Rolling vs Point Buy--Combining?

[Raineh Daze]

I know the tier list itself gives suggestions about stratified point buys, but I was just wondering if letting primary noncasters roll for their stats, and primary casters use a fixed point buy (25?), would yield the fairest (in principle) outcome. 4d6, drop lowest, arranged to taste? Rerolling ones?

What's the best combination?

[eggynack]

I don't really see why that would help much. I guess that you could construct the situation such that the non-caster rolled stats would just about always be better than the caster's point buy, but at that point I don't see the advantage over just giving the non-caster a higher point buy. Really, the fairest outcome is actually constructing a situation that you think is fair, rather than tweaking probability to suit your needs. I mean, the utility of stratified point buy is a little questionable, as it's trying to change fundamental rules issues with a simple change in numbers, but at least you're getting exactly what you want. I can't really imagine a set up involving a combination of dice rolling and point buy that'd be more successful than just point buy.

[ArcturusV]

I'd actually suggest the other way around myself. Make the high tier classes roll 3d6 old school, in order. Allow them to pick ONE stat to remove points from 2 at a time in order to feed only ONE other stat 1 point at a time.

So thus a Wizard rolls 3d6 for everything. Decides their Int is too low, so trades 6 points of Strength for 3 points of Intelligence. They cannot also drain their Charisma to feed their Intelligence, or drain their Wisdom as well to feed their Constitution, etc.

Then let the weaker/lower tier classes do a point buy with a higher amount. So a Fighter gets some 36 Point Buy.

[Studoku]

It seems unnecessarily complicated compared with just using different point buys for each tier. I'm also not sure how it's supposed to balance things- a Wizard can get 18 int, 14 con and 8's everywhere else for just 22 points whereas fighters would typically get stuck with above average stats everywhere.

Then again, I dislike rolling stats in general (or at least the roll+assign method) so I may be a wee bit biased here.

[Raineh Daze]

Well, yes, just using different point buys is of course the more predictable and sensible option, but the question is whether this would also work. It's just a theoretical question.

That, and I like rolling stats. Might have something to do with somehow always ending up with all 16's and above. :smallbiggrin:

[eggynack]

Well, yes, just using different point buys is of course the more predictable and sensible option, but the question is whether this would also work. It's just a theoretical question.

That, and I like rolling stats. Might have something to do with somehow always ending up with all 16's and above. :smallbiggrin:
Yeah, but I don't think it works as well in a theoretical environment. I mean, the goal here is to construct a situation where a combination of rolled stats and point buy is somehow either more balanced than just point buy, or at least equally balanced. I honestly can't imagine a situation where either would be true. If you want your fighter's stats to be all 16's and above, just give them point buy such that that would be the case. I'm just failing to see the potential advantage on this one.

[Raineh Daze]

Yeah, but I don't think it works as well in a theoretical environment. I mean, the goal here is to construct a situation where a combination of rolled stats and point buy is somehow either more balanced than just point buy, or at least equally balanced. I honestly can't imagine a situation where either would be true. If you want your fighter's stats to be all 16's and above, just give them point buy such that that would be the case. I'm just failing to see the potential advantage on this one.

As I just said, there's no practical reason to pick this above 'bigger point buy'. I just want to know what the outcome would be. You're assuming that it has to be equal to or better, I just want to know if it would work.

[Emmerask]

I thought you created a System combining Point Buy and Rolling in one which would be kind of interesting ^^
ie you take an array that allows you something like

14
14
12
12
10
10

then you roll a d4 for every stat or somesuch :smallsmile:

[eggynack]

As I just said, there's no practical reason to pick this above 'bigger point buy'. I just want to know what the outcome would be. You're assuming that it has to be equal to or better, I just want to know if it would work.
I guess that my definition of working requires that it be either equal to or better than a more efficient system. In any case, if your goal is a combination system, I agree with Arcturus. One of the main flaws with the variable point buy system is that wizards can still just put as many points as they have access to into one stat. If you forced the wizard to use poor rolls, they'd be a bit more likely to have evenly distributed stats, which are obviously suboptimal for them. Melee characters, who often benefit from many stats, would have access to the ability to customize. That way, you're removing the ability to act in a SAD manner from the class that would desire it the most.

Thus, instead of focusing on how to make rolling as powerful as possible, you may want to consider focusing on how to make it as weak as possible. Maybe use something ridiculous, like "2d6, double the lowest, reroll 6's." Y'know, as diametrically opposed to what you have now as possible. You could also go with the regular 3d6 system, but that's much less fun than creative nerfs. At the same time, you'd obviously give fighters an amount of point buy roughly equal to what they get in the current altered point buy system. Point buy is more inclined to optimization than rolling, so it only makes sense to give it to fighters over wizards.

[Kelb_Panthera]

If you really want to bring casters down (though you really can't bring them down hard enough to gain parity with the lowest tier non-casters) then give non-casters a 32-ish point buy and make casters use the elite or even the standard array out of the MM.

Elite is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8
Standard is 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8

The standard array for casters is harsh, but it still won't stop them from dominating if they're played to potential.

