequality. Then again he has possibly identified the inequality of inheritance as having a major impact on the equality of opportunity, & wants to eliminate it?
UltimateReality 09-07-05, 11:07 PM	My two cents thrown to the wind... Our group has gone as high as 5d6 and as low as 32 point buy. I am actually wanting to try out a lower point buy to see what properly balanced challenges are like -- not to mention watching the group freak out, whine, then realize I'm serious about doing a 28 pb. (Should be fun. We'll see if anyone commits any felonies in righteous indignation.) Our "regular" rolling has been 4d6 drop lowest, make highest and 18 and lowest an 8; and 4d6 reroll ones and drop lowest. (We usually go with some form of 4d6.) I am increasingly finding that the game is unsatisfying to me the more ungodly my stats are, and I feel it really puts the focus on mechanics and takes away from the rest of the game, as everyone is always bragging about their saves, atk/damage, AC, blah blah blah, and not playing characters. Only the newbs, who haven't learned our bad habits yet, seem to have a personality -- even a character development! -- in mind. Edit: Just read that article by olshanki_home. Tasty goodness. More fuel for my fire, and something to share with that Special DM in my life. ;)
Shadowmagyk 09-08-05, 01:30 AM	I am just surprised that Drizzt would say something like that considering he came from such an matriarchal society marked by entrenched inequality. Then again he has possibly identified the inequality of inheritance as having a major impact on the equality of opportunity, & wants to eliminate it? Well, he was talking about the Gondsmen making items to make the ordinary individual a hero. The problem with this is that the ordinary have never learned what it takes to be a hero. They did not put in the time to make themselves, and learn (read: earn XP). The engineers of society, in this case, are the Gondsmen. He feels that everything should be earned, not given. In the Underdark, there is no equality, so he doesnt have to worry about it. However, when a male achieves such a high rank in the Drow society, you can be sure that he has definitely earned it. I am increasingly finding that the game is unsatisfying to me the more ungodly my stats are, and I feel it really puts the focus on mechanics and takes away from the rest of the game, as everyone is always bragging about their saves, atk/damage, AC, blah blah blah, and not playing characters. This is the fault of the player, though. I am playing in a a game where we started at 20th level, so we will have a little feel for our characters before we go to Epic levels. We have many cool items, but we also have very few combats. We have focused this game on more of a "role"-playing aspect. Sure, my character could kill an entire town within a round, especially since he is evil, but I dont because my character doesnt want to do that. My background is one of gaining power. How can I gain power if I kill all my potential followers? This is why I was making an argument for "role"-players not needing to worry with stats. They arent important to them. Howeer, "roll'-players are worried about their stats, and that is what is fun for them, so they should be allowed to have their uber-characters. It doesnt matter that the battles only last for four rounds, instead of sixteen. The point is that they are having fun playing their characters. Yes, this makes it harder on the DM, but everyone is having fun.
KeltenVonRatzenberger 09-08-05, 02:52 AM	In the campaigns I've played in and the one I run, we've always used 4d6 drop the lowest and reroll ones but all of us would use the same rolls. 6 rolls, put 'em where you want. Always worked out for us. Most current set came out 18, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12. Slightly higher than 25 pt buy but it works out well. The power gamers are happy enough with the stats so they don't complain and the role players use it to flesh out a character.
allenchan 09-08-05, 03:21 AM	In the campaigns I've played in and the one I run, we've always used 4d6 drop the lowest and reroll ones but all of us would use the same rolls. 6 rolls, put 'em where you want. Always worked out for us. Most current set came out 18, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12. Slightly higher than 25 pt buy but it works out well. The power gamers are happy enough with the stats so they don't complain and the role players use it to flesh out a character. "Slightly higher" ? That's a 49 point buy right there buddy. Yea, almost exactly double. :eek:
FreeTheSlaves 09-08-05, 03:35 AM	:D Yeah I was going to say the same. My experience with 4d6dl without any of this rerolling cheese is usually something more modest & annoyingly with something less than 8. :( It is really because of the <8 rubbish that I prefer point buy. The village idiot was fun once, likewise the mage on crutches quickly wore on everyones nerves.
