D&D 5e stats, how 'bout instead of the usual 4d6 drop, you just roll 24d6 all at once, drop the lowest six, and arrange the remaining eighteen as desired?
I'd really love to understand the statistics of this, but it's just too goddamn complicated for me to do by myself. Nevermind the sheer number of possibilities, you have to account for all the possible choices of each possibility.
I've rolled a bunch of them and it kind of feels like a cross between 4d6 drop and point buy. You feel like you're in control, but you get the same basic range of stats. It's not too hard to get an 18, pretty easy to get a 17 or 16, and kind of impossible to get anything lower than an 8.
Math majors, don't be afraid to show off.
>>47934366
Or you could save time and effort and use point buy.
>>47934413
I could also not play D&D, but that's not what this thread is here to discuss.
>>47934366
Seems like a lot of effort to be a slightly random point-buy system.
>>47934366
Every player a base stat of 3.
Roll between 18 and 24 d4s.
Choose 3 d4 results from the pool and add it to each stat.
Have 6-15 stat range that skews toward higher overall starting stats.
>>47934641
It's actually slightly faster than 4d6 drop. I mean, it's just one big roll, and then some sorting and counting. It's like point buy only without checking some dumb table and with the thrill of chance-based gambling.
The problem is I want to have like a clean set of probabilities like this ( http://anydice.com/program/13e ) and it just isn't possible. At least not for me.
>>47934754
That's way more complicated than what I described.
Plus I don't like the fact that 5e point buy is capped at 15.
>>47934366
So it's a randomized point buy.
Not really seeing the point. It removes a lot the randomness aspect people want with rolling stats (even more so than 4d6 drop lowest assign as you wish already does) and removes the control point buy gives.
In addition, 4d6 needs only 4 dice, while this requires 24 dice, so better ask those Shadowrun players to borrow their dice cubes.
All it really offers is rolling more dice. In that case, just go over and play Shadowrun with said gamers.
>>47934906
FYI, all of these dice were for the full attack of a 3.5 monk I used to play, and that's not even all of them. But I appreciate your dismissiveness.
>>47934823
>thinks adding the step of adding 3 to a stat is incredibly complicated
>wants more extreme min maxing
You probably should just not play 5e
>>47934366
Each stat starts at 8. Roll 7d6. Assign them as desired. You can't go over 18.
I love how I post a rolling method I've never seen mentioned before, specifically asking about the statistics of it, and people respond with completely different rolling methods that I didn't ask about.
This is why nobody likes us.
>>47935068
OP.
You're a faggot.
No one cares about your system of rolling.
Get over yourself.
Love,
Your big gay lover.
>>47934366
My hobby is coming up with stupid different ways to roll stats, so far my favorite are:
4d4 with exploding dice
2D5+1 "Averaging Die (numbered 2,3,3,4,4,5)+ 1d3
>>47935116
You cared enough to reply though.
Good luck losing enough weight to suck your own dick.
>>47935068
I'll humour you, what sort of things do you want analysed?
>>47934366
>the usual 4d6 drop
Found a picture of OP
>>47935168
Nono, we're past that. I don't even feel like playing anymore. The warmth of this community has motivated me to turn off my computer and go outside.
Thanks though.
>>47934366
>>47935068
>>47935189
Really? You can't wrap your head around this?
24d6 means statistically you'll see four of each result. Dropping the lowest six means you get rid of half the 2s and all the 1s.
So, just to see how min-maxed we can get it.
6 6 6 = 18
6 5 5 2 = 18
5 5 4 4 = 18
4 4 3 3 3 = 17
So almost 4 18s, with a 3 and 2 left over for the dump stats.
If you want a more even spread
6 6 6 = 18
5 5 6 = 16
5 5 2 = 12
4 4 2 = 10
3 3 4 = 10
3 3 4 = 10
An 18 and a 16 with no major weakpoints. Compared to a 4d6 drop lowest, this seems to generate much higher power results quite easily.
You get a much better range of stats. It's almost garunteed that you'll get an 18 unless you actively choose not to get it. I have been assuming that you can assign any number of dice to any stat with a minimum of 1, but if it's capped at 3 then that helps slightly. The second spread is still totally viable, while the first can't min-max quite as hard. It makes multiple 18s much harder to get, though really, at this point I can't understand why you wouldn't just pointbuy. It basically does all the same things as pointbuy, except there's a slight chance that somebody doesn't roll above a 4 and gets screwed, or that somebody gets a boatload more 6s and gets even better stats.
If you want everyone to start with an 18 and no weaknesses, just do that. This isn't that hard.
>>47934366
Best I've seen is 108d6 with every 3 rolls arranged in a 6x6 grid.
So, 28 lines of 6 (6 horizontal, 6 vertical, 2 diagonal, and those again in reverse).
