were the beasts from the terrors of athas (great conversion by the way) maxed at 18 or 20?
i want to run my own game with a max of 20 like in the old days to show players who have no experience with dark sun that this a world of survivors beyond those from worlds they are used to. i know when i first played dark sun so many years ago and stats capped at 20 i was awed. it did not help at all. still my first few characters met gruesome ends!
if the terrors of athas are capped at 18 i have no trouble refiguring them with a +2 to each stat to compensate.
thanks as always.
hmmm. perhaps i will have to go that way. a point buy but with a goodly number of points. 35? 40 even?
You can expand the point buy to go up to 20 (or even higher, I suppose)
19: 20 points
20: 24 points
21: 29 points
22: 35 points
(point buy runs on the following formula: attributes start at 8 for 0 points. 9-14: 1 point to increment. After that, the point counts increase for every attribute bonus. 15,16: 2 points each, 17,18: 3 points each, 19-20: 4 points each, etc)
A point count 40 is very high. The DMG recommends 32 points for a "high powered" campaign. At 40, you can have 2 18s, and still have enough points left to take no negatives. Most classes are only dependant on one or two ability scores ...
hmmm. perhaps i will have to go that way. a point buy but with a goodly number of points. 35? 40 even?
I use 35, which is 3 more points than he recommended "high" values in the DMG. As my characters generally have a total amount of money - combined with the value of their equipment - being about 3 levels lower than they really are (so level 8 characters are equipped like level 5 characters), I feel higher stats do help ease that burden. I have found that too many points, however, rapidly unbalances the game.
I balance this at the lower levels by generally protecting them, or setting them up in a situation where they can be protected. For example, they may start in a city and be under the rule/protection of a local neighborhood "gang" (for lack of a better word). In my current campaign, the characters are all kreen and are starting with their pack. An entire pack of thri-kreen is quite formidable, so the PCs will be able to gain a few levels before I start chucking them to the wolves.
My players start with 28 points. On the high side, but not rediculously so. Also, I keep the same standards with their enemies - so they don't run into elven tribes carting around wheelbarrows of gold and fighting with +10 vorpal, dancing swords. The chief of the said tribe might...might...have a metal dagger and it MIGHT be magical. If they're lucky.
these characters will be prodigal. prodigal or not, they will be brought low beneath the savage dark sun! *insert dramatic music here*
as only one other player is at all familiar with dark sun i really want to seperate the brutality of dark sun from the fluff and magic of faerun (our last setting).
i am going with 40. yes it is high. but, i am a rat bastard. the bodycounts are always high at my tables even in games with good stats and loads of gear and gold. i just set difficult encounters and vile settings. that is why dark sun fits my brutal style so perfectly.
these characters will be prodigal. prodigal or not, they will be brought low beneath the savage dark sun! *insert dramatic music here*
as only one other player is at all familiar with dark sun i really want to seperate the brutality of dark sun from the fluff and magic of faerun (our last setting).
You say it's brutal, but you arm your player's to the teeth with advantages. That's not so much brutal, as just having your characters go through a bloodbath of destruction and hardly having to think twice about their own well-being. While such games are interesting, I personally find that they get boring real quick, and become monotonous kill after kill, harking to a very, very hack & slash-esque system.
Brutal is when you take away most of the power of the players, and pit them against difficult odds - force them to develop tactics just to survive an encounter above and beyond "I'm going to attack with my sword". I'm all for the occasional adventure that is a bloody hack & slash, but that's just not something I want to draw out for session after session, adventure after adventure through an entire campaign. Characters usually develop real fast, and the game spirals out of your control quick, fast and in a hurry - plus, people burn out (in my experience) quickly, and soon look to something else to attract their attention.
Brutal is when you take away most of the power of the players, and pit them against difficult odds...
He's saying he is brutal in what he throws at them not that he just wants to beat them up. I'm sure his game includes plenty of encounters where the PCs are unable to succeed by just "attacking with their swords" and good stats have absolutely nothing to do with whether such things happen.
In my opinion DS2E was all about giving players advantages far beyond those of normal settings in order to showcase the harshness of the setting by still making it a struggle to survive. I know with all the free psionics, high stats, and powerful races in DS2E I certainly never fealt like it was a cake-walk (and even never fealt as secure as most characters in lower-powered games).
