PDA

View Full Version : Alternative Ability Generation System



Shesheyan
2010-03-07, 08:33 PM
I'm thinking you using this system to create the characters for my next campaign:

• Player receives +X* in ability bonuses he can distribute as he wishes.
• Negative penalties to abilties can be taken to raise the value of other bonuses at the rate of 1 for 1, but total bonuses can never exceed +X.
• No ability can raise above 18.
• 3 abilities must have even numbers and the 3 other odd numbers.

Exemple (+8) : 17 (+3) / 15 (+2) / 14 (+2) / 12 (+1) / 12 (+1) / 09 (-1) = +8 in bonuses.

*GM can adjust bonus [+5 to +10] as he sees fit for the campaign.

erikun
2010-03-07, 08:40 PM
I think the point of standard point-buy is to make 18 harder and less common than two 16s, or multiple 14s.

All this seems to do is eliminate the math, making it just as easy to get one 18 as it is to get two 14s. Your sample character could easily have 18/14/18/8/10/8 with the relatively "small" +8 point buy.

Shesheyan
2010-03-07, 09:16 PM
I think the point of standard point-buy is to make 18 harder and less common than two 16s, or multiple 14s.

All this seems to do is eliminate the math, making it just as easy to get one 18 as it is to get two 14s. Your sample character could easily have 18/14/18/8/10/8 with the relatively "small" +8 point buy.

You missed the 3 odd and 3 even numbers part. The character you propose is impossible to get under this system.

tyckspoon
2010-03-07, 09:19 PM
You missed the 3 odd and 3 even numbers part. The character you propose is impossible to get under this system.

Not really, because you're counting in bonus modifier instead of raw value. It just changes the numbers to 18/14/18/9/11/9; picking an odd number for your dump stats has no mechanical difference from even.

Malificus
2010-03-07, 09:25 PM
18/18/18/11/11/3

Ug has no need for silly talking

magic9mushroom
2010-03-07, 09:40 PM
Not good due to basically being standard point-buy without the difficulty of getting really high scores.

Shesheyan
2010-03-07, 09:50 PM
Not good due to basically being standard point-buy without the difficulty of getting really high scores.

What if negatives where 2 for 1 instead of 1 for 1? Higher scores would get harder to get.

Fiery Diamond
2010-03-08, 12:05 AM
Actually, I've been considering something like what you said in the first post myself. What I would do is make it so you can't have any number below 8. Personally, I have no problem with people having a couple 18s. I tend to like higher powered games anyway.

Devils_Advocate
2010-03-08, 05:50 AM
What if negatives where 2 for 1 instead of 1 for 1?
So, instead of an array of like 18 18 18 11 7 6, now I'm making something more like 18 18 11 11 11 10?


Higher scores would get harder to get.
Well, it would actually cost something to get several 18s at that point, but there would still generally be no reason not to stick all of your points into your most important ability scores. There would just be the question of how much to dump your low scores for even moar points.


Actually, I've been considering something like what you said in the first post myself. What I would do is make it so you can't have any number below 8. Personally, I have no problem with people having a couple 18s. I tend to like higher powered games anyway.
This favors the classes that need a few ability scores to be high over classes that need several ability scores to be fairly good, though. And the former classes already tend to be the overpowered ones.

Shesheyan
2010-03-08, 07:42 AM
So, instead of an array of like 18 18 18 11 7 6, now I'm making something more like 18 18 11 11 11 10?

This favors the classes that need a few ability scores to be high over classes that need several ability scores to be fairly good, though. And the former classes already tend to be the overpowered ones.

If that's the kind of character min/maxers want to play I have no problem with that. BUT having average on 4 stats is crippling in terms of roll playing and role playing.

As an 11 INT fighter you shouldn't be able to do do most optimal combat action ALL the time which min-maxer do all the time. Its a systemic weakness in RPGs that needs to be resolved. Some GMs resolve this problem through roleplay but many others let min-maxers get away with it.

In my group we have often talked about this problem. Should there be a game mechanic (a roll) to force a player not to do the optimal thing all the time?

Devils_Advocate
2010-03-08, 08:12 AM
having average on 4 stats is crippling in terms of roll playing and role playing.
Really? I rather think that the average person is capable of doing a fair bit. What sort of activities outside of their specialties do you see adventurers needing above-average stats for?


As an 11 INT fighter you shouldn't be able to do do most optimal combat action ALL the time which min-maxer do all the time.
Well, this is sorta the reason that several Fighter feats require Int 13. Though how "optimal" they are I'm not sure.


Should there be a game mechanic (a roll) to force a player not to do the optimal thing all the time?
Well... if the player's build is such that "Charge in and hit one of the baddies really hard" is the best option, the character probably shouldn't randomly decide not to do that. But maybe he wouldn't be aware in some cases that he shouldn't do that, which is maybe what you're thinking of. A lot of awareness of optimal tactics is covered by Knowledge rolls, I guess.

Caphi
2010-03-08, 11:46 AM
If that's the kind of character min/maxers want to play I have no problem with that. BUT having average on 4 stats is crippling in terms of roll playing and role playing.

As an 11 INT fighter you shouldn't be able to do do most optimal combat action ALL the time which min-maxer do all the time. Its a systemic weakness in RPGs that needs to be resolved. Some GMs resolve this problem through roleplay but many others let min-maxers get away with it.

In my group we have often talked about this problem. Should there be a game mechanic (a roll) to force a player not to do the optimal thing all the time?

A fighter, regardless of his int score, shouldn't be barred from realizing (nor should he have to roll) that he should attack the biggest baddie, be between the large angry guy and the sorceror, or to know how to use that one really sweet move he's been working on all his life and that's why he's a fighter and not, say, a warblade or someone good.

Also, 11 int is average. You probably have no more than that. But even an 8 int fighter has an idea of how to fight. That level of INT shouldn't be "crippling" in roleplay, let alone what you can do in combat.

Besides all that, fighters are bad enough without imposing arbitrary and dumb restrictions on their combat actions.