Organic Point Buy: a new idea in ability score generation (3.x, PEACH)

[TuggyNE]

Many people complain about point buy that it feels too inorganic; that their flaws are pre-chosen, and therefore mean less. They seldom complain that it's too easy to get high stats in important scores, though. So taking that into account, it would seem that rolling for dump stats is all that's really desired.

Fortunately, we can do that; we have the technology.

When generating ability scores for a character, you may choose to combine point buy and rolling as follows. First, select which ability scores are relatively unimportant to your character's key function, up to a maximum of three; a ray-specialized Wizard might select Cha and Str, while a melee-oriented Bard might choose Dex, Int, and Wis. You gain two extra points for your point buy for every score that you select in this way. Next, roll 3d4 in order for those ability scores, and subtract (or add) the point buy equivalents of those scores from (or to) your total point buy. Finally, assign your remaining ability scores as you see fit, up to the total adjusted point buy. (As usual, racial modifiers are applied after the scores are generated.) Rolled scores cannot be further adjusted by point buy modifications.

Each score starts at 10. Point buy costs for each score are 1 for every point between 11 and 13 inclusive, increasing by 1 at every even number above that range, or -1 for 6 through 9, decreasing by 1 at every fourth number below that range. (Scores below 10 cannot be selected, only rolled for.) See the following table for details.

Score	Cost (delta)	Cost (total)
3*	-2	-10
4*	-2	-8
5*	-2	-6
6*	-1	-4
7*	-1	-3
8*	-1	-2
9*	-1	-1
10	0	0
11	1	1
12	1	2
13	1	3
14	2	5
15	2	7
16	3	10
17	3	13
18	4	17

*These scores may not normally be bought, only rolled randomly, but their values are given for accounting purposes.

Typical starting point buy amounts range from 10 for a gritty, tough campaign to 25 for a sweeping epic; 15 is the standard.

Example: A Ranger intends to make a Horizon Tripper, and selects Wis and Cha as rolled stats; Int is needed at 13 or better, and Str, Dex, and Con are important. Starting point buy is set at 20, bumped up to 24 after two rolled stats are chosen. She rolls a relatively average pair: Wis is 10 and Cha is 7, leaving 27 points for her other stats. Buying Int at 13 leaves 24; Str 18, Con 14, and Dex 12 eat up the rest.

Example: A Sorcerer selects Str to roll; Cha needs to be as high as possible, Con, Dex and Wis are useful, and even Int is handy for skill points. Starting point buy is 15, bumped up to 17 after one stat is chosen. He rolls a 5, which might get awkward when trying to lug things around, but at least leaves a lot of points for other things: 23 points left. Cha at 17, Con at 14, and Wis at 12 leave 3 points; Dex could be 13 and Int 10, 12 and 11, or 11 and 12 respectively.

This system is recommended for use with variants that convert level-based ability score bonuses into further point buy bonuses, since otherwise you may end up with odd leftover lumps that are hard to spend. If you are not using such a variant, and you end up with more point buy than can be spent on your stats (quite unlikely, but possible), you may buy one or more of your stats higher as indicated on the table.

Not sure if the reward for choosing a dump stat is quite right; obviously, 3d6 is a lot less nice than 4d6b3 or 5d6b3 (to the tune of 4-8 point buy or more), but then you also get some benefit from having a low roll on your dump stat, since that gives you point buy as well. So +2 is probably about the minimum, but maybe it should be +4.

Anyway, let me know if there's any other problems or wording that should be tweaked or whatever.

[AttilaTheGeek]

Hmm, I like the idea. Question, though: I don't understand why anyone would ever point buy an even number when they could get that even number plus one for the same price.

Also, could you give a couple examples? I'm not sure I understand the system completely.

[eggynack]

Hmm, I like the idea. Question, though: I don't understand why anyone would ever point buy an even number when they could get that even number plus one for the same price.

Also, could you give a couple examples? I'm not sure I understand the system completely.

