In developing a rules set, a key early mechanical decision for a designer is whether to use Point Buy or Random Roll for a character creation system. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, so let's take a look this week at the former:
In a well-designed Point Buy system, a player is able to create exactly the type of character that he wants, the PCs are balanced with each other (assuming that they start with the same number of build points), and scaling the starting power level of the campaign is simply a matter of adjusting the starting number of build points. And it is quite fun to look for interesting combinations and synergies from build options. I consider Standard Arrays of ability scores a form of Point Buy where the system has preemptively generated stats rather than the player.
On the downside, character creation often takes considerably longer since Point Buy places a premium on initial character conception (although pregenerated templates can help speed things up), which in turn often means that character death is a more bitter pill for the player to swallow since the player has invested more time and energy. Also, metagaming often increases, with players playing to the system rather than in game considerations, the most notorious example of which is min-maxing.
In a well-designed Point Buy system, a player is able to create exactly the type of character that he wants, the PCs are balanced with each other (assuming that they start with the same number of build points), and scaling the starting power level of the campaign is simply a matter of adjusting the starting number of build points. And it is quite fun to look for interesting combinations and synergies from build options. I consider Standard Arrays of ability scores a form of Point Buy where the system has preemptively generated stats rather than the player.
On the downside, character creation often takes considerably longer since Point Buy places a premium on initial character conception (although pregenerated templates can help speed things up), which in turn often means that character death is a more bitter pill for the player to swallow since the player has invested more time and energy. Also, metagaming often increases, with players playing to the system rather than in game considerations, the most notorious example of which is min-maxing.
 |
| Attribution to Gage Skidmore |
Moreover, even where a player isn't min-maxing per se, once players figure out the "best" build for an archetype, a blandness of PCs often sets in. Better systems will offer more choices without a clear "best" for an archetype, such as GURPS.
Other lesser examples of metagaming include players attempting to twist the narrative to fit their character's skills, sometimes in the face of common sense. Overemphasis of system mastery may sacrifice more organic gameplay, as well. For example, Gimli of Arabia may never have happened in a Point Buy system where a player is loathe to use a suboptimal weapon.
Also, please note that I wrote "well-designed", as it is often easy to cheese a poorly-designed Point Buy system, with a player able to exploit flaws in the system, such as picking up effectively free build points for Disadvantages that are never enforced in actual play. "REIGN: A Game of Lords and Leaders," by Greg Stolze, has the best implementation I've seen to prevent this kind of cheesing: In REIGN, rather than additional build points, Disadvantages give extra experience points (and only after the PC has suffered a tangible setback).
Other lesser examples of metagaming include players attempting to twist the narrative to fit their character's skills, sometimes in the face of common sense. Overemphasis of system mastery may sacrifice more organic gameplay, as well. For example, Gimli of Arabia may never have happened in a Point Buy system where a player is loathe to use a suboptimal weapon.
Also, please note that I wrote "well-designed", as it is often easy to cheese a poorly-designed Point Buy system, with a player able to exploit flaws in the system, such as picking up effectively free build points for Disadvantages that are never enforced in actual play. "REIGN: A Game of Lords and Leaders," by Greg Stolze, has the best implementation I've seen to prevent this kind of cheesing: In REIGN, rather than additional build points, Disadvantages give extra experience points (and only after the PC has suffered a tangible setback).
No comments:
Post a Comment