Ability Score Selection

[P.F.]

In an attempt to strike a balance between the high variance of dice-rolling and the absurdities of player-selected point-buys, I intend to allow my players to select from the following arrays:

........Savant: 18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8

.........Gifted: 17, 17, 14, 12, 11, 10

...Exemplary: 16, 16, 16, 14, 12, 10

.......Perfect: 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15

.......Special: 17, 16, 15, 14, 10, 8, and character is "special"

Thoughts?

[Pex]

Are racial modifiers added in afterwards or not at all? It's not necessarily a problem with either answer, but the answer could influence player choice of array.

[Extra Anchovies]

What do you mean by "special"? Also, how high-powered is your game? These are some crazy point buys.

In D&D:
Savant: 33 point buy; that's a lot to pay for an 18. Maybe 18/16/14/12/12/8? That's a 40 PB.
Gifted: 41 point buy
Exemplary: 42 point buy
Perfect: 48 point buy; a high outlier, but changing it to 15/15/15/14/14/14 would make it 42 PB, in line with the rest
Special: 39 point buy

In Pathfinder:
Savant: 25 point buy; still a lot to pay for an 18. Maybe 18/16/15/12/10/8 for a 34 PB?
Gifted: 34 point buy
Exemplary: 37 point buy
Perfect: 42 point buy; 15/15/15/14/14/14 would make it 36, in line with the rest
Special: 33 point buy

[Andezzar]

What's so absurd about point-buy? While it does favor one or two high stats, at least all players get the same amount of resources to spend. As Extra Anchovies already calculated, the various choices differ greatly, no matter how you calculate their worth.

[HighWater]

In an attempt to strike a balance between the high variance of dice-rolling and the absurdities of player-selected point-buys, I intend to allow my players to select from the following arrays:

........Savant: 18, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8

.........Gifted: 17, 17, 14, 12, 11, 10

...Exemplary: 16, 16, 16, 14, 12, 10

.......Perfect: 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15

.......Special: 17, 16, 15, 14, 10, 8, and character is "special"

Thoughts?
All these arrays are flat-out better (and massively so) than the expected average when rolling the most common 4d6b3 (the Elite array, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).

Expect some pretty powerful PCs, especially early on!

Don't mind a direct comparison to point buy. Although the "perfect" array is clearly the highest pointbuy, it will likely be passed up for other arrays by any but the most MAD character.

[Malak'ai]

All these arrays are flat-out better (and massively so) than the expected average when rolling the most common 4d6b3 (the Elite array, 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).

Expect some pretty powerful PCs, especially early on!

Don't mind a direct comparison to point buy. Although the "perfect" array is clearly the highest pointbuy, it will likely be passed up for other arrays by any but the most MAD character.

I wouldn't take the "Perfect" array for a MAD class. I'd take the "Exemplary"... Three +3's, a +2 and a +1 would allow you to create almost any character.

[nedz]

Some of my best characters, using rolled stats, have had 6's.

Characters are defined by their weaknesses as much as by their strengths, well apart from Mary Sues.

[Extra Anchovies]

I wouldn't take the "Perfect" array for a MAD class. I'd take the "Exemplary"... Three +3's, a +2 and a +1 would allow you to create almost any character.

Indeed. I would select Gifted or Exemplary, depending on whether the class needed two ability scores or three.

[atemu1234]

This gives me flashbacks to when I told a player we were using 36 point-buy, and he plops a character down who, without racial modifiers, required 52 points. One of the most tedious conversations I've ever had when he tried to pass that off as anything else.

[Andezzar]

What character requires 52 points? That's four 16s and two 14s for example.

[weckar]

Psh, perfect? If I got that many odd numbers in an ability rollup, I'd hand in my dice.

[Telonius]

The "Perfect" array is practically begging to advance an age category.

[HighWater]

I wouldn't take the "Perfect" array for a MAD class. I'd take the "Exemplary"... Three +3's, a +2 and a +1 would allow you to create almost any character.


Indeed. I would select Gifted or Exemplary, depending on whether the class needed two ability scores or three.

I said "any but the most MAD character" as in "needs all 6 stats to be high for some reason". Also, my point was that eventhough the "Perfect" stat represents the highest point buy, it doesn't require nerfing when compared to the rest because it's almost always (or really just always) the suboptimal choice. I thank you two for making my point though. :smallbiggrin:

[nedz]

I said "any but the most MAD character" as in "needs all 6 stats to be high for some reason". Also, my point was that even though the "Perfect" stat represents the highest point buy, it doesn't require nerfing when compared to the rest because it's almost always (or really just always) the suboptimal choice. I thank you two for making my point though. :smallbiggrin:

So Perfect = Monk then ?

Not often you see that !

[Andezzar]

Perfect is a misnomer. Six 18s would be perfect. Jack of all trades and master of none would be more fitting.

[Flickerdart]

So Perfect = Monk then ?

Not often you see that !
Monk would be much better off with Exemplary (16s in WIS, STR, and CON, 14 in DEX, 12 in INT, 10 in CHA).

[P.F.]

Are racial modifiers added in afterwards or not at all?
Added after.

What do you mean by "special"? Also, how high-powered is your game?
By "special" I mean obviously deficient in the relevant ability score, noticeable by physiognomy, posture/body language, or something. While a commoner with an 8 strength might just be a bit weak, and an adventurer with the "savant" array might appear slim, the "special" character would have an obvious handicap.

Also, I am expecting characters to be a bit better than "average," compared to the "4d6 / reroll 1's / drop lowest / assign as desired" system we normally use.

What's so absurd about point-buy?
Nothing, in and of itself. It's the way my players (alright, some of my players) use the point-buy that is absurd. Furthermore, while I don't mind characters with disadvantages, I personally despise characters with a "dump stat."

Basically I want to shift the trade-off from one of "how do I allocate these points to optimize my character" to one of, "do I want that 18 badly enough to have these five other stats, or can I make do with two 17's or three 16's." I just don't think the point buy comparisons are strictly as balanced as they first appear, as evidenced by the broad rejection of the all-15's array.

The "Perfect" array is practically begging to advance an age category.
Hmmm.... That does seem an obvious weakness in my otherwise carefully balanced scheme. For that matter, two others, if age-advanced, would be substantially better than the next-highest array, albeit only for those interested primarily in mental ability scores.

So is there a class or character type that would benefit from the Savant array? What would it take to make the "one 18" at least as appealing as the "two 17's" array?

[Jeff the Green]

It's the way my players (alright, some of my players) use the point-buy that is absurd. Furthermore, while I don't mind characters with disadvantages, I personally despise characters with a "dump stat."

That's silly. People in real life have dump stats (I have four), characters in books have dump stats, characters in movies have dump stats, characters in plays have dump stats. All a dump stat means is that you're bad at something and so you don't do things that require that. Like how I haven't sunk much effort into learning to dance because with my natural Dexterity it would take a lot of work to just be mediocre.

[jjcrpntr]

Some of my best characters, using rolled stats, have had 6's.

Characters are defined by their weaknesses as much as by their strengths, well apart from Mary Sues.

Tell that to my buddy. He plays in the pathfinder game I run. If he rolls a stat that is less than 12 he throws a fit wanting to reroll it. Once I was nice and just said fine make it a 12 and he started bitching because a +1 mod is crap.

Personally I agree with you. While I like my character powerful I like having some kind of statistical weakness.

[Andezzar]

That's silly. People in real life have dump stats (I have four), characters in books have dump stats, characters in movies have dump stats, characters in plays have dump stats. All a dump stat means is that you're bad at something and so you don't do things that require that. Like how I haven't sunk much effort into learning to dance because with my natural Dexterity it would take a lot of work to just be mediocre.Also the minimum in point buy is 8 before racial modifiers. That is only one step below average.

[Pex]

Added after.


Then personally I'd go with Gifted or Exemplary depending on whether the class needs three stats or two and my mood at the time, though I lean towards Exemplary.

Perfect is boring. Special is "better" than Savant taking racial modifiers into consideration. Both give an 18 with Special having better non-prime scores. 8 goes into the dump stat. If you allow racial modifiers to have Savant's 18 go to 20 that will entice some players of non-MAD classes.

The Point Buy value is irrelevant. The value alone doesn't signify anything about the funness or function of the game, except maybe the party can handle a higher CR than normal. However, it would be better if everyone was given the same array. Exemplary looks more well rounded to me.

[SowZ]

What's the issue with Point Buy? There's enough variety here already that you may as well just do PB. You can limit it to one or two 8s if you dislike dump stats, and max of one stat above 16 if you dislike characters with multiple 18s.

[Extra Anchovies]

Regarding the Perfect array: Middle-aged Perfect (16/16/16/14/14/14) is objectively better than the Exemplary array.

[P.F.]

That's silly. People in real life have dump stats (I have four), characters in books have dump stats, characters in movies have dump stats, characters in plays have dump stats. All a dump stat means is that you're bad at something and so you don't do things that require that. Like how I haven't sunk much effort into learning to dance because with my natural Dexterity it would take a lot of work to just be mediocre.

I make a distinction between a dump stat and being bad at something. Bad at something is what we in real life have to deal with, and that goes to an extent for characters in fiction as well. But a dump stat is a game mechanic manipulation. You are not stronger or wiser or whatever for being clumsy; a DnD character is. And fully half the population has 10 or less Con, yet somehow it's never anyone's "dump stat" unless he or she is undead.

Just because a character doesn't dazzle anyone with their intelligence doesn't mean they have to have an 8 or less in the stat. A character whose lowest score is a 12 might consider herself "bad at" things involving that ability, and she would be, compared to her obvious talents in other areas and probably compared to other party members as well. The fact that she isn't worse at it than a random untrained joe off the street doesn't make it any less of a weakness (for her).

So I'm alleviating the desire to have penalties to some ability scores for the purpose of making other numbers higher. If your 10 charisma or 11 strength is your "dump stat" so be it. But I'm more interested in where a character lies on the spectrum between the perfect renaissance man and the so-good-at-that-it's-scary savant, than in where you feel inclined to take a dump. At least for ability score generation.

[Andezzar]

I make a distinction between a dump stat and being bad at something. Bad at something is what we in real life have to deal with, and that goes to an extent for characters in fiction as well. But a dump stat is a game mechanic manipulation. You are not stronger or wiser or whatever for being clumsy; a DnD character is. And fully half the population has 10 or less Con, yet somehow it's never anyone's "dump stat" unless he or she is undead.You are looking at it in a weird way. A character is not getting stronger for having a dump stat, he is just using the available resources in a certain way. He does not improve one or more stats with those resources.
Also PCs are already special snowflakes. It does not matter much that none of them (excluding undead) have CON 8. All the characters with bad CON probably just didn't become adventurers or died early.


Just because a character doesn't dazzle anyone with their intelligence doesn't mean they have to have an 8 or less in the stat. A character whose lowest score is a 12 might consider herself "bad at" things involving that ability, and she would be, compared to her obvious talents in other areas and probably compared to other party members as well. The fact that she isn't worse at it than a random untrained joe off the street doesn't make it any less of a weakness (for her).What is so much different if the lowest ability score is 8 instead of 10, that it vexes you? It cannot be the -1 to skill checks. Also average means that some people are worse than the average. Why shouldn't that be possible for PCs?

[Jeff the Green]

I make a distinction between a dump stat and being bad at something. Bad at something is what we in real life have to deal with, and that goes to an extent for characters in fiction as well. But a dump stat is a game mechanic manipulation. You are not stronger or wiser or whatever for being clumsy; a DnD character is. And fully half the population has 10 or less Con, yet somehow it's never anyone's "dump stat" unless he or she is undead.

...you really think that if someone can't take a punch, exercise for prolonged periods of time, or survive diseases and poisons as well as the average person, they're likely to become an adventurer?

Also, you can't avoid a character having an increased Intelligence or whatever for a decreased Dexterity unless you either use a flat array or you roll. With arrays all you're doing is dictating ahead of time how much you can/have to do that.


Just because a character doesn't dazzle anyone with their intelligence doesn't mean they have to have an 8 or less in the stat. A character whose lowest score is a 12 might consider herself "bad at" things involving that ability, and she would be, compared to her obvious talents in other areas and probably compared to other party members as well. The fact that she isn't worse at it than a random untrained joe off the street doesn't make it any less of a weakness (for her).

Yes it does. If I have an IQ of 110 (the equivalent of Int 12) and I think I'm stupid I have self esteem problems. It might not be my strongest point, but it is not a weakness. Not being allowed to bring a stat below 10 eliminates the possibility of creating a character that actually has a stat that is below average. The person with Strength 12 who bemoans that she's weak and the person with Strength 8 are different characters with different roleplay possibilities.

[P.F.]

What's the issue with Point Buy? There's enough variety here already that you may as well just do PB. You can limit it to one or two 8s if you dislike dump stats, and max of one stat above 16 if you dislike characters with multiple 18s.

The last time our group started a new campaign (in which I am a PC) the number-crunchies worked their magic and came up with what they considered the two "best" arrays, and in the end everyone used one or the other, plus racial modifiers. Even I ended up using the less dumpy of the two.

Notice how the vastly higher point-buy value of all 15's doesn't seem to be appealing to anyone, if there's the possibility of having some score(s) higher than a 15. So in this regard, point-buy is clearly missing something.


Special is "better" than Savant taking racial modifiers into consideration.
Yes, but your character will be "special." And that assumes the racial bonus is applied to the second-best attribute, which I have to expect a Savant will apply the bonus to her top score, making it a 20.


Regarding the Perfect array: Middle-aged Perfect (16/16/16/14/14/14) is objectively better than the Exemplary array.
Yes, Telonius noticed that too. Does it make a difference that those 16's would have to be Int, Wis, and Cha? Who would use that? A cleric maybe? Would you rather have a 16 Int and all 14's in physical stats, or be able to put that 16 in Con, the 12 in Str, and the 10 in Int?

I don't really expect any of my players to choose Perfect array, I included it as a baseline/reference. What would it take to make someone want to choose Savant over Gifted or Exemplary?

[Extra Anchovies]

What would it take to make someone want to choose Savant over Gifted or Exemplary?

See my suggestions in this post. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18433615&postcount=3)

[SowZ]

The last time our group started a new campaign (in which I am a PC) the number-crunchies worked their magic and came up with what they considered the two "best" arrays, and in the end everyone used one or the other, plus racial modifiers. Even I ended up using the less dumpy of the two.

Notice how the vastly higher point-buy value of all 15's doesn't seem to be appealing to anyone, if there's the possibility of having some score(s) higher than a 15. So in this regard, point-buy is clearly missing something.

That has very little to do with the weaknesses in Point Buy, and everything to do with the fact that in D&D only even stats matter. Before level bonus, 15s across the board is no different than 14 across the part. Notice how people did think that array was really good for someone willing to go middle-aged. 16, 16, 16, 14, 14, 14 is very juicy, and vastly superior to any array I could make with a 28 Point Buy. The only possible advantage to a Point Buy is if you want an 18. What am I going to do, 18, 14, 12, 10, 8, 8? Forget about it.

[P.F.]

16, 16, 16, 14, 14, 14 is very juicy, and vastly superior to any array I could make with a 28 Point Buy.

Would you choose Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 16, Cha 16 (45 points)?

Or would you rather use 16, 16, 16, 14, 12, 10 (37 points) arranged to suit?

For which classes?

[Andezzar]

For a caster (especially a cleric) I would prefer the first, but for a mundane the second. FYI both are beyond what is suggested in point buy for a high powered campaign (32 points, DMG p. 169).