cynical 09-08-05, 04:55 AM	25 point buy means no one will take any class that suffers from MAD It also gives human as a race the shaft and makes ecl races much more attractive. It means far less multiclassing and far less flavor to charictures. It limits the feats you can take dramatically. Youll get bunch of cookie cutter pcs, 1 wiz , 1 priest, 1 thief and 1 fighter. SOunds like funs were can i sign up. 32 point buy gives you a good range of stats and the abillity to cope with MAD. Most importantly it does not make the charictures too powerfull. Youll moslt likly and up with 18 14 14 10 10 8 or 16 16 14 10 10 10. If you cant cope with a single 18 then you are NOT playing monster to their ntelligence. You can still tpk a party with a encounter of there cl very easily. Randomly rolled stats have the big down side of one player has lucky dice and ends up with no scored below 15 and another player is lucky if he got a single 15. I have tried all the standard system for charicture creation and 32 point buy has led to the least conflicts and the most varied playing styles. No one in my campains have every thought they were too powerful or that the monsters did not present a challange. But then again I dont play my monters as video game mindless mobs.
FreeTheSlaves 09-08-05, 05:37 AM	25 point buy means no one will take any class that suffers from MAD (MAD = Multiple Attribute Dependency) That is simply not true because 2 of us play such characters & we contribute successfully to the game without feeling like extras. This pov is only valid with the mindset that <+3 modifiers are not acceptable in primary attributes.
Cantankerous 09-08-05, 07:01 AM	25 Point Buy does definately NOT mean no MAD. It's MORE common with a 25 point buy than the OSW (One Stat Wonder) classes in my long experience. of course this is dependant on Player type more than anything else. Power Gamers tend to hate low to average point buy, of course, since it's all about MORE POWER for that aptly named subgroup. Role Playing Purists tend to prefer low to average point buy, as it's a hell of alot easier to identify with the character who isn't superman stats wise to start with, since most of us aren't ourselves. Isshia
Solik 09-08-05, 10:29 AM	Starting power doesn't matter in terms of the strength of the players. Good DMs just inflate the monsters, too, so the players don't gain anything. So you have a 50 AC at level 8. Big deal -- the DM's enhanced monster gets a +45 to attack. Or, it just makes touch attacks. High-number buys do, however, decrease the tactics needed in combat by greatly shorting the duration of battles. This is because players tend to put those extra points in stats like Str and Int, which make them hit harder and more often and increase the DC of their spells. This means monsters fall faster. If your group doesn't like tactical combat, high-point games are the way to go. If they enjoy it, however, standard point games are best.
ObsidianIchor 09-08-05, 11:02 AM	I made a program for some of the rolling methods to find the average score rolled. I used 1,000,000 trials for each. Here are the average rolls I got: 4d6 drop lowest: 12.24 4d6 reroll 1s drop lowest: 13.27 5d6 drop lowest 2: 13.43 As you can see, the 4d6 drop lowest is roughly equivalent to a 25 or so point buy (all stats 12 = 24 points). The other 2 methods are very close in terms of average score rolled, but an evaluation of the distribution showed that the 4d6 reroll 1s drop lowest method had more values in the middle of the curve, that is, closer to the average 13.27 than the 5d6 drop lowest method. The 5d6 drop lowest has a more of a tendency towards the extremes. This should give you a little to think about.
janusthinker 09-08-05, 01:27 PM	This is why I was making an argument for "role"-players not needing to worry with stats. They arent important to them. Howeer, "roll'-players are worried about their stats, and that is what is fun for them, so they should be allowed to have their uber-characters. It doesnt matter that the battles only last for four rounds, instead of sixteen. The point is that they are having fun playing their characters. Yes, this makes it harder on the DM, but everyone is having fun. Hear, hear. I have had uber-fighters, uber-rangers, uber-bards, and uber-mages. And yet...the greatest fun was always had with the fighter's decisions and the mage's use of prestidigitation in totally inappropriate circumstances. Actually, what with our group's limiting of resurrection, often the greatest accomplishment of uber-characters is simply to have survived. Go, us! :clap:
Solik 09-08-05, 02:21 PM	This is why I was making an argument for "role"-players not needing to worry with stats. They arent important to them. Off-topic, but this is bullocks. Roleplaying heroic characters is just as valid as roleplaying average joe's, and usually more fun. Moreover, how fun is it to RP a character with an Int score of, say, 5 (which translates to roughly 50 IQ, which is far below the retardation line)? Given that Int, Wis, and Cha are often seen as the "personality" attributes, these scores should be very important for any roleplayer. Unless you ignore the realities of your character when you roleplay. And that's not very good roleplay, is it?
Shadowmagyk 09-08-05, 02:36 PM	Off-topic, but this is bullocks. Roleplaying heroic characters is just as valid as roleplaying average joe's, and usually more fun. Moreover, how fun is it to RP a character with an Int score of, say, 5 (which translates to roughly 50 IQ, which is far below the retardation line)? Given that Int, Wis, and Cha are often seen as the "personality" attributes, these scores should be very important for any roleplayer. Unless you ignore the realities of your character when you roleplay. And that's not very good roleplay, is it? The problem with this is that, with a point-buy, there will be no score less than 8, unless you are not human. Then, you can have a six. The only characters with 6 INT are going to be the Half-Orc. Anyone wanting to play a Half-Orc will most likely be playing a Fighter type. They could also play a Cleric, and just be stupid and uncharismatic. For any other character, they will have, at least, an 80 IQ, which is within one standard deviation from the normal IQ, and it is only 5 points shy of normal IQ (I believe). With a 25-point-buy, most characters will have, at least, 10's in all stats, which is perfectly average. Some of the stats will be above average, which means that, while they are not supermen, they are still super. This is why it is okay for "role"-players to use point-buy. They dont need ALL theirs stats to be uber-. They only need one or two to be semi-uber-.
FreeTheSlaves 09-08-05, 10:25 PM	Starting power doesn't matter in terms of the strength of the players. Good DMs just inflate the monsters, too, so the players don't gain anything. So you have a 50 AC at level 8. Big deal -- the DM's enhanced monster gets a +45 to attack. Or, it just makes touch attacks. Why would a "good" dm inflate the monsters? Wouldn't the reason to have great scores be to have great scores? Why would the "bad" want to increase their workload to inflate monsters? I for one won't increase my valuable time to do this. If the players want more free power at first level onwards rather than aquiring it solely through level-ups then great. I'm happy to run such a campaign.
FreeTheSlaves 09-08-05, 10:28 PM	I made a program for some of the rolling methods to find the average score rolled. I used 1,000,000 trials for each. Here are the average rolls I got: 4d6 drop lowest: 12.24 4d6 reroll 1s drop lowest: 13.27 5d6 drop lowest 2: 13.43 This doesn't look right. Did you not include invalid characters (all stats < 14 & total bonuses < +1)?
Solik 09-08-05, 10:39 PM	For any other character, they will have, at least, an 80 IQ, which is within one standard deviation from the normal IQ, and it is only 5 points shy of normal IQ (I believe). It's also the IQ of Forrest Gump, I believe. Nevertheless, my point was that many people consider it more fun to roleplay a heroic character. I didn't mean a superhuman with 18s all over the place. But I certainly meant a character with average scores above 11. I mean, who wants to roleplay a commoner tending a tavern? For more than an hour? I have a job. I don't need two, thanks. Why would a "good" dm inflate the monsters? Because otherwise, your combats will last two rounds, and your players will likely get bored before very long. Alternatively, you could reduce the CR of all monsters by one, but that has roughly the same effect (though it's harder to pick even battles). Wouldn't the reason to have great scores be to have great scores? Why would the "bad" want to increase their workload to inflate monsters? I think you accidentally just got it. The whole point of having great scores is just that -- to have great scores. Not necessarily to be better than everybody else -- just to be high. It's the same reason people like to power up to level 3000 in Nippon Ichi games. The monsters power up right with them, but who cares? You're level 3000, and that is SOOOO COOL. But then you, the DM, get stuck being the one powering up the monsters with the players -- or risking boring them to death. Sure, I'm speaking in generalities -- some groups may actually enjoy playing games where they just run all over everything. Not quite sure why anyone bothers rolling the dice, but I'd suspect there's lots of beer and laughs involved. Nothing wrong with that, but it's hardly your "standard" D&D game.
