Point Buy

[riddles]

we generally use point buy when creating our characters. One player in the group insists on maintaining balance for a well rounded character

i.e. no one attribute will be over 14 or under 10. he argues that this gives the most balanced character and you don't get caught out in certain situations with a dump stat (say, having no skills, for instance)

now while i agree with him in principle, for a class like cleric, surely it is better to up your wisdom to 16 early on?

[its_all_ogre]

yes it is.
the rounded character idea is a nice one, but does not apply in dnd imo.
if you have a cha of 12/14 as a fighter then it is largely wasted as none of your skills tie into it. most skill checks scale with level so by level 5 you'll be unable to pass any worthy checks anyway.
i like the idea, but not so much for dnd, depending on dm.:smallwink:

[Nebo_]

Your friend is a fool. He should invest into his class's main stat; D&D isn't about having a well rounded character, you're supposed to specialise. A caster with a 14 in their main stat is utterly gimped.

[Charity]

Surely the whole point of dumpstats is that the character really doesn't need them.
What he says is fine from a preference perspective, whatever floats yer boat, but if he's trying to tell you it's mechanically superior I fear he is sorely mistaken.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Any primary spellcaster requires at least a 15 in his spellcasting stat in order to get 9th level spells. It is generally accepted that a 16 or 18 in the casting stat and a 14 con is worth all 8s in the other stats.
For non-casters, 2 or 3 stats have no influence on class features, and should be dumped. Rogues are the only class that can get away with "all-around" stats, other classes suffer too much from generalizing. Compare a fighter, started with 16 str, 16 con, 14 dex, to a fighter that started with 14 str, 14 con, 14 dex, 12 int, 10 wis, 10 cha. He traded 1 ab, 1 damage, +1 to fort saves and 1 hp/level for 2 skillpoints/level, a couple of skill mods, and +1 to will saves. Which is the better fighter?

[Theli]

I have to agree with him somewhat.

That every player plays a character with stats perfect for the role they've chosen has got to be one of the most ridiculous parts of pointbuy.

But then, I can see the whole issue of not wanting to be gimped in that chosen role as well. Still, the game is fully playable with those stats. (And in fact it could actually be considered better designed for it than most stat selection methods I see used online. 28 pointbuy gives you better stats than the average of 4d6b3, arrange as desired. And people tend to use even higher.)

And I disagree that a caster with 14 in their main stat is useless. There are rules in place that allows them to manage. And considering that casters are considered generally more powerful than non-casters anyway, I fail to see a problem with reducing their effectiveness by some degree.

[Nebo_]

And I disagree that a caster with 14 in their main stat is useless.


I didn't say useless, I said Gimped. Have you seen how low save DCs are compared to saves? Caster's DCs need all the help they can get.

[NamelessArchon]

And considering that casters are considered generally more powerful than non-casters anyway, I fail to see a problem with reducing their effectiveness by some degree.Well, all right, but aren't you forgetting something?


i.e. no one attribute will be over 14 or under 10. he argues that this gives the most balanced character and you don't get caught out in certain situations with a dump stat (say, having no skills, for instance)Which means that your fighter has a STR and CON of no more than 14, your rogue and ranger have a DEX no higher than 14... If you feel that casters are overpowered, limiting people across the board is not a good way to restore parity.

Specialization is not always a bad thing - 3.0 has been generally built with some level of this in mind.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

In a long-term, low magic campaign, a caster with a 14 cannot cast their highest spells. They are delayed on level 8 spells, and level 9 spells are never a possibility.

[Leewei]

Concepts with average stats are not optimal. The design philosophy used by the OP's friend was put into play to address worst case scenarios. It doesn't do a reasonable job of that, however. Any build created with this approach would have +0 to +2 from ability scores to skill and ability checks. An optimal build will have -1 or 0 to most skill and ability checks, and a +4 or +5 to the ability that they use constantly.

In the worst case scenario, the optimal build is down roughly 2 points on the check. In the most frequent scenario, the optimal build is up 2 points. The difference here is that the worst case rolls can typically be mitigated or avoided altogether by teamwork and player creativity. The most frequent scenario is where the character's bread and butter are. If you can't at least reliably perform your primary role, what use are you?

One last note: I disagree with the 15 minimum; 13 is usually okay to hit the spell requirements with the help of the appropriate stat booster item. This is beside the point, however. Starting with the highest stat possible allows a PC access to more spells and also drives up the DC of the spells' saves. An ability of 18 (or higher if permitted) is always the best way to go for a caster.

[Theli]

Well, all right, but aren't you forgetting something?

Which means that your fighter has a STR and CON of no more than 14, your rogue and ranger have a DEX no higher than 14... If you feel that casters are overpowered, limiting people across the board is not a good way to restore parity.

People have argued that the limited stat affects casters more. And I'd tend to agree with that.

[Theli]

I didn't say useless, I said Gimped. Have you seen how low save DCs are compared to saves? Caster's DCs need all the help they can get.

*shrugs* Sure. But casters also have the capability, in many cases, to get things that don't necessarily need saves.

And then there's always the "buffing up the other party member" option, which would probably be appreciated even more with this limitation.

I think a caster can deal with low save DCs, if they really have to.

[Theli]

Concepts with average stats are not optimal. The design philosophy used by the OP's friend was put into play to address worst case scenarios. It doesn't do a reasonable job of that, however. Any build created with this approach would have +0 to +2 from ability scores to skill and ability checks. An optimal build will have -1 or 0 to most skill and ability checks, and a +4 or +5 to the ability that they use constantly.

Assuming classes based on SAD. Now MAD classes on the other hand...

*shrugs*

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Assuming classes based on SAD. Now MAD classes on the other hand...

*shrugs*Even those generally only have 4 required stats. Dex, con, and 2 of int, cha, or str for rogues; con, str, wis, and cha for paladins; the only class that generally has 6 good stats is the Gonk, and everyone knows how those play. :smallbiggrin:

[Nebo_]

In a long-term, low magic campaign, a caster with a 14 cannot cast their highest spells. They are delayed on level 8 spells, and level 9 spells are never a possibility.

In a game with no magic items, maybe; but how many of those have you played? By the time you can cast 9th level spells, you should have a +6 booster.

[Charity]

Theli using stat caps to limit caster power is not what the original poster said. He spoke of a player making this decision for his (and presumably only his) character. Doing that in an average party will make your character less powerful than his peers, if thats how you want to play then fine, but to suggest it is an overall advantage to the character, as he has is plain daft.
(particularly as it can be used to deliberately cap a full spellcaster's power (given an unavailability of stat increasing gear))

[kamikasei]

In a long-term, low magic campaign, a caster with a 14 cannot cast their highest spells. They are delayed on level 8 spells, and level 9 spells are never a possibility.

Er, don't you get five stat increases? Isn't 14+5=19? Granted that leaves you waiting until 20th level to cast your 9th-level spells, but still. And as Nebo points out, it would have be quite a low-magic campaign for you to be without a +2 headband of intellect or other minimum-power booster for the appropriate stat by the time you hit 15th level (which is the earliest that your low stat will actually deny you spells).

[Theli]

I interpreted it as a general guideline for characters:

i.e. no one attribute will be over 14 or under 10. he argues that this gives the most balanced character and you don't get caught out in certain situations with a dump stat (say, having no skills, for instance)

I'm probably wrong, but the entire post is poorly worded if so.

Well, if that's the case and he's actually suggesting it for a cleric character of his, then of course... Once a caster has a high casting stat then the rest is just a bonus.

Would be nice to receive clarification from the OP.

[Saph]

Everyone seems to have missed a key line in the opening post: his example class was a cleric.

Clerics DO do well with a balanced stat array, because they're so versatile.

• They need Strength to fight in melee - dumping Str is a total waste of their huge combat power.
• Since they're going to be in melee so often, they'd prefer a Dex at least 12 if possible.
• Con has to be high, for obvious reasons. Can't dump this.
• Wis is their primary casting stat. Can't dump this either.
• Int powers their skills, which they're limited without - a Cleric really wants Spellcraft, Concentration, and Knowledge (Religion). Diplomacy would be nice, too.
• And Charisma powers their Turn Undead, which they can do all kinds of cool things with.

And the "You can't cast 9th-level spells without a starting 15" argument is ridiculous. How many 17th-level characters do you know who don't have at least one ability-boosting item?

