Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Greenman Apr 15, 2015 7:35:50	I would like some advice from fellow DMs, so please let me know if you see any glaring problems that I may have missed or have any advice. It would be much appreciated.    When I have run a games, I used a variant point buy system. All stats start at 10, and the player has 20 points to spend at a one to one "exchange rate", then add the racial modifiers.  If you wanted an 18 in your primary stat, then you'd have a remainder of 12 points to spend. I prefer this home brew approach because it allows the PCs to generate characters on their own, much like the Array approach does.    I have used this system a few times and I haven't encountered anyone using it to make something like a Mountain Dwarf Barbarian with a stats that look like  S: 18, D: 16, C: 20, I: 10, W: 10, C: 10. I've had some good groups.    Another reason I like this is that it helps with NPC generation. If I need stats on guardsmen, bandits, assassins, etc, I can use 10 points to stat out the NPC. A more challenging NPC will have 15 or 20 points, and a big boss would have 25 points.    Out of curiosity, I checked out the NPCs in Princes of the Apocalypse and I found that most of the big bad bosses are over 20 point characters even when their ability score increases for level are factored out.    Thanks for reading!
#2 Tempest_Stormwind Apr 15, 2015 8:19:09	This seems like a faster but gameable version of the standard point buy rules, but the rationale you describe just supports point buy in general. (For instance, standard point buy allows self-generating characters too.) What do you see as the advantages of using your scale instead of the standard (which is 27 points with diminishing returns, with scores starting at 8 and capped at 15)?
#3 Greenman Apr 15, 2015 8:48:20	I feel it allows the player to create the character he or she envisions better.   An example: One person had an idea for a Fighter. Once background and some thought was put in, the idea was a character that was going to be groomed to become the captain of the guards, but due to political maneuvering, she was not chosen and became an adventurer instead. The stats were chosen to reflect how that player saw this character. She ended up with these stats, after picking Hill Dwarf as the race:  S: 16, D: 10, C: 16, I: 12, W: 15, C: 14. The increases in the mental stats supported how this player saw the character. She was smarter than average, highly perceptive and a natural leader, in addition to the physical capabilities.
#4 Tempest_Stormwind Apr 15, 2015 9:05:11	That's the same argument for a standard point buy. (Which can produce mountain dwarves with 14/10/16/12/14/13 by the same fluff reasoning). If you haven't seen standard point buy, it is on page 13. My question is "why would you reject standard point buy and use your variant on it", and it seems you just want higher powered characters or characters with higher " weak" scores (in which case the question becomes " why not just use a higher point buy (32, say, instead of 27)?").
#5 Greenman Apr 15, 2015 9:23:16	Good point.   Well, power is part of it, no doubt. I also assumed it's easier to use my system than introduce new players to than the current point buy rules. I have seen the rules on page 13, but I never really read them. I've been using my method since 3rd edition when I got the idea.
#6 SterlingRat Apr 15, 2015 9:51:52	The only problem I have with your system is that I can't have an 8. I almost never play a character that's average or above average at everything... most of my role-playing is based on what stat I have below average.   I've played wizards who asked others to carry his equipment. Clumsy clerics. Nearsighted rogues. Paladins that are a little slow to catch on and can't remember anyone's name. I prefer the regular point-buy system, but if you are going to do something else, let players have an option for a below-average stat.
#7 Greenman Apr 15, 2015 10:06:01	I have considered that, and it's a valid point. I don't mind the idea of below average stat. I ultimately rejected it because I was worried of low stats being picked to overpower the primary stat.    I've had the idea for awhile for a bard with a low wisdom score. He's always thinking about songs and stories and never at the tasks at hand. Consequently, he fails to notice things.    If I put in a low stat option, then I would have to tinker around with the points.
#8 Tempest_Stormwind Apr 15, 2015 10:25:03	Greenman wrote:
#9 Ozzmal1 Apr 15, 2015 11:28:03	If I was going to use your system I would cap abilities at 15 or 16 before racial modifiers. I beleive characters starting with higher stats has a huge effect on bounded accuracy, or so ive been told (I havent played enough 5th edition to tell you tbh). Like you, I do like players to invest in all there stats, or at the very least, I hate having a player with an 8 Intellgence or Charisma. This holds especially true if the player has no intention of using that low stat to roleplay, but simply chose to specialize in one or two ability scores (which you can hardly blame them).    Thats just me though, I think Ill juse the standard scores given. 15,14,13,12,10,8. Ill change the 8 out with another 10 and be done with it. That way I have the best of both worlds =) I used to love rolling for stats when I was younger, but as a DM I just dont feel it adds enough to my game to justify the consequences. Whatever you decide, best of luck :D
#10 Greenman Apr 15, 2015 11:46:39	Bounded accuracy is a concern as the players level up.  I don't have alot of experience with 5E yet myself.    I've sort of justified the power level/higher stat thing (to myself) with the increase of lethality in the game at earlier levels. The characters are the heroes and I think it takes away from the campaign if there is a revolving door of replacement characters being brought in because a goblin got lucky here, or an bandit got rolled a crit there.    I never considered an alternate array that you mentioned Ozzmal1. I really like that, and I'm going to tinker with it myself.
