so, I was kind of annoyed that point buy had 10 as it's base stat, which made sense for a 3d6 rolling system. So, in my spare time I programmed together a little program to figure out exactly how to organize a point buy system balanced for 4d6drop1.
basically I had it roll 1 million 4d6d1's and just tabulate the ratios to come up with a point buy cost that was in line with it.
7: cost : -9
8: cost : -6
9: cost : -4
10: cost : -3
11: cost : -2
12: cost : -1
13: cost : 0
14: cost : 1
15: cost : 2
16: cost : 3
17: cost : 6
18: cost : 12
is what it came up with. first of all it compared each ratio for a standard point(against the most common roll), and then added the distance away from the center to the cost.
basically, I wanted something that I didn't just throw more points at to raise the average Ability Score. After, I did this I thought about posting it, so here it is. 6-3 were insanely high, and I might even remove 7 as an option (3 was -166).
So how many points do you get to make your character?
What is low fantasy/high fantasy/etc.?
This also seems easier to min-max (now two 8s make an 18 regardless of the point buy). If this a feature or a bug?
So how many points do you get to make your character?
What is low fantasy/high fantasy/etc.?
This also seems easier to min-max (now two 8s make an 18 regardless of the point buy). If this a feature or a bug?
both, 18's are significantly more common in 4d6d1, they're something like 60 times more likely than a 3 in the system, so it's a "feature". 13 being only 7 or so times as likely as 18.
also, after more thinking, I'd say half the normal point allotments per fantasy level OR -10 per fantasy level.
(this was entirely a work out of boredom and free time, which i posted after I had done this, not with the intention of posting it, but here are some revisions)
8: cost : -6
9: cost : -4
10: cost : -3
11: cost : -2
12: cost : -1
13: cost : 0
14: cost : 1
15: cost : 2
16: cost : 3
17: cost : 6
18: cost : 12
I think there is 0 benefit to using this chart over the previous chart. It is easier to min-max, as excalibur pointed out, and doesn't really accomplish anything you couldn't accomplish with the other chart by simply giving out a higher point value.
I'm aware of this
in fact for it to exactly be in line with 4d6d1, it would have you start with 0 points, with higher fantasies adding points. after more thinking, i like it better with the -10 to fantasy levels.
my intention was not to make a better point buy, or even a more useful one. just to make a point buy that used the ratios for 4d6d1 as a base. mathematically this is the most "true" point buy for those dice rolls, and as i said in my start post, I didn't really like the idea of just throwing more points at the previous point buy.
mind you, I don't want you to not point out any problems with it, your post just seemed to assume things that were not true, basically that those were my original goals.
So 5, 7, 10, 12 or 0, 5, 10, 15?
Low fantasy min-maxing:
18 (13)
16 (3)
16 (3)
12 (-1)
8 (-6)
8 (-6)
[probably not what you want for low fantasy]
or
18 (13)
16 (3)
12 (-1)
10 (-3)
8 (-6)
8 (-6)
[also probably too good]
High fantasy min-maxing:
18 (13)
18 (13)
14 (1)
10 (-3)
8 (-6)
8 (-6)
or
18 (13)
18 (13)
16 (3)
11 (-2)
8 (-6)
8 (-6)
This stuff is also crazy good.
-6 points for an 8 is just too much. The incentive to drop a stat goes through the roof.
Edit: REAL worse case scenario for high fantasy
18 (13)
16 (3)
16 (3)
14 (1)
14 (1)
8 (-6)
with point buy your basically buying rolls out of millions. so those to me are valid salad, though i agree a change in the "fantasy level" would be good. so certainly i think this would not actually be good for low fantasy (i was considering them just as numbers not as actual settings)
Well, the hope is that the numbers reflect the setting and what you can expect of modestly impressive individuals within those settings.
Maybe lower fantasy games should just use the old system and high fantasy could use your point buy and 10 points. I still feel like the 6-point 8s are a perverse incentive though.