For someone who himself said he used 35 point-buy you're certainly jumping to a lot of assumptions about his play style for choosing 5 points higher.
For someone who himself said he used 35 point-buy you're certainly jumping to a lot of assumptions about his play style for choosing 5 points higher.
He added that he gives them a plethora of magic items and money as well, which I do not.
And let me qualify - I've not found a true "happy medium" on ability point assignments, but 35 worked before.
He added that he gives them a plethora of magic items and money as well, which I do not.
He said "even in games with good stats and loads of gear and gold" (emphasis mine) so he wasn't referring to his currently planned game. True it was in relation to his past brutality as a GM, but in the same sentence he mentioned body counts, so while you could jump to the conclusion that he likes hack 'n slash, there isn't really any question of brutality or difficulty.
Basically you took someone saying "I run very dangerous high-powered games" and took it to mean he was a boring hack-n-slasher that was making his games easy for the players.
I basically ignore the point buy system and give players 80 ability score points to distribute freely on a 1-for-1 basis. Min 3, max 18 before racial adjustments. Minimum score allowed after racial adjustments is 3 and you cannot take advantage of the lowest score (for example if you play a thri-kreen (-4 Cha mod), the minimum amount of ability score points you can use on Charisma is 7 (7-4=3).)
How well does it work out for you?
Just curious.
:whatsthis
My players think the point-buy system from the DMG is too costly to attain high key ability scores. 32 point point-buy gives you five 14s and one 10 at best (or some other combination yielding the same total score of 80). My 80 points freely distributed at 1-1 cost is based on that calculation.
Since ability score bonuses accrue linearly, i.e. 12 grants +1, 14 +2, 16 +3 etc, I find my system to be more fair (and balanced) than the DMG system, which penalizes taking higher scores than 14. My players like this system a lot better, since it doesn't discriminate high scores.
People might disagree with me and claim that an 18 and two 8s (point-buy cost 16; net bonus of +2) are better than two 14s and a 12 (point-buy cost 16; net bonus of +5), but I'm not of that perception. Hence I use a 1-for-1 system.
Note that I don't use 8 as a base score, I use 0. Hence the 80 point total for distribution. If you want to use 8 as a base score, like DMG point-buy does, use 32 points, but at a 1-for-1 cost.
People might disagree with me and claim that an 18 and two 8s (point-buy cost 16; net bonus of +2) are better than two 14s and a 12 (point-buy cost 16; net bonus of +5), but I'm not of that perception. Hence I use a 1-for-1 system.
Note that I don't use 8 as a base score, I use 0. Hence the 80 point total for distribution. If you want to use 8 as a base score, like DMG point-buy does, use 32 points, but at a 1-for-1 cost.
Do you have problems with characters with extremely low dump-stats? Sounds like it's kind of an honor system that characters won't all have 3 charismas (or whatever they don't need).
Evil Setting:
Standard Array.
Brutal Setting:
Standard Array, +1 CR with no XP adjustment
Dragon of Tyr Setting:
Standard Array, +1 CR with no XP adjustment, low gold
Wanna hear players whine like babies? Just mention 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
In my campaigns, they have a choice. Either they roll 4d6 (taking the 3 better results) or they take the 80 buy points (1 to 1). BUT the 1 to 1 80 buy point have these restriction : Cannot put more than 17 in a stat and MUST have at least a score lower than 10.
In order to help the fact that I dont really give much magical items or gold :evillaugh , I give them a psionic talent feat (so they all have a native power)
Do you have problems with characters with extremely low dump-stats? Sounds like it's kind of an honor system that characters won't all have 3 charismas (or whatever they don't need).
Only with one player and that only happened once. Setting 8 as the base score for all stats and giving 32 points out for 1-to-1 purchase solves this issue if it would become a problem, though. Personally, if I had to do it this way, I would probably set 5 or 6 as the minimum score and give 50 or 44 points and use 1-for-1 purchase.
There are three settings for my campaigns:
Evil Setting:
Standard Array.
Brutal Setting:
Standard Array, +1 CR with no XP adjustment
Dragon of Tyr Setting:
Standard Array, +1 CR with no XP adjustment, low gold
Wanna hear players whine like babies? Just mention 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8.
Interesting. (scribbles down notes)