(Reply to #9) SterlingRat	Ozzmal1 wrote:
#12 Ozzmal1 Apr 15, 2015 12:05:20	SterlingRat wrote:
#13 BoldItalic Apr 15, 2015 12:48:34	Some thoughts:   The point-buy system in the PHB leads to an average unadjusted score of about 12 (averaged over the six abilities, that is) whereas your system gives just over 13, so you are actually making the PCs more powerful and thus making the game easier for the players. If that is intentional, that's fine, but if you want to preserve play balance it would be better to shift down by one and take a base of 9 rather than 10. The best unadjusted score you can get for any ability by dice rolling is 18 whereas your system allows a character with, in the extreme case, a single score of 30 which would be fairly game-breaking, I imagine. Capping at 18 would seem sensible. Perhaps you do this anyway. One of the incentives for levelling up is that it allows ability score increases to be earned. If you allow starting scores in the primary abilities to be too high, potentially 19 or 20 after racial adjustment,, there is less scope for increasing those abilities before hitting the hard cap of 20. If you allow feats, and if your players tend to take feats rather than ability increases, this is almost equivalent to granting a free feat. Again, you are making the game easier and giving players power they have not earned. Your system is slightly easier to understand and work through during character generation, but that saves only a short amount time in the life of a character. The inflation of scores that it leads to is permanent and will have a lasting effect on the game.
#14 Tempest_Stormwind Apr 15, 2015 13:02:47	Greenman wrote:
#15 AndyDay Apr 15, 2015 13:22:09	This sort of 1-1 point buy system makes high stats boring. If everybody at the table has 20 in at least 1 stat, then having a 20 goes from "wow, nice!" to "meh."
#16 RasmusNord Apr 15, 2015 22:32:56	Higher stats will have significant impact on the difficulty and pace of the game.  In 5ed stats are very important, because you get at max a +8 from your level and +3 from magic items, and your players will have +4/+5 on their main stats from lvl 1. With your system a starting character will have significantly higher chance to hit, higher damage output, spells with better saving throws and higher saving throws (and have fewer weak saving throws), which means they can tackle bigger monsters faster, will gain more xp and level up quicker (or have boring combat if the enemies are of normal level).  The character who wished to be groomed for command should live with the fact that she can't have max str and con, if she also wants higher mental stats. It will make her stat increases more meaningful and it doesn't ruin a fighter character that you only have 14 in str or con.
#17 Coredump00 Apr 16, 2015 8:32:47	I would tend the other direction.   Lower starting stats, and allow for boosts more frequently.
#18 BoldItalic Apr 16, 2015 10:20:45	It occurs to me that the OP envisages a game with a high rate of PC "churn" - a game where PCs are generated fairly often, die quickly before levelling up very far, and are replaced often as a matter of course. In that case, wanting to simplify the generation procedure, wanting to give the characters an immediate boost to try to make them live just a little longer, and not worrying about the long-term level up consequences, is understandable. But 5e isn't like that, at least in my experience. In 5e, PCs are not expected to die at all. They are expected to progress gradually through the levels. They may get knocked down to 0hp in combat but combats typically only last about two or three rounds and there is time for the PC's companions to at least stablilise the character, if not heal him, before he makes three death roll fails. Only if the DM is vindictive and the players reckless, will PCs actually die. Even then, temples can provide resurrection, albeit for a price. That being so, creating your PC thoughtfully, and with an eye to the future, is worthwhile; and even if it takes a few minutes longer, it is time well spent.
#19 Greenman Apr 16, 2015 12:12:06	You are correct BoldItalic, the group that I have played most often with often did have a high rate of character death and we would be bringing in new PCs often. My character generation idea is definately influenced by it.    I'll stick with the array approach.   Thanks for all the responses everyone!
#20 Tempest_Stormwind Apr 16, 2015 12:38:53	Greenman wrote: