A Radical (Not to Mention Controversial) Change to Characteristic Determination

[Bastoche]

I think it's a bad idea for statistical reason.

The more dice you roll, the closer to average you are. A 50d6 score WILL be equal to "175" 97% of the time. At that limit, you're better off with fixed scores for a given race, assuming that the strongest is not that much stronger than the weakest of said race (hey, might not be a bad idea after all...).

At 15d6, the statistical fluctuation are still a bit important, but I suspect you'll rarely see anyone with a score much lower than 40 or much higher than 60. At 3d6, the fluctuations are huge. for 6 scores and 4 PC, there is about 10% chance that one score among the 24 will be exceptionnally high or exceptionnally low. While with the 15d6, there is 1 over 10E10 chances to have an exceptionnally high or low score.

If you want to keep the numbers high, use 3-4d20 instead. or go with 7-8d12.

 

[Felnar]

Not to mention that, as an example off the top of my ehad, a heavy warhorse has a strength of 18; I can have a character literally a strong as a horse! At first level!

sort of...
you have the same strength modifier as the horse for strength based checks.
but, the horse is size large and a quadruped so it can carry x3 what you can.

i think this is one of the problems the original poster is trying to solve with a wider stat range
but rolling more dice just makes the extreme scores that much more uncommon.

'man in the funny hat' describes the situation very well, but i'd disagree with changing stat generation to linear. that would create as many 18's as 10's, and nothing would be rarer than anything else. changing the modifiers exponentially to match the curve is a better option i'd say because it maintains different sized populations of each stat score.

 

[SBMC]

sort of...
you have the same strength modifier as the horse for strength based checks.
but, the horse is size large and a quadruped so it can carry x3 what you can.

i think this is one of the problems the original poster is trying to solve with a wider stat range
but rolling more dice just makes the extreme scores that much more uncommon.

'man in the funny hat' describes the situation very well, but i'd disagree with changing stat generation to linear. that would create as many 18's as 10's, and nothing would be rarer than anything else.

That would also make the whole idea pointless; as all would equal all.

changing the modifiers exponentially to match the curve is a better option i'd say because it maintains different sized populations of each stat score.

But, in theory, by making it match the curve they still all equal each other. The likelyhood of 3 1's is the same as 3 6's. It is sheer gambling; you be on the high numbers - if you get them then you get a Higher "payback" (modifier).

The modifiers already follow a 2 for 1 exchange against the ability scores; how else could it be mapped? You could have each number hold its own modifier but in the end an 18 would still need to be a +4 unless you change the whole game. By doing that someplace along the line you either need to divide the numbers down (i.e. an 18 Ability score's modifier: (18/6)+1)

The idea of 4d6, drop the lowest pushes the probability of a higher ability score upward as you get to drop the lowest 25% or so of the total score with more opportunities for the probability of any given number - but with the drop that is of course always a higher number (unlesss somehow you roll the same numbe on all dice).

Thus; unless you change the entire game a a whole it is what it is. Honestly ther are plenty of ways to use the existing process with ease to get what you want.

For example; you could use the standard point buy system but raise the starting score from 8 to 9 to 10; or drop it down to 7 or 6. I played in a game whee the DM beleived that since characters were supposed to be the physical and mental elite of the world that he did the following:

Get 1 score of 18 in the classes primary ability
Fighter: STR, CON or DEX
Rouge: DEX, CHA or INT
Wizard: INT
Sorceror: CHA
Bard: Any
Barbarian: STR or CON
Paladin: STR, WIS or CHA
Ranger: STR, WIS or DEX
Druid: CHA or WIS

NOTE: You had to choose this prior to rolling any other scores.

Then get two rolls of 12+2d6 drop the lower which could be used however you chose.

NOTE: You had to choose these, in order, prior to rolling any other scores.

The last three were rolled via 5d6 drop the lowest 2.

Like I said; he held that adventurers are the ultimate heroes of their world; Hercules, Achilles, Ajax, Hector as examples (just as examples seing as I watchd "Troy" again last night for the 1,000th time!). Aragorn, Gandolf etc. fall into this category as well with this methodology. As such half their scores should be forced to be above average by far and the primary one maxed out; following this method that is. And I do agree with it as long as the campaign properly challenges the characters.

 

[genshou]

Actually, 3 sixes rolled nets an 18, a +4 bonus. 3 ones rolled nets a 3, a -4 penalty. The statistics of getting either is the same, and the mechanic works to the same level in the opposite direction.

Really? Please tell me how the probability of rolling dice has to do with a -4 or a +4. That was the point I had made in response to the "linear" and "curve" statements made by several others as well here.

The CONSEQUENCE is the modifier; that does not drive the probability of 3 1's or 3 6's. The chances are equal for either one. Feel free to look that one up - you'll find it under "Game Theory". It dates back to the 1960's. In their it identifies the proof why casinos will always end up ahead.

As I had said "gambling". When you roll dice to generate ability scores you are hoping that you end up on the for right of the curve.

I don’t understand what point you are arguing here–it looks as though you and I are in agreement about this point. The probability of rolling a 3 or an 18 are equal with 3d6, and the modifiers are equal mechanically (4 - 4 = 0). The modifiers are simply a way of illustrating that the game mechanic for modifiers of equal chance are equal in that regard as well. Of course, nobody wants to be on the lower side of the curve, which is why rolling methods for generating “heroes” gained popularity and were officially adopted in 3rd Edition rules.

Point-Buy is not really measurable by any sort of probability as there is little "chance". It is a decision by an individual.

Ahh, my apologies. That reference was rather irrelevant.

Even when rolling 15d6 the probability for any of the 6 numbers coming up on any dice is indeed equal. However given the mathematics involved and 15d6 the likelihood of the numbers being evenly distributed over a wider numeric spectrum is higher. However note that the probability of each die is still the same per die if you roll 1 or a million of them. It is the combination of those curves that push the numbers towards the middle.

Yet another thing we understand perfectly between the two of us. If I roll 1 million dice for nonheroic ability scores, I’ll probably never generate a character with either a bonus OR a penalty.

HOWEVER if you do what most folks do and DROP some lower dice then the probability of having a higher average increases exponentially based on the number of die rolled. Tink about it. If I have

6
5
4
3
2
1
My average is 3.5

I drop the lowest 2
6
5
4
3


My average is 4.5

Choose any numbers you want (unless they are all the same of course - which has an equal probability of occurring as anything else per die; less probable for the whole lot simultaneously) and the same thing happens. Thus your statement is no entirely correct.

Actually, it is VERY correct in the context in which I actually gave that statement. Consider the following approximate percentages for given ability scores being rolled using the standard 4d6, drop lowest die method:

3: 0.07%
4: 0.3%
5: 0.8%
6: 1.8%
7: 3.3%
8: 5.5%
9: 7.7%
10: 10.3%
11: 12%
12: 13.3%
13: 12.8%
14: 11.3%
15: 8.7%
16: 6.3%
17: 3.5%
18: 1.6%

These percentages were calculated by a program I wrote which runs all 1,296 possible 4d6 rolls and then ignores the lowest die, adding the other three together. Clearly, it’s not a common occurrence for a hero to have a 3 in any of their ability scores. Even an 18 is very rare. Over 50% of ability scores fall between the ranges of 10-14. The average ability score is 11.99614, which we could just approximate as 12 to say that’s the middle ground to expect on a given die roll.

As for rolling 20d6 and dropping the lowest 5 dice, the program I made has some problems with variables, but when it does successfully run from start to finish without crashing it rolls a total of 1,200,000d6, in groups of 20, and drops the lowest 5 before adding the others together. This results in 60,000 separate ability rolls, or enough for 10,000 characters. Wow.

When I originally wrote the program, I didn’t have access to mythusmage’s scaling system. Now that I have that, I’ll run it and be able to compare percentages and actual ability modifiers, instead of splitting it among 75 unfamiliar numbers from 15-90.

Rolling a -4 or +4 is impossible. The following percent chances applied to the other modifiers based on the 60,000 scores rolled:

-3: 0%
-2: 0%
-1: 0.13%
+0: 44.8%
+1: 45.9%
+2: 8.8%
+3: 0.15%

As you can see, you’ll almost never end up with a score that isn’t +0 or +1. Even dropping the same percentage of the total dice, you still end up with scores leaning an excessive amount toward the middle. What if we used 1 million d6, drop 250,000 lowest? Same thing to a much more extreme scale. That was all I was trying to say. Obviously, rolling 5d6, drop 2 lowest greatly increases the averages. I’m simply pointing out that even *heroes* under mythusmage’s system will be more “mundane” than before due to the higher percentage of scores rolled within a smaller modifier range (over 90% are +0 or +1).

The point I was making is that I, or others here most likely, could start throwing mathematics, diagrams, mapping of curves, etc. up on the actual board and others may not like it. Perhaps I am wrong. I also, in making my statement, did not want to start getting into a discussion about the actual calculation of probabilities - but it appears perhaps you do want that.

Oh, very much so, as you can see above! If they don’t like it, TOO bad! I’m having fun relearning programming in order to calculate all of these!

Besides, this is a valid point that needs to be brought up in order to make mythusmage’s system work. Speaking of which, where has mythusmage disappeared to during this discussion? You’d think [he/she?] would have wanted to comment on something by now. *shrugs*

You don't hate to say it - you wanted to say it otherwise you would not have. I would venture to guess it is because you ran out of anything substantial to say given you spent half your post criticizing a portion of mine and virtually ignoring the meat of it.

Trolling if I’ve ever seen it. Regardless, I hope I’ve paid enough attention to the meat of the matter in this post to satisfy your carnivorous desires, yes? If not, go eat a cow–I can’t offer much more sustenance without being sucked dry (a very uncomfortable experience, to be certain).

 

[genshou]

sort of...
you have the same strength modifier as the horse for strength based checks.
but, the horse is size large and a quadruped so it can carry x3 what you can.

Not to mention that the horse gets size bonuses on many of those strength-based checks, most notably grappling.

That would also make the whole idea pointless; as all would equal all.

As explained above, yes a +4 for a human would be the same as a +4 for a horse, but because some effects of Strength also depend on size for other modifiers...

The modifiers already follow a 2 for 1 exchange against the ability scores; how else could it be mapped? You could have each number hold its own modifier but in the end an 18 would still need to be a +4 unless you change the whole game. By doing that someplace along the line you either need to divide the numbers down (i.e. an 18 Ability score's modifier: (18/6)+1)

Or, you could just refer to the first post in this thread (you know, the one that opened the topic and defined the general range of the discussion’s tangents?). It lists a different scale for the 15d6 method.

The idea of 4d6, drop the lowest pushes the probability of a higher ability score upward as you get to drop the lowest 25% or so of the total score with more opportunities for the probability of any given number - but with the drop that is of course always a higher number (unlesss somehow you roll the same numbe on all dice).

That is true, but we should try to focus on the difference a 15d6 ability score calculation requires, as that was the original intent of this thread, and the intent behind all of my posts thus far. As stated above, refer to the first post in the thread to see what the real discussion going on here amounts to.

Thus; unless you change the entire game a a whole it is what it is. Honestly ther are plenty of ways to use the existing process with ease to get what you want.

Ah, but that’s the joy of the House Rules forum. Why leave untouched what you can tamper with?

Seriously, though, your point is very valid. It’s just not a point that mythusmage seemed willing to consider when [he/she?] started this thread. That’s why the thread started. It’s about an alternate system that really functions rather well, except that rolling heroes requires a great deal of thought, and effects based on a score itself (such as carrying capacity, amount of time you can hold your breath, etc.) will have to be changed to somehow use the new scale.