I'm pretty sure that the numbers are cumulative, rather than total. thus, an eleven costs one point, and a 14 costs 5 points. Anyway, it seems rather odd to have a system that incentivizes rolling low to a significant degree. You end up with weird fighters who are significantly worse because you accidentally rolled an 18 in wisdom. I dunno how I feel about it. Still, I like the part where this system is randomizing dump stats so that ability scores have some flavor to them. Instead of a wizard being just an 18, two 14's, and three 8's, those three 8's will become a wide spread, which is kinda neat. The fear of accidentally rolling high on dump stats might cause folks not to take advantage of this system though, which is something that should be considered if you haven't done so already. It seems like you haven't though, because at the end you say that it'd be better for a character if the dump stats had higher numbers. On the contrary, I'd much rather my wizard get a few 3's and a few 18's than a pile of middling numbers.

[TuggyNE]

Hmm, I like the idea. Question, though: I don't understand why anyone would ever point buy an even number when they could get that even number plus one for the same price.

As eggynack said, they're cumulative. Maybe I should put in a new column for total.

Also, could you give a couple examples? I'm not sure I understand the system completely.

OK. Added to the OP.

Anyway, it seems rather odd to have a system that incentivizes rolling low to a significant degree. You end up with weird fighters who are significantly worse because you accidentally rolled an 18 in wisdom. I dunno how I feel about it.

That's partly why you get a bonus for risking it. (It's also, I would argue, an essential part of rolling; you have to have some chance of things going rather poorly for you, even if it's fairly low. And since no stat is quite useless, it gives you the chance to find unexpected advantages or disadvantages from either rolling low (more points, higher chance of being disabled by ability damage, etc) or rolling high (fewer points, bonuses to odd things, etc).

Still, I like the part where this system is randomizing dump stats so that ability scores have some flavor to them. Instead of a wizard being just an 18, two 14's, and three 8's, those three 8's will become a wide spread, which is kinda neat.

Yup.

The fear of accidentally rolling high on dump stats might cause folks not to take advantage of this system though, which is something that should be considered if you haven't done so already. It seems like you haven't though, because at the end you say that it'd be better for a character if the dump stats had higher numbers.

Where did I say that? In isolation, yes, any stat is better higher, and that's what my comments about 5d6b3 vs 3d6 were about (i.e., the difference between rolled and organic point buy). In the system as a whole, it should be somewhat harder to decide which you'd prefer, which is why there's a smaller bonus (because in point buy dump stats are preferred to be low, so I'm basically splitting the difference).

On the contrary, I'd much rather my wizard get a few 3's and a few 18's than a pile of middling numbers.

Have fun with allips, shadows, struggling to lift a handy haversack, and ego whip~

It's a tradeoff, you see.

[eggynack]

Where did I say that? In isolation, yes, any stat is better higher, and that's what my comments about 5d6b3 vs 3d6 were about (i.e., the difference between rolled and organic point buy). In the system as a whole, it should be somewhat harder to decide which you'd prefer, which is why there's a smaller bonus (because in point buy dump stats are preferred to be low, so I'm basically splitting the difference).

Well, you kinda implied it hereabouts:

Not sure if the reward for choosing a dump stat is quite right; obviously, 3d6 is a lot less nice than 4d6b3 or 5d6b3 (to the tune of 4-8 point buy or more), but then you also get some benefit from having a low roll on your dump stat.

There's at least the idea that you'd be better off if the dump stat rolls were higher, though you admittedly have the inverse idea there as well.

Have fun with allips, shadows, struggling to lift a handy haversack, and ego whip~

It's a tradeoff, you see.

Heh, fair enough I guess. Actually, if you're able to add point buy to your dump stats, rolling low is universally better, because stats are modular upwards, but they can't be pushed back down. You might want to consider stuff related to that, because it seems like a thing of some kind.

[TuggyNE]

Heh, fair enough I guess. Actually, if you're able to add point buy to your dump stats, rolling low is universally better, because stats are modular upwards, but they can't be pushed back down. You might want to consider stuff related to that, because it seems like a thing of some kind.

Oh. Hmm. That's not the intent; you're supposed to be stuck with your rolls unless and until you put level-up bonuses toward them. Not sure how to word that, or if it needs to be mentioned as such.

[eggynack]

Oh. Hmm. That's not the intent; you're supposed to be stuck with your rolls unless and until you put level-up bonuses toward them. Not sure how to word that, or if it needs to be mentioned as such.

You should probably just say that the point buy can't be used to alter the dump stats. I don't know if there's some special D&D terminology wording for that, but it seems simple enough. Maybe make it something like, "Finally, assign your remaining ability scores as you see fit, up to the total adjusted point buy. This point buy can not be used to change your dump stats."

[TuggyNE]

You should probably just say that the point buy can't be used to alter the dump stats. I don't know if there's some special D&D terminology wording for that, but it seems simple enough. Maybe make it something like, "Finally, assign your remaining ability scores as you see fit, up to the total adjusted point buy. This point buy can not be used to change your dump stats."

OK. How's this?

[eggynack]

OK. How's this?

That seems fine. Now I have to think about actual factors of the system though, which is all kindsa more complicated. For example, with ten as your baseline, eight as the typical dump stat placement, two as the number of points gained per dump stat assigned, and 10.5 as the average roll on a 3d6, you actually stand to subtract points from your primary scores on average. At least I think that's how it maths out. I'm honestly not sure if this factor is a good thing or a bad thing. The ultimate result is that assigning "dump stats" is actually pushing more points towards the stats that you'd otherwise neglect. It's certainly an interesting thing, at the very least.

[Qwertystop]

That seems fine. Now I have to think about actual factors of the system though, which is all kindsa more complicated. For example, with ten as your baseline, eight as the typical dump stat placement, two as the number of points gained per dump stat assigned, and 10.5 as the average roll on a 3d6, you actually stand to subtract points from your primary scores on average. At least I think that's how it maths out. I'm honestly not sure if this factor is a good thing or a bad thing. The ultimate result is that assigning "dump stats" is actually pushing more points towards the stats that you'd otherwise neglect. It's certainly an interesting thing, at the very least.

Yeah. It should either shift the no-points to 11 instead of 10 or maybe just subtract 1 from your roll (average becomes 9.5)

[Cheiromancer]

... with ten as your baseline, eight as the typical dump stat placement, two as the number of points gained per dump stat assigned, and 10.5 as the average roll on a 3d6, you actually stand to subtract points from your primary scores on average.

Yeah. It should either shift the no-points to 11 instead of 10 or maybe just subtract 1 from your roll (average becomes 9.5)

Or make it 3 for the number of points gained per dump stat assigned.

It would be hilarious if you rolled 18's in a couple of dump stats, and had negative points to spend on your important stats. Maybe keep it +2 points per dump stat, and use 3d4 for them instead? (Or 2d6+1, or something like that).

[Mangles]

This is good. I hope to see it thrown around the boards a bit.

[TuggyNE]

That seems fine. Now I have to think about actual factors of the system though, which is all kindsa more complicated. For example, with ten as your baseline, eight as the typical dump stat placement, two as the number of points gained per dump stat assigned, and 10.5 as the average roll on a 3d6, you actually stand to subtract points from your primary scores on average. At least I think that's how it maths out. I'm honestly not sure if this factor is a good thing or a bad thing. The ultimate result is that assigning "dump stats" is actually pushing more points towards the stats that you'd otherwise neglect. It's certainly an interesting thing, at the very least.

Now that's a useful analysis that I didn't think to make!

Yeah. It should either shift the no-points to 11 instead of 10 or maybe just subtract 1 from your roll (average becomes 9.5)

Or make it 3 for the number of points gained per dump stat assigned.

I'm inclined to try to keep it to even numbers where possible, and I'm reluctant to change either the baseline or the rollable range; I might change the bonus to +4, though.

It would be hilarious if you rolled 18's in a couple of dump stats, and had negative points to spend on your important stats. Maybe keep it +2 points per dump stat, and use 3d4 for them instead? (Or 2d6+1, or something like that).

There's only a 21 in a million chance of hitting 0 PB starting at 28 with two rolled stats. It goes up a bit with three, but it's still pretty low, I think. If you have more than three dump stats you're probably doing something wrong. (Unless you're, I dunno, a DFA or something.)

Edit: it's actually a 0.18% chance of going negative, starting at 20. Still small, but nowhere near that small.

As above, I'm reluctant to change the rolling range, since it feels weird. If there's a good explanation for why it would make sense, though, fluff-wise, I'm open to that I guess.

This is good. I hope to see it thrown around the boards a bit.

Awesome! Glad you like it.

[eggynack]

Now that's a useful analysis that I didn't think to make!

Fancy. Glad to help out on nifty stuff.

There's only a 21 in a million chance of hitting 0 PB starting at 28 with two rolled stats. It goes up a bit with three, but it's still pretty low, I think. If you have more than three dump stats you're probably doing something wrong. (Unless you're, I dunno, a DFA or something.)

