Topic: Point-buy systems for stats (principally for RM2/RMC)

[Aotrs Commander]

So... Preamble. I am - for the first time in a looong time¹ actually going to be creating a new Rolemaster/Spacemaster party.

It's not that we haven't been playing RM in all that time - though it's been sporadic - it's just we've been playing largely with the one SM party that has its foundations dating back to 1994. And, despite being only level 12 or so, the power creep of "it seemed like a good idea at the time" and balancing out flukey dice rolls (which has pushed potential stats up to the point where some of the characters have, like 104 in stats...) to keep everyone at the same level, plus access to ludicrous amounts of high-tech equipment, this party has become steadily harder to manage! (Put it this way, the guy with the Qu 94 (+10) is the SLOW member of the party: most of them are in the +35 bonus ranges with innate stat abilities...!)

As I had also ground out of ideas for said party (or the other D&D 3.x/PF mutant hybrid we play), I decided I needed to actually start a new RM party and keep them a little more... sane. I had also been toying with the idea of using RM instead of in addition to my next campaign world anyway.

Now, since the last time I created a new party, we have come around to using point-buy, rather than random dice rolls for D&D. (Largely because some of us roll bad and one or two of us are practically literal dice-gods, and the imbalance - and therefore Mandated "fixing" was required.) This was especially true in the aforementioned SM party, wherein at one stage, I through up my hands and principally got the players to regenerate a couple of the bottom end of the party so they could keep up with the top!)

What I want to do, then, is essentially do the same with RM, with the intention of keeping RM's delightful randomness a bit more in-line for party overall balance. We currently play a hideous mutant hybrid of RM2/RMC/RMSS/RMFRP/SM/SMP that likes of which Man Was Not Meant To Know; but which is principally RM2/RMC that just uses a lot of the new tables from the later systems (especially attack and critical tables), and the other odd tweak.

But before I start out and make my own houserules, I figured I might as well at least ask around and see if anyone else has done something similar (or whether if someone can remember if one exists somewhere in RM - it's been a long while since I trawled through all my RM2 companions looking for that sort of alternate rule - where there is a cat-in-heck's chance I might already have or can purchase!) Principally, I'm looking for one for RM2/RMC, but I'm prepared to have a good look at any others, as I carry a large rules-crowbar and wield it with cheerful impunity...! (Which is why I'm posting in the general forum, rather than RM2 subforum.)


¹According to my document files, the last time was in 2002...

[tbigness]

I do believe that RMSS has a Point-Buy system in the character creation options. I know with a character generator that I use it had this as an option straight from those rules. Best is to base the points off of how limited you want the stats, I use 650 + 5 D 10 for points to use but this is higher than average so you may want to play around with the numbers to start with.

[Peter R]

You could lift the points based system right out of RMU?

[markc]

Depending on the power of your game you can do any where from 400+10D10 to the sky is the limit. In the past I have done 400, 450, 500 and 550 as my base points.
 I also have a rule that you roll 13 D10 and keep the highest 10 and a rule that if your dice comes up a 10 you roll again and keep on adding (open ended high) and if you roll a 1 you roll again and keep on subtracting (open ended low).
 The open ended rule can favor the people that roll very well but from experience I can say that on average the open ended rule has averaged out as being good for everyone.


 Also note that I generally remove the 90's in a stat requirement for a profession (it never made sense to me that every person in a profession would have the same two stats at, at least 90.) This rule I think has had the biggest change in my game as it allows average people to be anything and not just always laymen.
 The above rule also elements the need for replacing two stats with 90's or I should say raising the professions two prime stats to 90 if they are below 90.
MDC
 

[Hurin]

I've gone with a point-buy system for my last two campaigns (SM and RM) for the same reasons you are contemplating it Aotrs. I find rolling creates too many imbalances. Point buy has worked much better for me.