[atemu1234]

For a caster (especially a cleric) I would prefer the first, but for a mundane the second. FYI both are beyond what is suggested in point buy for a high powered campaign (32 points, DMG p. 169).

Really? I always play 36 point buy. It stops characters from feeling sucky.

[weckar]

I like low point buys, myself. Overspecialization SHOULD be crippling in other regards.

[Flickerdart]

I like low point buys, myself. Overspecialization SHOULD be crippling in other regards.
Overspecialization is the way to win - a Wizard only needs Intelligence, pretty much. All low tier characters need more ability scores (sometimes 5 or even all 6) to contribute.

[weckar]

Agreed, but that same Wizard then should not be able to afford a high CON and DEX as well. Getting through the lower levels should be tougher: A Wizard earns his power that way.

[Amphetryon]

Agreed, but that same Wizard then should not be able to afford a high CON and DEX as well. Getting through the lower levels should be tougher: A Wizard earns his power that way.

So how does a Character that's MAD earn his power?

[Nightcanon]

The last time our group started a new campaign (in which I am a PC) the number-crunchies worked their magic and came up with what they considered the two "best" arrays, and in the end everyone used one or the other, plus racial modifiers. Even I ended up using the less dumpy of the two.

Notice how the vastly higher point-buy value of all 15's doesn't seem to be appealing to anyone, if there's the possibility of having some score(s) higher than a 15. So in this regard, point-buy is clearly missing something.


That's on odd way of putting it. I'd have said that point buy is offering something that people clearly want: the option to have their characters be standout amazing at one or perhaps two things, rather than be solidly above average at everything. Players accustomed to high scores may thimk of their 12STR wizard as a weakling or their 12WIS fighter as foolish, but it won't make a whole lot of difference in play. It's cool that you aren't strong as the fighter or wise as the druid, because if it come down to it, they are the ones who do the heavy lifting and pondering deeply.

[SowZ]

Would you choose Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 16, Cha 16 (45 points)?

Or would you rather use 16, 16, 16, 14, 12, 10 (37 points) arranged to suit?

For which classes?

For any full caster I'd take the former. Either way, a 28 Point Buy could never compete with these arrays no matter how big of munchkins they are. This proposal is a straight upgrade from Point Buy, so I still don't understand the dislike of Point Buy.

[Extra Anchovies]

A non-TWF Bard would be very happy with 14/14/14/16/16/16, especially if they have a skillmonkey focus.

[ZamielVanWeber]

I said "any but the most MAD character" as in "needs all 6 stats to be high for some reason". Also, my point was that eventhough the "Perfect" stat represents the highest point buy, it doesn't require nerfing when compared to the rest because it's almost always (or really just always) the suboptimal choice. I thank you two for making my point though. :smallbiggrin:

The perfect array is decent, although a bit on the low side, for a 3.0 psion. It is workable with items thankfully.

And yea, gifted and exemplary are kind borked arrays. Great on pretty much anything that requires numbers.

[P.F.]

That's on odd way of putting it. I'd have said that point buy is offering something that people clearly want: the option to have their characters be standout amazing at one or perhaps two things, rather than be solidly above average at everything.

That's interesting, because I think that's exactly what the point-buy fails to offer: the option for their character to be solidly above-average at everything. The point-buy offers only the choice between being great at one or two things while being absolutely terrible at one or two things (dump-statting), or being marginally okay at a few things and not sucking horribly at the rest.

What I have offered my players is basically the same as creating my own different set of point-buy values, in which 18's are more expensive, 15's are cheaper, and there's no bonus points for having scores below 10. After all, if taking an 8 in one stat didn't give you points to spend elsewhere, would you do it?

The difference is, if I choose the available arrays beforehand, it's easier for me to balance and faster for the players to pick. They get variety, I get consistency. Based on the feedback from folks here, I am going to make the Savant array slightly better, perhaps 18/14/13/12/10/8, perhaps even remove the 8 altogether.

[weckar]

So how does a Character that's MAD earn his power?

[Insert Barbarian Rage pun here]