As also discussed partially in another thread, this seems to be quite problematic.

Thinking a little about it, it is not a really good system and has no real good motiviation to have something as "+" if you do the allocation approach.

If allocating, all the "+" does is imposing a minimum on a certain attribute, which is no benefit at all.

I would suggest to go back to the old ways and let the players add/subtract 5 at the end.

This might lead to 2 attributes slightly higher as 45, but given that you can increase attributes evevry rank once this time instead of 4 times total anyway, it is not such a big deal.

I agree in that this system really makes it so the characteristics which are a + don't really get reflected to any meaningful extent. It might be worth making it so that the cap is lower than usual for - characteristics, and higher than usual for + ones.

If you set the general max. on 45 and put the modificators afterwards, this would lead to a Max for strong attributes to 50 and for weak ones on 40.

Yeah. That, or make 45 for the strong characteristics only, 40 for average, and 35 for your weaker aspects.

That would be like DH1.

I liked the slightly higher stats in DH2 though.

I have no strong opinion either way, just throwing out ideas at this point. I definitely feel that +/- characteristics should stand out though, as it stands I don't even notice them using point buy.

In point buy, + is a flaw.

It limits your flexibility on certain attributes rather than push them.

What about a different approach. Keep the limits the same (Max 45), but make allocating points more expensive for - stats and cheaper for + stats.

As a rough first idea you get to allocate 1.5 points for every point spent on a + stat and it costs 1.5 to get 1 point in a - stat.

Plenty of balancing needed on this, but as an approach it might work.

Good idea. Had something similar once in an own designed RPG.

Tricky though to balance out. Especially since you have 2 strong attributes and only one weak.

Good idea. Had something similar once in an own designed RPG.

Tricky though to balance out. Especially since you have 2 strong attributes and only one weak.

Definitely. It's why I was always more a fan of the random rolling method (not that random rolling isn't without it's problems).

When it comes to point buying, the only thing I can think of is to have the + ability be weaker than the - (so 1.5 for 1 when +, 1 for 2 when -). It's still a min/max dream though, although point buy systems generally are.

The best system in my eyes would be a random system, which garantees the same sums for everyone ;D

But that would be hard to achieve.

Simple, fluffy and fair in one is hard to get.

What about:

> everybody determines his characteristics randomly: 25+2d10

> the total is compared to the average total of 36*10 = 360 + X (to simulate the additional throw which you may exchange), lets say X = 5

> the difference to this 365 Average will have to be subtracted/added by the player equally over the 10 attributes

--> this is correcting the level between players, but keeping the random element

> finally for each + you give +5 and each - you give -5

This would be an approach that I would prefer. As GM you could change the 365 of course for a more high level / low level campaign.

To have more choice, I would allow each player 5 different random generations to chose from.

Addition: If you have to subtract/add another no than 10, you first need to subtract from "-" and add to "+", then neutrals, then "+" / "-".

The best system in my eyes would be a random system, which garantees the same sums for everyone ;D

But that would be hard to achieve.

Simple, fluffy and fair in one is hard to get.

What about:

> everybody determines his characteristics randomly: 25+2d10

> the total is compared to the average total of 36*10 = 360 + X (to simulate the additional throw which you may exchange), lets say X = 5

> the difference to this 365 Average will have to be subtracted/added by the player equally over the 10 attributes

--> this is correcting the level between players, but keeping the random element

> finally for each + you give +5 and each - you give -5

This would be an approach that I would prefer. As GM you could change the 365 of course for a more high level / low level campaign.

To have more choice, I would allow each player 5 different random generations to chose from.

Fantastic idea, this seems like a really good way to do it.

I've already used a similar system which has everyone roll as normal, then I take the stat total of each character and then use the highest as the marker point. I then give each character half the difference between their stats and the marker as additional points. That way the highest roller gets the best stats, but they might not be in the best places and the lower roller gets weaker stats overall, but they are more evenly distributed.

Your system seems even fairer. About the only thing would be that some players might not like having to decrease stats when other people are putting their stats up in a targeted fashion, but this can be mitigated as you say by just having a higher target threshold or by making the add/remove across the board rather than targeted (although everyone's stats would tend to 36 then)

It would not tend towards 36 then as you have a random distribution before.

If I think about it again, you can even stay with the 1 additional roll, which you can exchange for a chosen attributes value.

Lets make an example (I rolled for real):

BS: 25 + 8 = 33

WS: 25 + 11 = 36

Strenght: 25 + 15 = 40

Toughness: 25 + 7 = 32

Agility: 25 + 2 = 27

Willpower: 25 + 13 = 38

Intelligence: 25 + 8 = 33

Fellowship: 25 + 5 = 30

Perception: 25 + 16 = 41

Influence: 25 + 10 = 35

Bonus roll: 7 --> I exchange my "2" at Agility

Sum = 345 (+5 effect because of the Agility exchange) --> 10 below the defined average target of 360

This means, I am quite lucky and have exactly 10 points to add --> 1 on each attribute.

Final values:

BS: 33 + 1 = 34

WS: 36 + 1 = 37

Strenght: 40 + 1 = 41

Toughness: 32 + 1 = 33

Agility: 32 + 1 = 33

Willpower: 38 + 1 = 39

Intelligence: 33 + 1 = 34

Fellowship: 30 + 1 = 31

Perception: 41 + 1 = 42

Influence: 35 + 1 = 36

The values are still randomized, but in a fair way (equal for everyone).

The possibility to exchange 1 value with the bonus roll still makes sure, you are not too bad in a key attribute for your character plan.

Afterwards you apply the +5 for "+" and the -5 for "-".

Of course, you can still allow your player to make a defined number of throws and pick one which matches his character better (3-5 is good in my opinion).

If it would not have been exactly 10 to distribute for the 360 average, you could:

a.) let the player distribute the difference equally, but define the order himself (so he can "save" some attributes 1 point)

b.) have him distribute equally, but negative differences on "-" attributes first and positives on "+" first

It would not tend towards 36 then as you have a random distribution before.

Should have been clearer, I meant it would tend away from the edges of the possible results. So people with 45 or 27 in a stat are likely to have them moved away towards 36 (as if they've generated such a extreme result they're more likely to be over/under the threshold as well). Not really a bad thing, just that some players might not like that they're very unlikely to keep their maximum stat (and everyone will like that they're unlikely to have a minimum stat, of course).

If it would not have been exactly 10 to distribute for the 360 average, you could:

a.) let the player distribute the difference equally, but define the order himself (so he can "save" some attributes 1 point)

b.) have him distribute equally, but negative differences on "-" attributes first and positives on "+" first

The only thing I'd do is probably not change the +/- system and just use the system as is when initially generating the stats (just means the average threshold has to be tweaked slightly up as there are more + than -).

Other than that seem like a perfectly elegant way of doing it and should keep everyone happy.