To make things easier, I have also done away with stats themselves, and just use the bonuses. So a character no longer has 68 str, 40 agility, and 86 con; rather, they just have +6 strength, -3 agility and +11 con. You can of course still stick with percentile stats if you want, but doing away with them for me makes the point-buy system a little easier, since you don't have to convert anything. One final option is to just go with a very simple, smoothed bonus system that allows easy translation from percentile to bonus without a chart. I basically just say that a percentile stat gives a bonus equal to (stat - 50)/3. so a 68 gives a +6, and a 41 gives a -3. This is a purely smoothed system that eliminates the need for any charts.

Anyhoo, whichever system you use, you basically give each character a set amount of bonus points to use, and you can modify this according to the power level of your campaign. I give out say 50 bonus points to spread around, meaning that a character could have for example 5 stats at +0 and 5 at +10, or alternatively 8 at +0 and two at +25. If you wanted to translate this into percentile stats and have the characters buy percentile stats instead, I think the lowest number of points you want to give is 500-- this would mean characters start with an average of 50 in all their stats. That is kind of low, so I take that as a floor. Somewhere between 600 and 750 I think would be the sweet spot. If you are using RMU, you might even go up to 800 or so, since lower level characters are very weak in RMU.

Finally, I also allow characters to raise their stats or bonuses each level, thus doing away with the temporary/potential system (which can make point-buy systems even more complex). Each level, each character gets a certain number of points to raise stats. When I use the bonus system, I just say that each character can increase one stat by +2 or three stats by +1 each level. As you can see, this will be harder to do if you keep the percentile system, since the default RM system is not smoothed-- a +1 to a stat of 99 is going to result in a much larger bonus than to a stat of 50; this is one of the reasons I recommend going to a purely smoothed system where the bonus = (stat -50)/2.

I have found this modified system to be much simpler and easier for players to use. They don't have to consult a chart to convert their percentile stat to a bonus, or to derive a potential from a temporary, and you can even do away with percentile stats altogether and just use simple, relatively small number bonuses. It works for me.

[jdale]

I thought the point-buy system in RMSS works pretty well. The cost for a stat = the stat itself, unless you want a value above 90. In that case the cost of a stat 90+x is 90+x^2. E.g. a stat of 92 (90+2) is 94 (90+2^2).

You have 660 points to spend. (Or, if you prefer, 600+10d10.)

If you want something simpler, the cost of the stat = the value of the stat bonus. Decide on the total bonus you want to permit. Bear in mind that a player can assign a negative stat bonus (for stats below 50).
Edit: I see Hurin goes one step past this, which is fine too, if a bit more radical.

[Aotrs Commander]

You could lift the points based system right out of RMU?

I assume this is the new version under playtest, yes? What scale of bonuses does it use (i.e. +5s like RM2/RMC or more smoothed like RMSS/RMFR?) If the former, I will definitely try and have a look.

Also note that I generally remove the 90's in a stat requirement for a profession (it never made sense to me that every person in a profession would have the same two stats at, at least 90.) This rule I think has had the biggest change in my game as it allows average people to be anything and not just always laymen.
 The above rule also elements the need for replacing two stats with 90's or I should say raising the professions two prime stats to 90 if they are below 90.
MDC

I was half-considering keeping that rule, on the basis that the PCs would be trading off (what should be!) two core stats their profession will want for being better in other areas. But that would need some more research, now you mention it. The last time stats were generated, I as generous enough that nonbody felt they needed to do that anyway. (I shudder to think of the average bonuses of the last two RM/SM parties, but I bet it's not far off 90, and don't even get me thinking about the average of the bonuses (thank you RoCoI background options I let people roll on until they got something they liked...!)

I know, I know: it was my own fault, but what can I say! When we started this party, I was literally 14 or 15!

I've gone with a point-buy system for my last two campaigns (SM and RM) for the same reasons you are contemplating it Aotrs. I find rolling creates too many imbalances. Point buy has worked much better for me.

*snip*

I have found this modified system to be much simpler and easier for players to use. They don't have to consult a chart to convert their percentile stat to a bonus, or to derive a potential from a temporary, and you can even do away with percentile stats altogether and just use simple, relatively small number bonuses. It works for me.

