Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 7255747" data-attributes="member: 58172">I have to say, I took Xeviat to task for his point system allowing this array:16 13 12 10 10 8 ( → 18 14 12 10 10 8)But my own results − twice now, with two unrelated methods − produced a similar result.The original post using the tried-and-true 3d6 statistics, produces: 16 13 12 10 10 8. Exactly the same!And now the experimental 4-Times-Prime method produces: 16 13 10 10 10 10 and 16 13 12 10 10  7. Both comparable.I view, the result here with the 4xPrime method as slightly more perfect. But in all cases these arrays are comparable in balance to the official arrays.The improvement to 18 14 10 10 10 10 and similar is a noticeably powerful choice. But this is more an artifact of the +2 race improvement, and the benefit of a resulting +4 d20 bonus in the context of bounded accuracy. The raw array itself is balanced compared to other arrays.A 16 in the context of these other numbers is balanced, and while an Intelligent choice for a player, is something that a DM can consider safe for the game.16 13 10 10 10 10 and similar, is fair.This array is at the threshold. Arrays that are noticeably better than this start to imbalance the game. But this is itself is solid and a good standard to evaluate other arrays with a very high ability score.</blockquote>