Assuming point buy 28, a cleric with:

Strength 14
Dexterity 12
Constitution 14
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 14
Charisma 12

is just fine. You don't care about Save DCs because your most useful spells (Divine Favour, Divine Power, Cures, Lesser Restoration, Neutralise Poison, Restoration, Dispel Magic, Righteous Might) don't use Save DCs anyway.

Balanced stat arrays are a perfectly good choice - for some classes.

- Saph

[Charity]

we generally use point buy when creating our characters. One player in the group insists on maintaining balance for a well rounded character

i.e. no one attribute will be over 14 or under 10. he argues that this gives the most balanced character and you don't get caught out in certain situations with a dump stat (say, having no skills, for instance)

now while i agree with him in principle, for a class like cleric, surely it is better to up your wisdom to 16 early on?

My emphasis, I think it is reasonably clear in fairness. It does sound like the sort of thing a DM might impose, but that is no way implied by the above.

Though as a power limiter it could work quite effectively i suppose, if stat boosting items are unavailable, though it would suck being a penultimate level caster.

Edit-

Is that how you build your clerics Saph? *Is sceptical* anyhow the friend is talking generally the OP uses the cleric as an example, and now you've proved it was a poor choice :smallwink:

[riddles]

theli is right in that, for every character this player makes (generally 25 point build), he keeps his stats rounded in this way.

so his barbarian 1/druid X and his paladin in our latest games utilise this rule.

my example of a cleric was just to highlight that the cleric has a definate primary stat above all others (regardless of versitility, wisdom is the key for a cleric) and i'm not sure the cleric will be optimal with this sort of build.

i see saph's point when it comes to DCs, but if a cleric wants to throw down the hurt with a spell or need for it to go off (hold person, cause wounds etc.), it will need the extra wisdom. on the other hand, starting with wis16 gives you a bonus level 3 spell as soon as you can cast them, whereas starting with wis14 means you are waiting til level 8 at the least.

[Dan_Hemmens]

Specialization is always better than generalization in party-based RPGs. The game is predicated on the assumption that there are only a limited number of things you need to do, and that one member of the party will be good at any given one of them.

A statline of all 12s-14s sounds good, because you don't have any weaknesses, and you wind up with more plusses in total than a specialist, but nine times out of ten you only *need* one party member with a particular ability. If the party Rogue with Dex 18 and max ranks in open lock can't get past a particular door, the "well rounded" guy has no chance.

Has this guy played with the sort of DM who interprets any stat below 12 as "min-maxing" and starts to arbitrarily hose you for it? The way some guys on the WotC boards talk about it, it's like a stat of 8 is treated as open season on the poor schmuck who takes it, if he's been in games like that it might explain a lot.

[riddles]

Everyone seems to have missed a key line in the opening post: his example class was a cleric.

Assuming point buy 28, a cleric with:

Strength 14
Dexterity 12
Constitution 14
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 14
Charisma 12


I would still be tempted to trade 2 points of strength for 1 more point of wisdom, allowing the bonus 3rd level spell. alternatively, drop 2 points of charisma for the same bonus for a melee orientated cleric and take divine feats.

oh, and the DM is a notorious min/maxer himself, which has tended to leave glaring holes in his characters, that have been exploited by other DMs, which i guess is why we lean towards more balanced/rounded/less specialised guys.

[CASTLEMIKE]

I like using the default array under 28 - 32 point as a nice compromise. Basically the PC gets a base 16 or 17 as an option before any racial and or template modifications.

[SoD]

I never use point buy if I can get away with it. True, sometimes the risk doesn't pay off, but sometimes it does. I don't roll for stats because they're better, or worse, or more balanced, or more unbalanced, but because I find it more fun rolling dice than doing the maths. Personally, today my dice rolling really paid off. I made 2 characters, one for me, one for a mate of mine. My stats: 18, 16, 18, 13, 13, 15. The ones I rolled for him: 17, 17, 12, 12, 14, 16. There's no way you can acheive this with point buy.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

There's also no way you can end up with 2 stats around 5 and most less than 10 with a DM who says you've already used your one re-roll. Point-buy is much more fun for me because it avoids the whole "screw you over" possibility.