I have sort of half been using the RoCoVI or VII thing where you convert everything to bonuses, not stats (for innate stat abilities, for one), so I guess that is one option to consider. Though, that said, I'd rather not switch over to a different bonus system, since that would mean I can't, for example, re-use my older monsters/characters/whathave you without re-working them.

I thought the point-buy system in RMSS works pretty well. The cost for a stat = the stat itself, unless you want a value above 90. In that case the cost of a stat 90+x is 90+x^2. E.g. a stat of 92 (90+2) is 94 (90+2^2).

You have 660 points to spend. (Or, if you prefer, 600+10d10.)

If you want something simpler, the cost of the stat = the value of the stat bonus. Decide on the total bonus you want to permit. Bear in mind that a player can assign a negative stat bonus (for stats below 50).
Edit: I see Hurin goes one step past this, which is fine too, if a bit more radical.

I'll have a quick nosy at my RMSS book next and see if I can find that and have a good look.


Though I am beginning to think that maybe I should get the PCs to point-buy their bonuses and then pick whatever stats they like from that. As that might also help in monitoring the background options => stat bonuses thing we had (which, to be fair, was a good way of counter balancing the races), by basically setting a conversion rate of background option to extra stat points. (Instead of making them roll.)



I had considered that, when it came to potentials, I was going to say "okay, you get basically the equivalent of a 10, 20, 30 (etc) to a 100 roll on the potential table to assign to your temporary stats" which would give them a bit of choice (and variability) hopefully without breaking anything.

I was also intending on putting increases to potential stats (when temporaries reach them) to a fixed rate of (say) +1 to a stat every level or two (or four, or five). (Yes, that might seem a bit harsh, but considering, just for example, my own damn NPC, who has two stats of 104 because I implemented that one optional rule out of RoCoIV...!)

[Hurin]

I have sort of half been using the RoCoVI or VII thing where you convert everything to bonuses, not stats (for innate stat abilities, for one), so I guess that is one option to consider. Though, that said, I'd rather not switch over to a different bonus system, since that would mean I can't, for example, re-use my older monsters/characters/whathave you without re-working them.

You can still use all your older material rather easily I think if you just stick with using bonuses alone. New characters won't have stats, but they will have bonuses, whereas characters in old material will have both stats and bonuses. But the bonuses should still align more or less the same.

[Peter R]

Out of interest you work power points and DPs?

[Aotrs Commander]

Out of interest you work power points and DPs?

Up until now, normal for RM2/RMC, using option 2 for stats above 101 from RoCoI, though that will be slightly changing.

I am also considering increasing the base PP, since basically every RM/SM caster we've ever had got Aura and/or Archtype to they could have enough PP to, y'know, DO something. (I've also had to MASSIVELY decrease cating times to a more D&D-like level, since otherwise its effectiveness compared to guns was laughable. Especially when you realise that the previously deadly spells like Lightning Bolt and Fireball are only actually mediocre when compaed to high AE weapons and grenades; especially since a chap with a gun can shoot about six times in he time it takes to cast one spell of your level in core RM...!)


Anyway, I have had a serious think, and a bit of number fiddling. I believe I shall go somewhere between Hurin's suggestion and RM2.

Looking back at my old stats (because I now generate monsters and NPC by approximating generating characters, something that D&D 3.x did that I decided was far better than treating them as "PCs" and "not PCs"), when I did them, I would naturally be assigning the stats, and therefore naturally assigned them on the basis of "about this bonus" and set the stat at the minimum for that bonus (or 50). (And the added any racial or background bonuses.) So they are full of 50s, 90s, 95s, 98s and 100s (as I believe I mentioned, I have been having to... stretch a bit... to keep up with the PCs!)

So, if I change over to stat bonuses, it'll only be basically doing what I have essentially been doing. I do want to keep the percentile stats, because they do havesome ancillary uses - hit points, exhaustion points - and very importantly, stat damage, i.e. con drain from Undead¹.

However... the percentile stats will be ANCILLERY to the bonuses. I.e., you pick your bonuses, and that tells you want your stat will be. Rather than your stat telling you your bonus. (And it means that your stat will now always match up to your bonus, as opposed to now when you get part of your bonus from your stat and part from race or background or whatnot.) Completely arse-backwards to conventional stats-and-bonuses wisdom, but I think it's just daft enough to be plausible.