Really though, the only way to keep casters under control is either by banning anything T2 or higher or by simple gentlemen's agreement. That is; the players simply and willingly agree not to push the caster they're playing to the limit so that they don't completely overshadow the non-casters.

[Bakkan]

As I just said, there's no practical reason to pick this above 'bigger point buy'. I just want to know what the outcome would be. You're assuming that it has to be equal to or better, I just want to know if it would work.

The difficulty, of course, is that rolling, even with favorable rules such as rerolling ones, can still give poor point-buy equivalents. And sometimes they give "good" point buys but poor arrays for real characters. For instance, if I want to make a Fighter and I roll al 14s, that's the equivalent of a 36 point buy but I'd much rather have a 30 point buy to assign as I wish.

[prufock]

I was just wondering if letting primary noncasters roll for their stats, and primary casters use a fixed point buy (25?), would yield the fairest (in principle) outcome. 4d6, drop lowest, arranged to taste? Rerolling ones?

What's the best combination?

4d6b3 yields an average roll of about 12.25, which is 2.25 x 6 = 25.5 points. The casters are winning out in this situation because they get to choose where those 25 points go, and I don't think the half of a point in difference is going to matter.

Casters will still have the higher "swing" to their stats as they'll almost certainly max out their casting stat and dump everything they don't need. Noncasters, by comparison, will have to live with the dice rolls, and will revert to the mean over multiple rolls.

[eggynack]

Really though, the only way to keep casters under control is either by banning anything T2 or higher or by simple gentlemen's agreement. That is; the players simply and willingly agree not to push the caster they're playing to the limit so that they don't completely overshadow the non-casters.
This is probably true. I don't even think that JaronK thinks that these house rules do much to effect the mechanics of the tier system. It kinda plays into one of the key sources of imbalance in the game. The fighters can get bigger numbers, but that just doesn't mean as much as doing different things. One of the best examples of this is probably vow of poverty, which shows just how poorly you do in this game when you trade versatility for raw numbers. You're much better off just picking a tier range, and playing within that. I suppose that a gentleman's agreement could theoretically work, but I don't think it's a better option than just creating the exact game you want to play, and playing it.

[jedipilot24]

I'm not sure how well this is known, but the Elite Array is equivalent to a 25 Point Buy.

You could use the Organic method of generation described in DMG II:
4d6, discard lowest, arrange in order as rolled; reroll any one ability score of your choice, then switch any two ability scores.
This allows some control over a character's ability scores but prevents dumping.

[Raineh Daze]

What's the average go up to when you reroll ones? Can't remember that one.

See, the point of this isn't to make something practical, it's more to see what can be done.

Especially because I cannot imagine many people ever being happy of 'not only will you roll, you're banned from being allowed to have or keep good rolls'. That 2d6 thing is only going to create a character that can do basically nothing, because I imagine that you're going to get a lot of 8's or below. In all your stats. Constantly. This is an unattractive, unobservant, unintelligent weakling. :smalltongue:

EDIT: Also, can I please have an explanation for why 'I just want to see what sort of thing you'd end up with' keeps getting turned into 'this is how you should nerf casters using ability scores'? That's not the same thing at all. :smallconfused:

[eggynack]

Especially because I cannot imagine many people ever being happy of 'not only will you roll, you're banned from being allowed to have or keep good rolls'. That 2d6 thing is only going to create a character that can do basically nothing, because I imagine that you're going to get a lot of 8's or below. In all your stats. Constantly. This is an unattractive, unobservant, unintelligent weakling. :smalltongue:
Well, yeah. That's kinda the point. The fighter gets cool stats, and the wizard gets lame stats. Also, the low roll is doubled, so you'd max out at a score of 15, and your minimum would be the regular score of 3. That gives you some opportunity to pick up a stat that's at least mediocre. Anyways, if the wizard doesn't turn out to be an unattractive, unobservant, unintelligent weakling, then what's the point of this whole exercise? We're trying to create some semblance of balance by doing that very thing. Also, it's kinda fun creating arbitrarily harsh methods of die rolling. Maybe give them something like 4d6, drop the highest. That'd be pretty cool. There's obviously room to maneuver here, but the point is to give the wizard the least optimal stat selection method, and the first step for that is to make him roll. Your post seems to assume that rolling is more optimal than point buy, and this is an untrue thing.

Edit:
Also, can I please have an explanation for why 'I just want to see what sort of thing you'd end up with' keeps getting turned into 'this is how you should nerf casters using ability scores'? That's not the same thing at all.
Presumably, it's because people think that the answer to the question of, "What kind of thing would I end up with?" is, "A system that doesn't work that well." It's a valid answer to the question. Also, the purpose of the system that you're attempting to replicate had the goal of nerfing casters, because casters are amazing. It seems only reasonable to assume that you'd have the same goal. In fact, if your goal is to maintain point parity while combining the two systems, you'd still be better off just giving the fighter the point buy. You set the dice rolls probabilistically equivalent to the point buy, except the fighter gets the benefit of stat selection. It's kinda a more even approach than the one in the tier system, though still probably worse than just giving folks the stats you want them to have.