[Theli]

There are rules by RAW that allow players to reroll if their stats are too low. (There are two different metrics it uses to make this determination I believe.) And it's not a single reroll either. Although, the minimum limits may not be to everybody's taste.

I believe they're listed in the DMG.

[SoD]

Players Handbook actually (although there is stuff in DMG as well).



REROLLING
If your scores are too low, you may scrap them all and roll all six scores again. Your scores are considered too low if the sum of your modifiers (before adjustments because of race) is 0 or lower, or if your highest score is 13 or lower.

[Telonius]

There's also no way you can end up with 2 stats around 5 and most less than 10 with a DM who says you've already used your one re-roll. Point-buy is much more fun for me because it avoids the whole "screw you over" possibility.

The whole thing is a matter of personal preference. Personally I prefer rolling because it includes the whole "screw you over" possibility.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

It wasn't DnD, and I've generally had better experiences with rolling, but I spent 3 months with this guy. 3d6, roll in order, with a 4d6 drop 1 floating stat. 9 stats, after the floater, I had 1 stat above 10. My int was 5. I had to role-play him until he could be retired. I try to get point-buy now, just because rolling has so many bad memories.

[Exeson]

Sorry to endanger some catgirls but.

Look at life, very few people are perfectly well rounded like that. The reason why we do the job we do, or play the sport we play, or do the hobby we do is because we enjoy it and we also specialize in it. e.g. If you work well with number you would naturally be drawn towards, say, accounting. But if you had no skill with numbers but found you could out-run everyone you know you will probably be drawn towards running.

The same is true for D&D. Remember, technically stats are taken before classes are. Therefore, from an entirely flavor point of view (mechanical view has been discussed), it makes sense for the person with 16 INT but 8 STR to go for a wizard over a fighter.

[Saph]

Is that how you build your clerics Saph? *Is sceptical*

It's hard to choose. You'd like a higher Wisdom, of course, but you really are giving up good stuff in exchange. I'd maybe put the Wisdom to 15-16, but it's more for bonus spells than anything else - save DCs are all but irrelevant for a cleric, since nearly all their best spells are either support or buffs.

In my experience the only two core classes that can get away with over-boosting their primary stat at the expense of everything else are wizards and sorcerers. And even then, a higher Dex and Con will in practice often help them more than an extra +1 to their save DCs.

- Saph

[riddles]

i've been in d20 games where some people have rolled below average and some have rolled way above. the high rolling guy was very much a "win button" and with the DM coming up with fights to challenge him, the rest of the party got left by the wayside. it's not a good feeling.

[Charity]

It's hard to choose. You'd like a higher Wisdom, of course, but you really are giving up good stuff in exchange. I'd maybe put the Wisdom to 15-16, but it's more for bonus spells than anything else - save DCs are all but irrelevant for a cleric, since nearly all their best spells are either support or buffs.

In my experience the only two core classes that can get away with over-boosting their primary stat at the expense of everything else are wizards and sorcerers. And even then, a higher Dex and Con will in practice often help them more than an extra +1 to their save DCs.

- Saph

Fair enough, I agree that it's the spell slots that are golden for clerics, (wizards too in my book, though they do need the high DC's more) you have to admit though; it is daft to try to be a jack of all trades in D&D generally.

I make all my players roll stats, but I'm not an arse about re-rolls why make a player play a character they're not happy with? I dislike the cookie cutter characters that point buy encourages... perhaps I ought not start up that old chestnut.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm beginning to like the grid system (http://invisiblecastle.com/stats/help/grid/) more and more.

[Leewei]

Assuming point buy 28, a cleric with:

Strength 14
Dexterity 12
Constitution 14
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 14
Charisma 12

is just fine. You don't care about Save DCs because your most useful spells (Divine Favour, Divine Power, Cures, Lesser Restoration, Neutralise Poison, Restoration, Dispel Magic, Righteous Might) don't use Save DCs anyway.