In addition, because my existing stats are all set at neat break-point values at the +5s, I can afford to create a new stat bonus table that will smooth the space between the gaps. (I actually made my own, rather than use the one in RoCoI or VI, partly because I'd forget about them and partly because I wanted to work around the +5 units (which that doesn't)². This will now give the PCs a little more fine control over their stats if they want, or not if they choose. I also have implemented RoCoVI's fractional DP and PP from bonuses as well, which will also see the PCs just slightly better off.

(Though as per normal I will give them an extra 25% of their DP for spending on background skills. (Or as I term it "not related to your profession and ask the DM if in doubt" skills, since sometimes I'll allow the likes of mages to defer some of their weapon skills to that pool provided they have a reasonable breadth of other skills... Though since I modified Combat Companion's weapon styles into something a bit like what RMU appears to have done with combat training skills, those costs are not quite as steep!))

For the sake of having a little bit of randomisation, the PCs will randomise what number in that range at character generation (otherwise we shall just assume that it is the middle number in the range if required) literally because it looks more organic than it in actuality is.

I'm also thus going to obviate potentials entirely. (That column on the character sheet can be used to record the PCs "base" bonus, in case they do get stat damaged and get their bonus lowered, kind of like hoe 3.X has a temporary column for stat damage, but in reverse!) Instead, I'm going to grant something like +1 stat bonus per level (or possibly +5 every 5th level). I intend to start the PCs off with fairly high stats anyway. I've always taken an approach more that stats don't need particularly to "progress", at least not at the sort of approach that RMU seem to be taking, but a steady trickle (a bit like 3.x) is enough. Also, after the overgenerous of that last twenty-odd years, I feel quite happy in being rather more frugal!

What remains, then, is to decide what sort of bonus value to assign to the PCs. I reckon something like +50 to +60 is not a bad start, since they'll be getting a bit on top with racials (doubly so or being Liches, so I think +50 is the place to start!) For background, I'm going to say "you roll on the table, and if you don't like it, you can swap it for a +10 bonus" with a proviso that no-one can start with more than a +25 bonus (before racial adjustments), so anything over that is wasted. That should keep the insane stacked bonuses down. (I mean, I am - was - no better, we had an NPC with a +65 AG at level 1 back in the day...!)


While we're about: Looking back at my old "lich" (specifically designed for skeleton liches, mind) stat bonuses, think they need a bit of revision. CO +0, AG +10, SD +5, ME +5, RE +0, ST +5, QU +10, PR -10, EM +5, IN +0.

If we disconnect the SD and ST bonuses as being from base human (because templating was a another genius idea from 3.x), what's left is acceptable, though a little odd in hindsight; I think the EM and PR bonuses could do with being swapped, especially since there is a whole "the stronger the will, the more powerful a spirit-bound Undead" thing floating around in my lich fluff. The ME bonus is debatable... The reasoning was I guess that the liches are better set up to remember stuff since they don't now have brains to rot and have incredible longevity, but you could nearly argue the opposite way for the same reason. Though to be fair, a +5 to ME isn't going to make a lot of difference, given how even in SM ME is nearly superfluous! (Gives you a few extra DPs, though, I suppose in this revised system, though.)

It says 8 background options, but I think we can safely laugh in that one's face (though I think the reason for that was actually to select some of the typical Undead abilities like Con drain and Cold crits and such) and replace them with a standard suite of those powers (with options to upgrade) and leave the background options to the base race.

(I'm not worried about inter-PC balance within reason, since the mandate is they are all going to be Liches.)



¹The new party is actually going to BE Undead - specifically liches (or rather spirit-bound Undead a la Necromancer base lists with what has been now long-since rules standard stat bonuses different from what RoCoVI assigned to them, since they were done before I owned that (possibly before it was written!)