As above, I'm reluctant to change the rolling range, since it feels weird. If there's a good explanation for why it would make sense, though, fluff-wise, I'm open to that I guess.

Well, there's always the direct approach to things. Something like, "If the combined modifier of your dump stats is equal to or greater than +3, multiplied by the number of dump stats, you may re-roll them." I dunno if +3 is the right number, or if the modifier should change somehow if you add more dump stats, but this system works for the dice rolling system itself, so it might as well work for you. The way I figure it, a couple of kinda high dump stat rolls is alright, but if the mechanic is crippling the character, you should make it not do that.

Edit: Actually, because this is a system that's modular relative to point buy, perhaps the re-roll system should also be modular relative to point buy. I'd advise doing it proportionally, rather than as a static amount of points that should be left at the end. Just as a basic version that probably won't work, "If the ratio of your points invested in dump stats to your total point buy is greater than or equal to n/6, where n is the number of dump stats you've assigned, you may reroll."

In plain English, if you set strength and dexterity as your dump stats, and it's a 28 point buy game, you can re-roll if you have ten or more points tied up in strength and dexterity (It actually might be eleven or more, after accounting for the +2's. I haven't decided whether you should account for them). It makes some logical sense to do it this way, because your ability score based power is supposed to be a function of the game's point buy.

Double edit: Just a thought: would it make the system work better if the bonuses gained by assigning dump stats were also modular relative to point buy? I have no idea why it would, but it's a thing worth thinking about a little.

[TuggyNE]

Well, there's always the direct approach to things. Something like, "If the combined modifier of your dump stats is equal to or greater than +3, multiplied by the number of dump stats, you may re-roll them." I dunno if +3 is the right number, or if the modifier should change somehow if you add more dump stats, but this system works for the dice rolling system itself, so it might as well work for you. The way I figure it, a couple of kinda high dump stat rolls is alright, but if the mechanic is crippling the character, you should make it not do that.

If I go that route, I'd probably just make the dice smaller or otherwise weighted. Chiefly dependent on sensible fluff, since, to me, a dump stat is basically something you are generally average in, although I'm beginning to lean toward "if you were really all that great in the area you'd probably have focused on something that made use of it".

Edit: Actually, because this is a system that's modular relative to point buy, perhaps the re-roll system should also be modular relative to point buy. I'd advise doing it proportionally, rather than as a static amount of points that should be left at the end. Just as a basic version that probably won't work, "If the ratio of your points invested in dump stats to your total point buy is greater than or equal to n/6, where n is the number of dump stats you've assigned, you may reroll."

In plain English, if you set strength and dexterity as your dump stats, and it's a 28 point buy game, you can re-roll if you have ten or more points tied up in strength and dexterity (It actually might be eleven or more, after accounting for the +2's. I haven't decided whether you should account for them). It makes some logical sense to do it this way, because your ability score based power is supposed to be a function of the game's point buy.

That seems a little tricky to explain, and it took me a bit to realize that by "modular", you meant "point-buy-amount-agnostic"; that is, it doesn't matter how many points you

— excuse me a minute, I have a serious math error to correct —

how many points you assign, it works just as well with 15, 20, 25, or whatever. (It also works if for some reason you don't like PF-style point buy, for that matter.)

Double edit: Just a thought: would it make the system work better if the bonuses gained by assigning dump stats were also modular relative to point buy? I have no idea why it would, but it's a thing worth thinking about a little.

I don't think the scaling makes sense that way, really. Point buy is pretty close to linear, except at the very low and very high ends.

[eggynack]

If I go that route, I'd probably just make the dice smaller or otherwise weighted. Chiefly dependent on sensible fluff, since, to me, a dump stat is basically something you are generally average in, although I'm beginning to lean toward "if you were really all that great in the area you'd probably have focused on something that made use of it".

That makes some sense, though I like the idea of maintaining dump stat variance without allowing it to cripple a character. The idea of having a character with one 18 and one 5 in his dump stats is vaguely interesting. However, come to think of it, using modifiers as the metric for re-rolling makes absolutely no sense in this case. My system would have forced a character to proceed with one 18 and one 12, for a total of 19 points, and would allow a reroll to a character with two 16's, for a total of 10 points. Thus, were this system to be used, it would have to be based on point buy.

That seems a little tricky to explain, and it took me a bit to realize that by "modular", you meant "point-buy-amount-agnostic"; that is, it doesn't matter how many points you

— excuse me a minute, I have a serious math error to correct —

how many points you assign, it works just as well with 15, 20, 25, or whatever. (It also works if for some reason you don't like PF-style point buy, for that matter.)

Yeah, that's about what I meant.

I don't think the scaling makes sense that way, really. Point buy is pretty close to linear, except at the very low and very high ends.

Perhaps so. The idea didn't make that much sense to me in the first place, because it seems like varying point buys are essentially already accounted for in the point buy itself. Still, I think that the idea was to set the bonus as some fraction of point buy. A +2 might mean less in a 32 point buy than in a 25 point buy. It might not be a necessary change though.

[erikun]

This seems like a fun variant, and I'll note the thread if I'm making new characters in the future. I don't see many people going with this, given how it could mess up planning if you accidentally roll high, but it seems like something interesting if you care about some high stats but not others.

Just out of curiosity, what do you recommend if a character ends up with negative point buy, or with such a high point buy that they still have points left over after maxing all the available stats?

For example, a wizard who only cares for INT and CON could choose to roll for the other stats. It'd be possible to end up in negative point buy (four 16's would net you -12 BP, which means 6 INT 6 CON or a 4 CON) or end up with excessive points due to low scores (four 5's would net you 64 BP, with gives you 18 INT 18 CON and 30 BP left over).

I'm not recommending you change it, mind you - it can be fun to gamble and have it not pay off. The 5, 5, 18, 18, 5, 5 is just the risks of the roll. Ending up with negative BP and taking penalties to your manditory stats - as amusing as that could be during character creation - would not be something you'd want to actually play in most games.

[eggynack]

I just noticed another issue. What happens if your dump stat rolls are low enough that you're fundamentally incapable of spending all of your point buy? It's a thing that can definitely happen if you have enough dump stats. Perhaps there should be a caveat that allows you to spend those crazy surplus points on the dump stats.

[Cheiromancer]

To reduce the chance of these statistical quirks, I would suggest the following:

• no more than 3 dump stats
• after point buy you may exchange two scores

If you can switch two scores then it greatly reduces the problem of when all three dump stats roll 13 or higher. You can buy a 7 for -4 points and switch it with the 16 you rolled or something.

Also, I think you should allow scores of 19 and 20 to be bought (for 21 and 26 points, respectively). This gives you some breathing room if your dump stats are real low and/or your base point buy was high.

Just something to think about.

[TuggyNE]

This seems like a fun variant, and I'll note the thread if I'm making new characters in the future. I don't see many people going with this, given how it could mess up planning if you accidentally roll high, but it seems like something interesting if you care about some high stats but not others.

Fair enough. It's mostly for those who would otherwise only be willing to roll, or who kind of wish they could roll, rather than replacing point buy in general.

Just out of curiosity, what do you recommend if a character ends up with negative point buy, or with such a high point buy that they still have points left over after maxing all the available stats?

Negative point buy I plan to handle (read: prevent) in a bit. Excessively high point buy can either be saved for level-up bonuses next level, or spent with an expanded chart, probably the latter. Assuming I don't prevent it as well.

Ending up with negative BP and taking penalties to your manditory stats - as amusing as that could be during character creation - would not be something you'd want to actually play in most games.

Yeah, that's not very likely, but it's still undesirable.

To reduce the chance of these statistical quirks, I would suggest the following:

• no more than 3 dump stats
• after point buy you may exchange two scores

If you can switch two scores then it greatly reduces the problem of when all three dump stats roll 13 or higher. You can buy a 7 for -4 points and switch it with the 16 you rolled or something.

Limiting sounds fine. Exchanging I'm not so sure of, though.

Also, I think you should allow scores of 19 and 20 to be bought (for 21 and 26 points, respectively). This gives you some breathing room if your dump stats are real low and/or your base point buy was high.

I may do this, yeah.

---

1So, thinking about using 3d4+2 for dump stats; max drops from 18 to 14, while min rises to 5. This offsets the current problem with averages, makes it impossible to have a negative point buy, and makes it more difficult to get a really high point buy as well. It is a little strange though.