This stat array is quite suboptimal. Strength and Dexterity do very little for the character when compared to a better starting Wisdom. It's true that the character's immediate impact in a low level game would be better with several low-end encounters, however after a few levels, higher Wisdom stat wins out. Consider the following stat array:

Strength 8
Dexterity 10
Constitution 12
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 18
Charisma 10

The character benefits from bonus 3rd, 4th and (due to 4th & 8th level stat increases) 5th level spells, making it immediately more effective at levels 5, 7 and 9 by comparison. The net loss of 3 from attack and damage rolls, as well as the loss of 1 AC and Initiative stings a bit, but washes out quite nicely by those latter levels. The capability to cast both prayer and magic circle against evil at 5th level rather than being limited to one of these is enough to make up the difference. Afterwards, the balance shifts even more towards the optimized Wisdom build.

Leave the meleeing to the grunts. Buffing and healing are cleric strong suits and a far worthier point of optimization. Spell DCs are still important to Clerics, but even so, access to more (especially high-end) spells really makes a difference when optimizing towards one stat.

I'll admit that building all Clerics as Wisdom weenies doesn't appeal to my sense of aesthetics, but as far as I can tell from the OP, we're talking about effectiveness here, not aesthetics.

[Voyager_I]

Um...you just completely sucked the life out of that character to give it a mild increase in one of its important statistics.

It'll enjoy having a high Wis, certainly, but you just traded 10 points for 4. Bumping it to 16 I could understand (and I generally do), but sacrificing everything for an 18 in a class that isn't SAD isn't a good idea.

Also, Clerics are perfectly capable of fighting. More so than the Fighter, in fact. You want that Strength score plenty.

[FirstAdam]

Preach it, Charity! Roll until you get something that can be fun to play! (that the DM also thinks would be fun to play)

[Deepblue706]

This stat array is quite suboptimal. Strength and Dexterity do very little for the character when compared to a better starting Wisdom. It's true that the character's immediate impact in a low level game would be better with several low-end encounters, however after a few levels, higher Wisdom stat wins out. Consider the following stat array:

Strength 8
Dexterity 10
Constitution 12
Intelligence 10
Wisdom 18
Charisma 10

The character benefits from bonus 3rd, 4th and (due to 4th & 8th level stat increases) 5th level spells, making it immediately more effective at levels 5, 7 and 9 by comparison. The net loss of 3 from attack and damage rolls, as well as the loss of 1 AC and Initiative stings a bit, but washes out quite nicely by those latter levels. The capability to cast both prayer and magic circle against evil at 5th level rather than being limited to one of these is enough to make up the difference. Afterwards, the balance shifts even more towards the optimized Wisdom build.

Leave the meleeing to the grunts. Buffing and healing are cleric strong suits and a far worthier point of optimization. Spell DCs are still important to Clerics, but even so, access to more (especially high-end) spells really makes a difference when optimizing towards one stat.

I'll admit that building all Clerics as Wisdom weenies doesn't appeal to my sense of aesthetics, but as far as I can tell from the OP, we're talking about effectiveness here, not aesthetics.

Gee, why not just dump INT then, too? In fact, dump CHA as well, put those four points into physical stats, and then make your character old, to get 20 WIS. Sure, you might have 7 STR, 8 DEX, and 10 CON, but you can just take Improved Toughness to get bonus HPs to compensate, and your INT and CHA automatically hit 10 again anyway.

[Saph]

This stat array is quite suboptimal. Strength and Dexterity do very little for the character when compared to a better starting Wisdom.

Uh, Strength and Dexterity help you fight in melee. Which is the main way a cleric is going to take out enemies from levels 1-10. What exactly is your cleric going to do in battles at, say, levels 5-6? You don't have enough HP to survive many hits. Your melee attack sucks. Your ranged attack also sucks. What are you going to do, stand behind the fighters casting heals on them? Better hope you don't face many encounters that day . . .


Leave the meleeing to the grunts. Buffing and healing are cleric strong suits and a far worthier point of optimization.

Why do one when you can do both? A Wisdom 16, Strength 14 cleric is far more effective in melee than a Wisdom 18, Strength 8 cleric, and gets only one less spell in exchange.

I don't know where you're getting this idea that clerics must be support casters only. They're one of the best melee classes in the game. You can choose to ignore this potential (as your build does) but it's certainly not 'optimal' unless you're using a very limited definition of the word.