²Yes, the results are broadly similar enough that probably nobody other than me will care, but let's establish the fact that I just spent the large part of the last week going through every single quest, wargames scenario, random background data and whatnot I could find from the main multiverse I set virtually all my games in from basically the last thirty years to compile an exhaustive list of every star system and planet mentioned or implied which runs to about 1070 entries and shake our heads and realise we're dealing with one of THOSE people...

[Cory Magel]

We run RMSS and have always given the players the choice of point buy or rolled.

[Aotrs Commander]

I know EXACTLY what happens when we roll, because it happened every single time - several players roll absolute crap, several in the middle and the one naturally lucky player (and maybe one or two others) will get excepional, and there is an immediate power gap. Which is why I've started moving completely over to point-buy (and fixed hit points for both D&D - and of this party - RM).

[markc]

I myself am moving away from games where everyone is the same, to me there should be some vacation in PC's and not just profession or class.
MDC

[Cory Magel]

I'm the guy that usually rolls lucky.   Although, the way RMSS stat rolling works gives you five free points per stat if you assign them the right way... so that helps the random ones.

[Aotrs Commander]

I myself am moving away from games where everyone is the same, to me there should be some vacation in PC's and not just profession or class.
MDC

Nominally, I agree. The problem is when that leads to a massive power gap between PCs. Which is problematic.

And it's happened just once too often for me, as both a player and a DM. With the aforementioned old SMN party, I had to basically have one or two of the players upgrade their characters, change the games rules (completely regenerate in one case - and that was the ARCHMAGE, who was solidly in the BOTTOM tier of the party), or significantly boost their stats or give them some free gear, just so that the threat level was even enough I could put in something to challenge the party. Otherwise, anything that would challenge the top end of the party would marmalise the bottom end, and anything that the bottom end could deal with, the top end would SLAUGHTER. (I'm talking differences in the ranges of 50-80 plus in OB and DB.) Even now, the disparity between the combat-orientated Rogue's top-end weapon skill (+159) and the Bounty-hunter's (+213) is large - with the test of party falling around the +180 mark). Heck, the PC-turned-NPC engineer (since the payer left, but they needed him to keep the ship running) is basically a noncombatant, despite what in many other games would be a fairly respectible +75 OB. And almost all of this disparity is due to stats and background stat bonuses. (Nevermind the disparity in DBs, which before I handed out a couple of super-special better-than-barrier shields went from +10 to +200-odd...)

It can lead to just too big a gap. (Thi, is, granted, probably the most extreme case, and one exacerbated by other factors, not least it is a party that started in my teens and had suffered from several rules changes.)


The finalised system we'll be using for the new parties is the PCs will be given +50 bonuses to assign to their stats. If they roll up any extra stat bonus on background options, great (or they can trade in background options they don't like for a +5 bonus), but with the proviso that before racial bonuses, they can't start with a higher bonus than +25. The stat is then calculated from the stat bonus (the opposite way to normal, I know!) And if that gives a range (with my smoothed-bonus system (which I rebuilt beause I wanted to keep the +5 mulitples static), +4 is 70-74, so you'd roll 69+1/2 D10 for that stat. And they will get a +1 bonus to assign every level. (I'm deliberately being mean, because, seriously, last party...)

So, in theory, the party will be balanced about the same, but the stats will be at look a little more organic (it doesn't matter in D&D because the bonus is both linear and lacking the granularity) and with obviating potentials (and the "5% chance of improving potentials" optinal rule which actually regulalrly turned up), it will stop the power-creep we had last time.

[markc]

I have seen some big gaps in power but those are often by profession, so in your case you might have to look at the level bonus rules if you are using some optional rules, race bonuses, etc.
MDC


I am also looking at running some Pathfinder for an old friend who is going to be visiting and just seeing the "Your encounter should be this, your wealth level should be this? etc is beginning to leave a bad taste in my mouth. I understand that it is a good idea to give some new GM's an basic idea but on the other hand I have known some GM's that say it is in the book so that is the way it is to be.
MDC

[Aotrs Commander]

For the old Rolemaster party, having to the PCs to a reasonable level of parity, my official responce has been to, as far as combat goes, largely "give up" and just let them slaughter things, and rely on the odd lucky roll to keep them honest. (Or 15th-odd level alien robot archmages or something...)


