I mean, they make me feel bad too, no question about it… But that’s exactly why they’re necessary.

There are two different things mentioned here, which I feel I need to clarify:

First, what you said about merging / creating a PR with broken tests. Absolutely you shouldn’t do that, because you should only merge once the feature is finished. If a test doesn’t work, then either it’s testing for the wrong aspect and should be rewritten, or the functionality doesn’t work 100% yet, so the feature isn’t ready to get merged. Even if you’re waiting for some other feature to get ready, because you need to integrate it or something, you’re still waiting, so the feature isn’t ready.

At the same time, the OP’s point about tests being supposed to fail at first isn’t too far off the mark either, because that’s precisely how TDD works. If you’re applying that philosophy (which I personally condone), then that’s exactly what you do: Write the test first, checking for expected behaviour (which is taken from the specification), which will obviously fail, and only then write the code implementing that behaviour.

But, even then, that failing test should be contained to e.g. the feature branch you’re working on, never going in a PR while it’s still failing.

Once that feature has been merged, then yes, the test should never fail again, because that indicates a new change having sabotaged some area of that feature. Even if the new feature is considered “essential” or “high priority” while the old feature is not, ignoring the failure is one of the easiest ways to build up technical debt, so you should damn well fix that now.

Isn’t the copyright specifically for the recordings/streams the league produces? I don’t actually know if it’s illegal to offer a stream using your own camera. Almost certainly against stadium rules, but as you said, they shouldn’t be able to claim copyright in that case.

Als ob ich das nach all den Jahren noch wüsste, vor allem war ich selbst nicht mal dabei, weiß das nur vom Hörensagen.

Ein Mitschüler hatte mal in einer Klassenarbeit einen Tischgrill angeschmissen… Soviel zu “Sicherheit”

I don’t think I understand what you mean, might be because we’re both ESL.

Are you saying you want a histogram or something about how points can be spent, instead of how players do spend them?

Hmm, you’d probably have to have access to something like DndBeyond’s data to compile such a chart (or use one they compiled). Problem is, there doesn’t seem to be anything like that. The only published data visualisations are about races, classes and names.

So I don’t think you can just search for it, the only other option I see is gathering that data (if from a smaller sample) yourself, by creating a poll asking for their ability spreads if they used point buy. You could try and advertise it in appropriate communities, and once you feel like your sample size is big enough, you can calculate the percentages.

I wish there was an easier way (and maybe there is and I just didn’t look far enough), but from my chair, that’s the only option.

Point buy is completely deterministic, so I’m not sure what you mean by probabilities… Are you referring to statistics, like which stat is a certain value most of the time?

Well, one way to easily replicate point buy’s range per stat (if not its distribution limit over all stats) would be 7 + 1d8. You could also do: Start every stat from 12, and if you want to increase one, you can do so by rolling a d4 as a bonus (rerolling on a 4). However, to do that you’ll have to decrease a different one by another / the same d4. So you’ll still have the same range, but like with point buy there’s an element of control and choice to it.

Regarding bigger ranges, one way could be using that same method, only with bigger dice (and possibly other starting points). E.g. you could start from 11 and roll a d8, rerolling an 8 if you’re adding it as a bonus. That example would give you values anywhere from 3 to 18, and it’s much more swingy than 4d6dl. Of course, if the high variance is an issue, you can experiment with dropping highest or lowest on 2d8.

For example, if you’re dropping lowest on bonus rolls and penalty rolls, you’ll get characters with high highs and low lows, or if you’re doing it the other way around, you’ll get characters where each stat is fairly equal, without much variance to speak of.

There isn’t much more I can say without knowing how much variance and player choice you want to include.