Shadowmagyk 09-08-05, 10:50 PM	It's also the IQ of Forrest Gump, I believe. I am almost positive that he had a 72, which was just a few points away from the required IQ of 75 at that time. This is why his mother had to perform for the Member of the School Board. Anyway... Nevertheless, my point was that many people consider it more fun to roleplay a heroic character. I didn't mean a superhuman with 18s all over the place. But I certainly meant a character with average scores above 11. I mean, who wants to roleplay a commoner tending a tavern? For more than an hour? I have a job. I don't need two, thanks. I completely agree with you. However, this does not change the fact that "role"-players DO NOT NEED the high stats to enjoy their games.
Nom 09-08-05, 11:24 PM	I made a program for some of the rolling methods to find the average score rolled. I used 1,000,000 trials for each. Here are the average rolls I got: 4d6 drop lowest: 12.24 4d6 reroll 1s drop lowest: 13.27 5d6 drop lowest 2: 13.43 As you can see, the 4d6 drop lowest is roughly equivalent to a 25 or so point buy (all stats 12 = 24 points).I do wonder why you ran 1M trials when there are only 1296 possible unique rolls for 4d6, and each score is independent. Regardless, there are problems with your logic and your stats. (Best 3 of 4) d6 has an mean ability score bonus comparable to 25 point buy where all scores are bought at 1-1. However, scores over 14 are relatively rare and thus are negatively weighted in PB. A mean score of 12.24 does not imply a mean point buy value of 4.24 points; the mean PB value is closer to 6. When calculating point equivalents you also need to figure how you will weight scores below 8, which are impossible under PB. Olsh has shown that there are "advantages" that come from increased skew. With correct min-maxing and as a gross generalisation, and 18 and a 10 is significantly more valuable than two 14s. The control is probabilistic for PH standard rolling and negative weighting for PB. Finally, you fail to account for the relatively massive variance in standard rolling. While the mean value is about a +6 total ability score bonus, approximately 25% of characters (1 in 4) are expected to be "hopeless" by the PH definition. A similar number can be expected to have total ability bonuses in the +12 or greater range. That's a non-negligible difference.
FreeTheSlaves 09-08-05, 11:43 PM	Because otherwise, your combats will last two rounds, and your players will likely get bored before very long. ... I think you accidentally just got it. The whole point of having great scores is just that -- to have great scores. Not necessarily to be better than everybody else -- just to be high. It's the same reason people like to power up to level 3000 in Nippon Ichi games. The monsters power up right with them, but who cares? You're level 3000, and that is SOOOO COOL. I don't think the difference between the 25 & 32pt buy "bands" are so different to decrease combat time so significantly. Also I use the 3.0 encounter distance rule which usually results in 1+ pre-battle rounds, but I digress. Nothing in the game will convince me to spend needless time upping the power of stock encounters. I would need to be paid & paid well to regularly engage in such trivia. The "Dungeon Siege"/"Nippon Ichi" parallel power ups may appeal to some but I reckon most players would feel shortchanged & cheated if the dm cancelled out their stat power by ramping up the world around them. I think it comes down to 3 questions: 1) What power do you want for your character? 2) Do you want to actually feel this power? 3) If no for 2), is the dm willing to devote time for this endeavour? My current answers were: 1) 4d6dl or 25pt buy, 2) yes, 3) n/a.