Kit abuse and inflation, especially in D&D, though, can be a huge issue. I have had at least two parties (converted from AD&D to 3.x) where I thought like you did, "frack the rules, can't be bothered to work that out" as a result, ended up in an ever-increasing kit spiral as the enemy NPCs required better and better gear to even come close to being relevant and that meant more kit for the PCs. The second time, when I caught it only a little bit late (and halved the amount of gold given out thereafter), it had already pushed them up a good effective character level for the purposes of challenge. (Admittedly, simply stopping them selling off and buying magical gear would also have stopped this, but by the time I'd realised, it was already a thing.)

For my own campaign world for D&D, I just went as far as decoupling all the basic +x items from items and giving all characters a set + progression and thus reducing magic items to "things that Do Stuff," rather than "stuff that gives pluses and might do stuff" which works a lot better. (3.x/PF is very easy to horribly imbalance if you have half an idea what you're doing.)

[Cory Magel]

Ah, yes.  No one buys magic items in our setting.  If something was commonly for sale it would, realistically, be 'normal' to a world.  Even potions and scrolls have to be created by a hard to find specialist that isn't just going to work for anyone.  I have exceptional material and workmanship in my setting, even then you aren't 'buying it off a shelf' so-to-speak.  You're ordering it to be make by a high priced expert crafter and having to wait for it.

[Peter R]

I have only played in one point buy RM game and all the other players were used to the system and were well aware of the optimal 'break points' which gave them say the best overal stats for the least points once potentials were taken into account. They also had a lot of stats that had been bought (or should that be sold?) down because they gave no minuses but freed up points to be spent elsewhere.

I don't even think this was really min/maxing. There are lots of people who when they see any numeric system just inherently want to use it efficiently.

My point is I suppose is to just raise the potential issue of min/maxing with point buy systems that should not really apply in random stat systems.

[Spectre771]

I myself am moving away from games where everyone is the same, to me there should be some vacation in PC's and not just profession or class.
MDC

Hear Hear, Cheers, and Amen.  I too was put off by the "same starting stats" of D&D/PF and I hated seeing it in RM very early on in my gaming experience.  The players who introduced me to the RM system also felt the same way.  If a player had a mediocre set of stats, he bought skills, equipment, and used creativity to compensate and everyone involved ended up having a more enjoyable time.  D&D gives you what, 40 points?  42?  I forget.  RM is D100, i.e.: 5xD20 so you get approx. 200 DP.  There was a post in here that said the GM started players with 200, 400, or 500 DP depending on the game.  That leads to the same cookie or same min/maxed PC as other systems.  I've posted before in other threads, in the party of nine players, the GM knew EVERYONE's starting stats save for the "low number" in which case he said "Did you put the 9 in CHA or WIS?"  If someone made a fighter he asked "Is your 17 in STR or DEX?  I like to know where the players put their high score."  Come on... how does a GM know the starting stats for NINE players before we even sit down at the table? So I tried to throw him off with each PC I made.  I put my high scores in uncharacteristic stats and he didn't like that.  I didn't fit in with the group and I was treated (dealt with in-game) accordingly.

I love the randomness and variety in RM PC-creation, not everyone does and that's fine.  I understand the desire for 'balance' and to level the playing field for all the players in the game and I get it, I respect that.  And I understand the crappy dice rolls for one player on a Tuesday night, and then my daughter's ridiculously lucky rolls for her PC on Wednesday night, then the mediocrity of rolls on Thursday and Friday but there is so much more variability and randomness in the game that it's not as important as it gets made out to be.  Low stats can be made up for with skills, equipment, party cooperation, creative ideas, using skills in fun inventive ways, and a different set of dice!  Always change out the dice!

This sets RM apart from some other systems, not just D&D/PF, but White Wolf, GURPS, World of Darkness, etc.  I do like the way RMU rolls up stats over the RMU Point buy system as well and I'm thinking of adopting that in my RM2 game.