 

[the Jester]

Proposed change to the official rules. House Rules forum not applicable.

Er, that's what the term 'house rules' means.

For what seems to me to be a very small problem you're proposing some massively sweeping changes that would instantly invalidate every dnd book ever put out. If you think it's a hassle converting old materials now, just think how much of a pain it would be with this change in place!

Edit: also, rolling 15d6 is pretty darn likely to land all your stats squarely in the average range. What fun, I'm as strong, smart and fast as a peasant.

 

[SBMC]

Trolling if I’ve ever seen it. Regardless, I hope I’ve paid enough attention to the meat of the matter in this post to satisfy your carnivorous desires, yes? If not, go eat a cow–I can’t offer much more sustenance without being sucked dry (a very uncomfortable experience, to be certain).

For certain - however eating and entire cow is not such a bad thing; the freshness of the meat cooked...the various beef dishes that could be made in addition to so many steaks...mmmm

And getting sucked dry is not all that bad - ask anyone who has been married You get used to it! After all its either her or her lawyer!

BTW your numbers are now backed up by my own calcs (not that it was required)

 

[genshou]

For certain - however eating and entire cow is not such a bad thing; the freshness of the meat cooked...the various beef dishes that could be made in addition to so many steaks...mmmm

And getting sucked dry is not all that bad - ask anyone who has been married You get used to it! After all its either her or her lawyer!

BTW your numbers are now backed up by my own calcs (not that it was required)

Speaking of eating meat and "trolling," have you ever thought of slicing a troll into tiny pieces, then taking one and putting it in a jar with little holes in the lid? If you burn the other pieces, then that one will stay alive and continue attempting to regenerate, right? So, whenever you need some meat, just open the jar and wait a few seconds. Then, hack off the growing chunk, close the lid, and toss the meat into a boiling pot over an open flame! Voila! Troll stew anytime you want it.

All joking aside, though...

I'm glad your math confirmed mine. I checked to make sure there weren't any flaws I could see in the programming, but it's been years, and I was hoping the numbers weren't wrong. It does bring up a valid point. The intent of using so many dice for abilities is to produce a larger scale for the ability score itself, not to change the ability modifiers in any way. Since ability scores themselves are the only things in d20 System that use their own mechanic (as opposed to all the many things that follow a d20 roll mechanic, or some such), they really can be changed without affecting anything else.

My suggestion with things that rely on a score rather than a modifier (such as holding breath) is that you divide the higher-scale ability score by 5. A 52 or 53 (the middle ground) divided by 5 is 10. So, there wouldn't be a change in how much a creature could carry or how long they could hold their breath. Also, when something deals a certain number of dice of ability damage, multiply the number of dice by 5. Ability damage of a fixed amount instead inflicts 1d10 loss per point normally inflicted.

Still stumped when it comes to heroic ability scores. My latest idea is to take the standard 4d6, drop lowest and multiply the result by 5. If the result is less than 90 after multiplication, add 1d5-1 (rolling a total of 0 on that is fine).

When

 

[SBMC]

Speaking of eating meat and "trolling," have you ever thought of slicing a troll into tiny pieces, then taking one and putting it in a jar with little holes in the lid? If you burn the other pieces, then that one will stay alive and continue attempting to regenerate, right? So, whenever you need some meat, just open the jar and wait a few seconds. Then, hack off the growing chunk, close the lid, and toss the meat into a boiling pot over an open flame! Voila! Troll stew anytime you want it.

All joking aside, though...

I'm glad your math confirmed mine. I checked to make sure there weren't any flaws I could see in the programming, but it's been years, and I was hoping the numbers weren't wrong. It does bring up a valid point. The intent of using so many dice for abilities is to produce a larger scale for the ability score itself, not to change the ability modifiers in any way. Since ability scores themselves are the only things in d20 System that use their own mechanic (as opposed to all the many things that follow a d20 roll mechanic, or some such), they really can be changed without affecting anything else.