Each player takes a different line of 6 (from the same grid) in order for their stats.
>>47934366
The statistical diference is most likely negligable. I've done the math for the difference between 2d3 keep the highest twice and 1d3 four times keep the highest two. That difference exists but can be ignored as it's 8/81s. we can expect this to scale upward with larger dice, and also with more stats.
Think of it this way, you roll a stat normally and get 1,1,4,6. Those are the only 1's you roll the whole time. You have to keep at least one of them. If you had rolled with your method, you could discard them both.
The method I used isn't that hard, just writing every combination of rolls ordered and without repeat, but noting the occurances (easily found with a formula using the number of different numbers) then calculating an average.
Best I've seen is (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8)
ITT OP comes up with a completely unnecessary way to do something and asks for "feedback." New way turns out to be minmax bullshit and is made fun of. OP cries about it.
>>47936345
What else is new?
>>47934366
The statistics works out that you lose smaller rolls and keep bigger rolls, because if you roll four 6 on 4d6, you're dropping a 6. You will roll a billion times before you throw away a 6 rolling 24d6. You might as well give your players 42 point buy.
A more rational iteration of this system is from the AD&D handbook. All stats start at 8, roll 7d6, and allow players to allocate their die values accordingly.
>>47934366
With this many dice, the end total is going to be very bell-curved and have enough variety of dice in it for you to construct pretty much whatever array you want.
Just uses 1-to-1 pointbuy if you want.
Rolled 5, 2, 3, 5, 1, 3, 5, 3, 2, 2, 4, 4, 4, 1, 2, 2, 6, 4, 3, 6, 4, 4, 3, 6 = 84 (24d6)
>>47934366
>>47937752
STR: 3
DEX: 3
CON: 4+4+4+5 : 17
INT: 6+4+3+6 : 19
WIS: 3+6+4+3 : 16
CHA: 2+4+5+5 : 16
Wizard time.
Rolled 6, 5, 4, 6, 1, 6, 1, 6, 3, 1, 4, 4, 1, 1, 1, 3, 6, 1, 3, 6, 6, 5, 3, 2 = 85 (24d6)
>>47934366
>>47934366
Nah, this is dumb. Basically you can get max starting stats by putting all the 6s together. It's pretty much cheating a system that in itself is originally an alt rule to give people a break.
We start double stacking breaks, what's next triple breaks? Just give everyone max stats? Fuck this shit.
>>47937906
with 6x4d6 (Cleric)
6, 5, 4, 6 --> 17 WIS
1, 6, 1, 6 --> 13 CHA
3, 1, 4, 4 --> 11 DEX
1, 1, 1, 3 --> 5 STR
6, 1, 3, 6 --> 15 CON
6, 5, 3, 2 --> 14 INT
(drop 1,1,1,1,2,4)
with 24d6 (again, Cleric)
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,3,3,3,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,6,6,6,6,6
┝--> 64 WIS (4,4,4,5,5,6,6,6,6,6,6,6)
┝--> 3 CHA (1,2)
┝--> 3 DEX (3)
┝--> 3 STR (3)
┝--> 3 CON (3)
┕--> 3 INT (3)
(drop 1,1,1,1,1,1)
>>47938023
>64 wis
>>47934366
>I've rolled a bunch of them and it kind of feels like a cross between 4d6 drop and point buy.
>You feel like you're in control, but you get the same basic range of stats.
>It's not too hard to get an 18,
>pretty easy to get a 17 or 16,
>and kind of impossible to get anything lower than an 8.
>and kind of impossible to get anything lower than an 8.
>and kind of impossible to get anything lower than an 8.
>and kind of impossible to get anything lower than an 8.
>>47937799 >>47938023
>and kind of impossible to get anything lower than an 8.
>>47938033 inb4 0/7/7/7/6/6/6/6/5/5 bonus spells
>>47938023
>64 WIS
This is the staple in our group currently. You can also choose to discard a die and reroll the entire batch-1d6, up to six times (meaning you're stuck with the last roll).
Give nicely heroic totals.
what about 2d6+6? average of 13 (slightly higher than point buy) but no chance of rolling less than an 8 (cuts the tail of of 4d6D1)
BEST ROLLING SYSTEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL ABILITIES COMING THROUGH
>2d10, reroll both dice if either die is a natural 1
Creates a nice wide bell-curve centered on 12, stretching out to 4 at the lowest and 20 at the highest (1.2% chance each). For people who are okay with randomness; this one is fun if you just list stats 1-6 instead of letting players reorder them.
>[3d8, drop the lowest] plus [3d4, drop the two highest]
Mean of about 12.5, this will produce lots of results in the mid teens (median is 13) but very few absurdly high scores in the 18, 19, 20 area. Very low scores will happen but are fairly rare. Good for having high-powered characters that are nonetheless limited by one or two low dump stats.