ObsidianIchor 09-09-05, 01:17 AM	To answer your questions 1st reply: It's not a roll-up of a character. Each an average roll for each stat. I'm too lazy to write that on short notice. 2nd reply: I just wanted to show the difference in average of different methods. The 4d6 drop lowest is often very close to the 24 point buy. --- The arguments of each side are basically these: Point buy: makes sure you're equivalent. allows for certainty. Roll: random is fun. Provides for more fun allocation of stats. Personally, I don't care which kind. I like either. Also: Point buys screw over humans and half elves. Talk about equality when the other standard races will essentially have +4 points or +6 points because of their racial stat bonuses. (for those of you who are slow: halfling with 16 dex costs 6, human with 16 dex costs 10)
FreeTheSlaves 09-09-05, 03:17 AM	The arguments of each side are basically these: Point buy: makes sure you're equivalent. allows for certainty. Roll: random is fun. Provides for more fun allocation of stats. I would add that some random proponants actually mean: Roll: high "random" is fun, low "random" is rerolled. Provides for more fun allocation of stats. Somehow a contingent of rollers assume they are not going to be held to account with their mediocre rolls. Take away this crutch & boy, watch them scream...
q'afuu 09-09-05, 04:51 AM	2nd reply: I just wanted to show the difference in average of different methods. The 4d6 drop lowest is often very close to the 24 point buy. That would depend on your definition of 'often' and 'very close', I guess, but by most people's definitions of those terms that's simply not true. 29 is closer to the mark.
Solik 09-09-05, 10:18 AM	However, this does not change the fact that "role"-players DO NOT NEED the high stats to enjoy their games. The statement made, however, was that role-players do not care about stats. In other words, if you have any interest at all in the numbers that make up your stats, you are not a role-player. I mean, I'm something of an elitist, but damn. Is that the stance you're really defending? If not, you're picking an argument where there isn't one. I don't think the difference between the 25 & 32pt buy "bands" are so different to decrease combat time so significantly. Again I refer you to Regdar's. 32pt buy essentially guarantees an 18. This results in higher DCs for save-or-die spells or hitting more often and for higher damage. That necessarily shortens combat, on average. It does this without forcing a weakness in the character as well. The essay I'm using even gives you the average of how much you can expect your combats to be shortened when players have high point buys.
Shadowmagyk 09-09-05, 05:40 PM	The statement made, however, was that role-players do not care about stats. In other words, if you have any interest at all in the numbers that make up your stats, you are not a role-player. I mean, I'm something of an elitist, but damn. Is that the stance you're really defending? If not, you're picking an argument where there isn't one. Yes, I said that role-players do not care about stats, and this is true. It is also true that they do not need high stats to roleplay their characters. Roleplayers will play their stats. On the other hand, the rollplayers care about their stats, and they need their stats. They want to be, and do, the best that is possible from a character concept. That is all that I was saying. It was a simple clarification. I am definitely not trying to start an argument. I think that I clarified myself... :thinks:
Solik 09-09-05, 06:17 PM	Yes, I said that role-players do not care about stats, and this is true. Hi! I'm a role-player who cares about his stats.
Sithis 09-09-05, 06:50 PM	So, I just finished reding that essay in the Repositorum (this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=477756)). It really opened my eyes. He has some interesting viewpoints, and is able to back them up with sound arguments and experiments. I would really recomend that you read this, especially since you've just read this thread. My admiration for the "humble" 25 PtB has only increased. This isn't a solid experiment. Of course the battles are shorter when both sides have emphasized offense. If a DM mirrors his players' inclinations rather than copying them, then the relative difference should be much smaller.
Shadowmagyk 09-09-05, 09:59 PM	Hi! I'm a role-player who cares about his stats. Yes, I am, too! However, it is relative to the "roll"player. The two types can be meshed, which is the category to which you belong. Then, on either extreme, there are the strict roleplayers, and the strict rollplayers. I am not trying to make this into an argument, and I am giving generalizations. We all know that there are exceptions to every rule (except that rule).