My suggestion with things that rely on a score rather than a modifier (such as holding breath) is that you divide the higher-scale ability score by 5. A 52 or 53 (the middle ground) divided by 5 is 10. So, there wouldn't be a change in how much a creature could carry or how long they could hold their breath. Also, when something deals a certain number of dice of ability damage, multiply the number of dice by 5. Ability damage of a fixed amount instead inflicts 1d10 loss per point normally inflicted.

Still stumped when it comes to heroic ability scores. My latest idea is to take the standard 4d6, drop lowest and multiply the result by 5. If the result is less than 90 after multiplication, add 1d5-1 (rolling a total of 0 on that is fine).

When

Troll probably tastes like chicken! Bu I do wonder if that is doable...I think I may actualy try that!

If your looking for heroic scores the easiest thing to do is to increase the "base" of it; essentially put in a "floor: of some kind like that with the poin-buy systems. I posted this before on this thread:


For example; you could use the standard point buy system but raise the starting score from 8 to 9 to 10; or drop it down to 7 or 6. I played in a game whee the DM beleived that since characters were supposed to be the physical and mental elite of the world that he did the following:

Get 1 score of 18 in the classes primary ability
Fighter: STR, CON or DEX
Rouge: DEX, CHA or INT
Wizard: INT
Sorceror: CHA
Bard: Any
Barbarian: STR or CON
Paladin: STR, WIS or CHA
Ranger: STR, WIS or DEX
Druid: CHA or WIS

NOTE: You had to choose this prior to rolling any other scores.

Then get two rolls of 12+2d6 drop the lower which could be used however you chose.

NOTE: You had to choose these, in order, prior to rolling any other scores.

The last three were rolled via 5d6 drop the lowest 2.

Like I said; he held that adventurers are the ultimate heroes of their world; Hercules, Achilles, Ajax, Hector as examples (just as examples seing as I watchd "Troy" again last night for the 1,000th time!). Aragorn, Gandolf etc. fall into this category as well with this methodology. As such half their scores should be forced to be above average by far and the primary one maxed out; following this method that is. And I do agree with it as long as the campaign properly challenges the characters.

 

[genshou]

Troll probably tastes like chicken! Bu I do wonder if that is doable...I think I may actualy try that!

If your looking for heroic scores the easiest thing to do is to increase the "base" of it; essentially put in a "floor: of some kind like that with the poin-buy systems. I posted this before on this thread:


For example; you could use the standard point buy system but raise the starting score from 8 to 9 to 10; or drop it down to 7 or 6. I played in a game whee the DM beleived that since characters were supposed to be the physical and mental elite of the world that he did the following:

Get 1 score of 18 in the classes primary ability
Fighter: STR, CON or DEX
Rouge: DEX, CHA or INT
Wizard: INT
Sorceror: CHA
Bard: Any
Barbarian: STR or CON
Paladin: STR, WIS or CHA
Ranger: STR, WIS or DEX
Druid: CHA or WIS

NOTE: You had to choose this prior to rolling any other scores.

Then get two rolls of 12+2d6 drop the lower which could be used however you chose.

NOTE: You had to choose these, in order, prior to rolling any other scores.

The last three were rolled via 5d6 drop the lowest 2.

Like I said; he held that adventurers are the ultimate heroes of their world; Hercules, Achilles, Ajax, Hector as examples (just as examples seing as I watchd "Troy" again last night for the 1,000th time!). Aragorn, Gandolf etc. fall into this category as well with this methodology. As such half their scores should be forced to be above average by far and the primary one maxed out; following this method that is. And I do agree with it as long as the campaign properly challenges the characters.

Yeah, but you see...

I'm looking at ways to generate heroic abilities on an entirely different scale (ie, mythusmage's proposed rules change). If you were to use point-buy with this 15d6 range system, how would you do it?