[prufock]

What's the average go up to when you reroll ones? Can't remember that one.

13.4336, so 5.4336 points x 6 attributes = 32.6016, or about 32 point buy. The STD is smaller, though, and you get more middling scores with a longer low-end tail.

Here's an odd option for you. I haven't run the math on this at this point, just off the top of my head.

You start with the elite array. For each score, you can choose to keep it or to roll it using one of the following methods. So basically for each score you choose an option (maximum 18, minimum 3). The averages should be about the same, but the distribution will be skewed.

15 : 3d6+4 : 4d6b3+2 : 4d6b3r1+1
14 : 3d6+3 : 4d6b3+1 : 4d6b3r1+0
13 : 3d6+2 : 4d6b3+0 : 4d6b3r1-1
12 : 3d6+1 : 4d6b3-1 : 4d6b3r1-2
10 : 3d6+0 : 4d6b3-2 : 4d6b3r1-3
08 : 3d6-2 : 4d6b3-3 : 4d6b3r1-4

[Raineh Daze]

Well, yeah. That's kinda the point. The fighter gets cool stats, and the wizard gets lame stats. Also, the low roll is doubled, so you'd max out at a score of 15, and your minimum would be the regular score of 3. That gives you some opportunity to pick up a stat that's at least mediocre. Anyways, if the wizard doesn't turn out to be an unattractive, unobservant, unintelligent weakling, then what's the point of this whole exercise? We're trying to create some semblance of balance by doing that very thing. Also, it's kinda fun creating arbitrarily harsh methods of die rolling. Maybe give them something like 4d6, drop the highest. That'd be pretty cool. There's obviously room to maneuver here, but the point is to give the wizard the least optimal stat selection method, and the first step for that is to make him roll. Your post seems to assume that rolling is more optimal than point buy, and this is an untrue thing.

It's not more optimal. This is getting annoying; you're insisting on treating it as if the aim is to make the system as balanced as possible, when it's not! I've said it's not three times, and you keep acting as if I'm saying 'rolling is better'. Stop with the stupid assumption already! :smallannoyed:

Also, out of 2d6, the chance you'll roll a one--and this isn't even rerolling sixes--is about a third (well, three tenths). This means at least two stats have a maximum cap... of eight (keeping sixes). It just gets worse if you reroll sixes.


Edit:
Presumably, it's because people think that the answer to the question of, "What kind of thing would I end up with?" is, "A system that doesn't work that well." It's a valid answer to the question.

Not really. It implies not reading any of the times I've said 'this is not an aim for practicality or balance'. I'd go back and remove all mention of casters if it wasn't for the fact the conversation would then make no sense, because this isn't about replicating 'how to nerf casters'. It's just the thing that made me wonder (I had nothing else to do this morning) ._.


15 : 3d6+4 : 4d6b3+2 : 4d6b3r1+1
14 : 3d6+3 : 4d6b3+1 : 4d6b3r1+0
13 : 3d6+2 : 4d6b3+0 : 4d6b3r1-1
12 : 3d6+1 : 4d6b3-1 : 4d6b3r1-2
10 : 3d6+0 : 4d6b3-2 : 4d6b3r1-3
08 : 3d6-2 : 4d6b3-3 : 4d6b3r1-4

Is it bad that I thought 4d6b3r1-4 meant reroll 1-4 when I looked at it?

EDIT: This was a stupid thread anyway, I recommend we all just drop it. :smallsigh:

[prufock]

Is it bad that I thought 4d6b3r1-4 meant reroll 1-4 when I looked at it?
Good lord. Haha 4d6b3r1-5 would be a pretty awesome stat spread then! No, it's a minus four.

[Mr. Zolrane]

I believe you when you say this wasn't "How to Nerf Casters Thread #4,562", but just based on the presence of the phrase "...the fairest (in principle) outcome..." led me to initially believe otherwise. I was all set with a generic, unhelpful comment about putting out a forest fire with a squirt gun or some such and everything. :smalltongue:

But seriously, after reading your follow-up responses I can understand your desire to see if there are other systems that will work. I personally, as a DM, run point-buy simply because it removes all possibility of complaining in the vein of "[Other player] is outperforming me because he rolled better." I cannot tell you how many times I've had to deal with that. With point-buy, your fate is in your own hand, and I wash my hands of it as the DM. A lot of my players, of course, gripe about point buy as well, and a system that stings a little less (what with having to dump things to get optimized stats and all) is worth looking into.

[navar100]

Whatever the issues of power discrepancy between spellcasters and warriors, the ability score array is not the cause or even a factor, with the exception of monks and to a lesser extent paladins, though not Pathfinder paladins. The ability score array does have an impact on classes, just not to the extent of Tier System concerns.

The monk, unfortunately, is heavily dependent on its array that it's always a factor in everything he does. If Point Buy is used, the monk needs a very high value many would find uncomfortable, even more than 32 points. If dice rolling is used, the player has to be really, really lucky.

[PaucaTerrorem]

My DM works on "The sum of your modifiers can't be over 10 and 18 as your highest stat before race". Allows for nice optimization.