What I did was use Excel to make 9 graphs: “% successful” vs. each stat individually, “highest stat,” “lowest stat,” and “total stats” under the assumption that there would be some sort of mapping of stats → success, but that there wouldn’t be any dependencies between stats -whoops-!
The discontinuities at 8 STR & CHA were visually obvious, as was the negative slope of Dex… I actually inverted everyone’s DEX (trueDEX = 22 - givenDEX] for the highest/lowest/total graphs. The data also showed big gains in the 12-16 range for CON and WIS, so that’s where I put the extra points.
What I did was use Excel to make 9 graphs: “% successful” vs. each stat individually, “highest stat,” “lowest stat,” and “total stats” under the assumption that there would be some sort of mapping of stats → success, but that there wouldn’t be any dependencies between stats -whoops-!
The discontinuities at 8 STR & CHA were visually obvious, as was the negative slope of Dex… I actually inverted everyone’s DEX (trueDEX = 22 - givenDEX] for the highest/lowest/total graphs. The data also showed big gains in the 12-16 range for CON and WIS, so that’s where I put the extra points.