- Saph

[Kesnit]

Compare a fighter, started with 16 str, 16 con, 14 dex, to a fighter that started with 14 str, 14 con, 14 dex, 12 int, 10 wis, 10 cha. He traded 1 ab, 1 damage, +1 to fort saves and 1 hp/level for 2 skillpoints/level, a couple of skill mods, and +1 to will saves. Which is the better fighter?

On the other hand, Will saves are poor for a Fighter. Having +1 to Will can sometimes make a difference between attacking the enemy mage, or becoming Dominated and attacking your teammates.

Also, Fighters have a very small number of skill points. If you are going for a PrC that has a skill point requirement, having 1 extra skill point per level can get you that PrC faster.

[Nebo_]

Leave the meleeing to the grunts. Buffing and healing are cleric strong suits and a far worthier point of optimization. Spell DCs are still important to Clerics, but even so, access to more (especially high-end) spells really makes a difference when optimizing towards one stat.

I'll admit that building all Clerics as Wisdom weenies doesn't appeal to my sense of aesthetics, but as far as I can tell from the OP, we're talking about effectiveness here, not aesthetics.

Looks like someone hasn't heard of CoDzilla. Saph is completely right, more strength at the cost of some wisdom is an excellent trade off for a cleric.

[CrowSpawn]

I have to say that I rather dislike point buy because of the cookie cutter factor, especially if you've played a large number of games trying the same class.

If I might offer a different method of stat generation?

In one such Dragon magazine a while back (before it was taken away :smallfrown: ), a rather interesting and fun method for stat generation included the use of cards:

Take 2 of each of the following from an ordinary deck of playing cards: 4's, 5's, 6's, 7's, 8's, and 9's.
Mix them up, and deal out six of them side-by-side. Then deal the rest, placing one card on top of each of the first six. Presto. Stats.

The method actually does a decent job of randomizing your stats without going too high or too low. The total modifiers add up to +6 at the least (about point buy's number) to +9 at the very most (and that being only one way to achieve). The rest end up totaling at +7 or +8. I actually really like this method. The only real flaw in it is that you could potentially draw all 13's, but then you'd need to "re-roll" as per the DMG rules. :smallbiggrin:

As to the OP, I think you should remind your friend that, all stats aside, role-playing deficiencies can be fun and rewarding, and that having a stat or two above 15 won't break the game in any real sense.

[Charity]

I'm beginning to like the grid system (http://invisiblecastle.com/stats/help/grid/) more and more.

That is quite interesting, though I'm not certain how limiting it might be if you have a SAD character, I supose you get 3 cracks of the whip so chances are you'll get something reasonable.

Leewei, though I was chiding Saph that she might have sacrificed more for a bit more Wisdom, your suggested stats are debilitating, certainly 18 wis is a bridge too far on that point buy.

[Saph]

Yeah. Thinking about it, I'd probably go for Str 14 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 10 if I expected the game to last a while. I'd put the Wis down to 15 and the Dex up to 12 if we were only going to be playing at low levels (a 16 Wis doesn't give any real advantage until level 8). Int 10 just barely gives you all the skills you need, assuming you're a human.

The initial stat set was just an example to show that clerics work fine with no stat over 14 (though that's more a demonstration of how overpowered the class is than anything else).

- Saph

[Crimson Avenger]

Myself, I love to roll for stats. Primarily because I love to roll dice, partly for the randomnes of high stat vs low stat, and partly because if I roll 4d6 drop lowest, I have always had phenomenal stats. 'Course if I pick up the same four dice to roll spell damage, I always roll average or less.

One of the other guys has the opposite problem, can't roll stats and positively blow you away with spell damage.

We've gone to point buy simply so that all of the characters are "equally strong".

[Charity]

I think the equally strong thing is a bit of a red herring. Build and class define a characters power much more than stats do (caveat- given minimum requirements as per PHB), particularily at higher levels.

[Crimson Avenger]

I think the equally strong thing is a bit of a red herring. Build and class define a characters power much more than stats do (caveat- given minimum requirements as per PHB), particularily at higher levels.

Oh, I'm not disagreeing with you. This guy builds wonderful characters. We call him The Monkey, cause he's always got smothing to pull out of his behind. He just can't get a break when he rolls for stats. And by equally strong, we all have the same ability bonus total, it's up to us how we use it.