FreeTheSlaves 09-09-05, 10:15 PM	Again I refer you to Regdar's. 32pt buy essentially guarantees an 18. This results in higher DCs for save-or-die spells or hitting more often and for higher damage. That necessarily shortens combat, on average. It does this without forcing a weakness in the character as well. The essay I'm using even gives you the average of how much you can expect your combats to be shortened when players have high point buys. And yet I run a 25pt buy campaign & I play in a 32pt buy campaign & the difference is not as pronounced as you say. There certainly is an increase in combat competency but this only seldom translates into more quickly resolved combat. In fact I have noticed a trend in my players that the more powerful their characters, the less teamwork is carried out, & the less efficient they become. The worst case was the (aprox.) 45pt buy Gestalt characters that got their butt handed to them.
Solik 09-09-05, 11:41 PM	The two types can be meshed, which is the category to which you belong. Then, on either extreme, there are the strict roleplayers, and the strict rollplayers. The only way a strict roleplayer would not care about stats would be if said stats did not exist. An important difference between acting and roleplaying is that, in the roleplaying hobby, players invent their own characters. You cannot invent characters without paying attention to your stats unless you fail to roleplay honestly. And yet I run a 25pt buy campaign & I play in a 32pt buy campaign & the difference is not as pronounced as you say. Then you're doing something else right, I suppose. Perhaps your players do not max offensive stats (which is the most common choice). Perhaps you are good at selecting opponents that the players cannot quickly defeat. Of course, you stated that the players tend to lose more often at high point buys. Might that be because they focused on offensive stats? To offset this, you used stronger monsters or more dangerous situational variables, and as a result, the players ended up taking damage, which they were not optimized to do?
FreeTheSlaves 09-10-05, 12:35 AM	Then you're doing something else right, I suppose. Perhaps your players do not max offensive stats (which is the most common choice). Perhaps you are good at selecting opponents that the players cannot quickly defeat. Of course, you stated that the players tend to lose more often at high point buys. Might that be because they focused on offensive stats? To offset this, you used stronger monsters or more dangerous situational variables, and as a result, the players ended up taking damage, which they were not optimized to do? I fear I have misled everyone. The campaign I _play_ is 25pt buy while the campaign I _run_ is on average a 32pt buy equivalent based on 4d6dl, which does include a runty character with the equivalent of 20pt buy. As a dm I've made a habit of starting combat at a distance when overland & using scent + hearing to generally negate surprise when underground. In a world of invisible foes it just makes sense to use guard animals & animal handling to train them in tricks. These habits make for longer combats with more time spent maneauvering before combat is joined in real earnest. The players in this campaign used 4d6dl (had the option of 25pt buy) for their characters & only one character has dumped on a defensive stats (wisdom in this case). D&D encourages offensive tactics as the best form of defence because of the turn based system & hit point system. The turn based system encourages gang bashing to remove an opponant before they get to retaliate & the hit point system reinforces this because having only 1 hp remaining does not diminish combat capability (except for longevity;)). As a player the 25pt buy characters are specialized & do not compete over niches, i.e. if one person can scout then noone else will spend character resources in scouting. My character is a S&B AC junkie while my companion is a 2Handed cleaver, & we place ourselves appropriately so as I bear the assault & he leads the counter-assault. Offense is very important, I placed my 15 in str & all melee types have at least 14+. For the Gestalt losers (a finished "campaign" of a whole 3 sessions :rolleyes: ) they were huge characters numerically with rolled stats using a generous system of 3d6dl+6*7, drop the lowest, reroll if 3 scores are not 16+. I did not pump the monsters rather I treated the party as 2 levels higher (but not if they were to face one foe). What got them smashed up was the players believing they were "supermen", as indeed they were, but thinking that they were individually invincible. There was massive niche competition & unwittingly they devoted multiple resources to magic & scouting with noone being a dedicated tank. I consider this a failing of "Gestalt" more than high stats, but I would not rule the stats out of the equation. One of my friends is going to start a 32pt buy campaign but you know I really do not think I am going to sink points into 17s & 18s. Maybe through racial bonuses I'd do this but strengthening the defence is a priority for me. By default dex & con will get an economic 14 & wisdom won't be less than 10.