[erikun]

So, thinking about using 3d4+2 for dump stats; max drops from 18 to 14, while min rises to 5. This offsets the current problem with averages, makes it impossible to have a negative point buy, and makes it more difficult to get a really high point buy as well. It is a little strange though.

I think I prefer the 3d6-in-order option, but with Cheiromancer's option to swap two scored after everything is done in the case of bizzare situations. Perhaps only make that possible in the event of a truely terrible BP end result. (10 BP or less, most likely.)

3d6 feels more classical, has the same range of possible numbers as intended. 5d4-2 gives you the same 3-18 range but much more weighted towards the center, although I think that weighting the dice towards any result kind of defeats the purpose of having the random result - most of the point is to "organically" determine those stats you don't care about!

[eggynack]

I actually like the 3d4+2 thing, or some other dice set up if there's a better one. These're dump stats, so it makes sense for them to be rolled differently than you would classically roll them. having them be worse is neat from an aesthetics perspective. Now we just need to figure out what the optimum dice are to convey dumpiness. d4's are kinda nice, cause their results are kinda squat and dumpy, but there could always be something better. Maybe something weird like 2d8. I dunno.

[TuggyNE]

I think I prefer the 3d6-in-order option, but with Cheiromancer's option to swap two scored after everything is done in the case of bizzare situations. Perhaps only make that possible in the event of a truely terrible BP end result. (10 BP or less, most likely.)

Hmm. Complicated, but it might work.

3d6 feels more classical, has the same range of possible numbers as intended. 5d4-2 gives you the same 3-18 range but much more weighted towards the center, although I think that weighting the dice towards any result kind of defeats the purpose of having the random result - most of the point is to "organically" determine those stats you don't care about!

What decided me (for now) is the observation that if those stats were as good as normal, you probably wouldn't be in a field that ignores them; it's basically a case of selection bias. I'd still prefer the range of 3d6 if possible, but it seems like the tradeoff isn't worth it right now.

[erikun]

I think you might be losing sight of the idea, though. I had assumed that the idea was to give a bit of randomness to the stats they don't care about, and providing a small bonus in exchange for taking the risk. If you're giving them +2 BP and weighing the dice towards the lower end of numbers - on a stat that they already don't care about and wouldn't mind low - then you're just making it a more optimial choice.

[eggynack]

I think you might be losing sight of the idea, though. I had assumed that the idea was to give a bit of randomness to the stats they don't care about, and providing a small bonus in exchange for taking the risk. If you're giving them +2 BP and weighing the dice towards the lower end of numbers - on a stat that they already don't care about and wouldn't mind low - then you're just making it a more optimial choice.

That doesn't seem accurate. The design, by my understanding at least, is that you end up with numbers that are randomized, without being too high. For example, let's say I'm playing a wizard in a 32 point buy game. I end up with 18 intelligence, 16 constitution, 14 dexterity, and three 8's. With this system, instead of having three 8's, you'd end up with maybe a 6, a 13, and an 8. It allows your non-scores to be dynamic rather than static, without forcing people into complete roll based randomness.

Thus, it makes sense to weight the numbers a bit lower than you'd normally have them, because these aren't supposed to be regular rolled stats. They're supposed to be dump stats. Besides, rolling 3d4+2 on extraneous stats only gets you about even against a +2. Once again assuming a standard dump stat value of 8, there's still a 1.5 point margin between your average roll and standard dump stat using pure point buy. Between that and the 2 point bonus, you're essentially picking up .5 points to your primary stats per dump stat, which might actually be a bit low when taken against risk to your character. It's definitely not an option I'd have no reservations about using.

Edit: Do note that this analysis is dependent on the value of high dump stats having marginal value. Any dump stat selection in this system will get you 2 points over normal no matter what, but I'm assuming that the difference in value between high dump stats and high non-dump stats makes any score higher than 8 a relatively minute power boost. There might be some room for error around this point, particularly when considering something like wisdom on a fighter, who will still gain value off the higher will saves.

[erikun]

That doesn't seem accurate. The design, by my understanding at least, is that you end up with numbers that are randomized, without being too high. For example, let's say I'm playing a wizard in a 32 point buy game. I end up with 18 intelligence, 16 constitution, 14 dexterity, and three 8's. With this system, instead of having three 8's, you'd end up with maybe a 6, a 13, and an 8. It allows your non-scores to be dynamic rather than static, without forcing people into complete roll based randomness.

