Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="seasong" data-source="post: 767107" data-attributes="member: 5137">Saeviomagy: Regarding managing the whole range, just don't divide the cost by 100 (somewhat rounded off):4 - 1 (total 1)5 - 3 (total 4)6 - 7 (total 11)7 - 15 (total 26)8 - 30 (total 56)9 - 45 (total 101)10 - 70 (total 171)11 - 100 (total 271)12 - 130 (total 401)13 - 160 (total 561)14 - 200 (total 761)15 - 225 (total 986)16 - 250 (total 1236)17 - 255 (total 1491)18 - 260 (total 1751)You could round those off a bit more, of course. Then, you would need to provide about 2,750 points to stick to the 4d6 range. I think you can see why I didn't <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />.Regarding ichabod's point - I would disagree. If you roll six times, one in ten characters will have ONE 18. I think this system simulates that rather nicely. A more generous system will simulate something closer to one in one or one in two characters having a single 18.As it stands, it is very easy to get a couple of 16s, and a decent range of other numbers, on 28 points, which is fairly typical of rolling 4d6/drop six times in a row. Remember, in order to simulate 4d6, it needs to average out to somewhere around 12.24 (the closest you'll get on six attributes is 12.16 or 12.33, which is the range my system mostly hovers in).If you mean it doesn't simulate the random fluctuations outside of that, well, no, it doesn't. That's why it's a point system, and not a randomized system.And like I have said before: if you want higher averages, just assign more points to the players - WotC has no problems with that, and neither do I.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="seasong, post: 767107, member: 5137"] Saeviomagy: Regarding managing the whole range, just don't divide the cost by 100 (somewhat rounded off): 4 - 1 (total 1) 5 - 3 (total 4) 6 - 7 (total 11) 7 - 15 (total 26) 8 - 30 (total 56) 9 - 45 (total 101) 10 - 70 (total 171) 11 - 100 (total 271) 12 - 130 (total 401) 13 - 160 (total 561) 14 - 200 (total 761) 15 - 225 (total 986) 16 - 250 (total 1236) 17 - 255 (total 1491) 18 - 260 (total 1751) You could round those off a bit more, of course. Then, you would need to provide about 2,750 points to stick to the 4d6 range. I think you can see why I didn't ;). Regarding ichabod's point - I would disagree. If you roll six times, one in ten characters will have ONE 18. I think this system simulates that rather nicely. A more generous system will simulate something closer to one in one or one in two characters having a single 18. As it stands, it is very easy to get a couple of 16s, and a decent range of other numbers, on 28 points, which is fairly typical of rolling 4d6/drop six times in a row. Remember, in order to simulate 4d6, it needs to average out to somewhere around 12.24 (the closest you'll get on six attributes is 12.16 or 12.33, which is the range my system mostly hovers in). If you mean it doesn't simulate the random fluctuations outside of that, well, no, it doesn't. That's why it's a point system, and not a randomized system. And like I have said before: if you want higher averages, just assign more points to the players - WotC has no problems with that, and neither do I. [/QUOTE]

Verification