Well your standard point buy would give us 10, 14, 16, 18, 10, 10 in this system, becasue we're starting with 10 as the base. But remember that rolling stats gets you +2 for each stat randomly rolled, along with an added total based on what the stats turn out to be. 6, 8, and 13 come out to -5 net, so that would add +5 to the point buy. We'd also get +6 due to rolling three stats.

So instead of 32 point buy, we now have 43 point buy to work with. That can give us 18, 17, and 17. We now have the following stats:
STR 6
DEX 17
CON 17
INT 18
WIS 13
CHA 8

See the problem? Strength and Charisma are lower, but the below average rolls for dump scores puts more points into the point buy pool - which is what the player wants to focus on. Rather than 32 point buy for the imporant stats (and dumping the others) we now have 43 point buy! This seems completely counter to the exercise, unless the point was to create stronger characters.

[eggynack]

I was using 6, 8, and 13 as a random example. It's strictly not representative of the actual probabilistic makeup of the game, because you're just as likely to get 15, 13, 8 (on a 3d6) and be screwed to the same extent as you'd be happy in the other instance. Also, I'm pretty sure that you're adding twice to get those results. The total point buy at the end should be exactly six more than your starting point buy, or 38. You don't add the +5 to the total point buy; you just take it into account when adding up to the normal point buy.

[Cheiromancer]

I was using 6, 8, and 13 as a random example. It's strictly not representative of the actual probabilistic makeup of the game, because you're just as likely to get 15, 13, 8 (on a 3d6) and be screwed to the same extent as you'd be happy in the other instance. Also, I'm pretty sure that you're adding twice to get those results. The total point buy at the end should be exactly six more than your starting point buy, or 38. You don't add the +5 to the total point buy; you just take it into account when adding up to the normal point buy.

I don't think erikun double-counted. There is -5 on the 6 , 8 and 13, and 43 on the 17, 17, 18, for a total of 38 points. Of those 38 points, 6 is from having three dump stats. 32 is a high point buy for PF, though, isn't it? It might be best to stick with 20 when working these kinds of comparisons.

Also, if 3d4+2 is the generation method for a dump stat, then 6, 8 and 13 are pretty typical. That triplet has an average of 9, while the average of 3d4+2 is 9.5. You only start to suffer if the average of your dump stats is above 12. And even then you could save things if you allow a switch: if by some cosmic fluke you rolled three 14's on 3d4+2 you could swap a 14 for a purchased 7. Then instead of being down 9 BP for your three good stats (3x5 to pay for the three 14's, partially offset by 3x2 for having three dump stats), you'd break even (the cost of 14, 14, 7 is 6, exactly offset by the 6 bonus BP).

If you use 3d4+2 for the dump stats, have +2 BP for each dump stat and allow two stats to be switched at the end I think you would be fine without allowing 19's and 20's to be purchased. With minimal scores and a base of 20 BP you'd end up with 53 BP to spend on three scores. That's three 18's with 2 BP left over. Hardly enough to worry about.

[eggynack]

Yeah, my brain-math keeps going off track because of the fact that ten is the median stat. Currently, because that's true, the average roll of 9.5 gets you up a point, in addition to the two from dumping a stat. It messes up my claims a bit, is what I'm saying. It might be better if the base stat is set at 8, or if some other aspect is changed a bit to reflect this difference. I mean, I said that 8 was the standard dump stat level, but in this system it seems to be 10, and that makes things different.

[Cheiromancer]

Yeah, my brain-math keeps going off track because of the fact that ten is the median stat.

Me too! I have been using 3.5 point buy for years, but this thread was the first time I ever really looked at how PF does it.

Given that you get more build points for low stats, I think a narrow spread centered just below 10 would be just about perfect.

2d4+4, maybe? 2 BP per dump stat.

No need for an exchange at the end, since you won't ever roll higher than 12, and the bonus points from the dump stat will pay for the extra cost. Sure you might get a 6 in a score, but this will give you a lot more build points to spend on your important abilities. But even minimum rolls would never produce more BP than you could spend. Three 6's on the dump stats would result in 44 BP (assuming a base of 20 BP). That's 17, 17, 18 with one left over.

So no need to exchange abilities, no need to add the option to purchase a 19 or 20. 2d4+4 is just about perfect.