DND_Reborn
Legend
Yep.Highest 3 of 6d5 (make it 8 if it isn't) is pretty -- except for needing a bunch of d5s.
Yep again!Similarly, highest 4 of 6d4 truncate between 8 and 15... but d4s are kind of annoying.
Yep.Highest 3 of 6d5 (make it 8 if it isn't) is pretty -- except for needing a bunch of d5s.
Yep again!Similarly, highest 4 of 6d4 truncate between 8 and 15... but d4s are kind of annoying.
That is pretty good, too, and has a higher chance of getting an 8...3d4+5. Any score above a 15 is set to 15. A 14 and 15 will both have a 15.63% chance of being rolled. Average score is 12.42.
Absolutely correct.
But since I am trying to get a range of 8-15 with an average of 12 or so, how does that help exactly?
% | Stat |
01-05 (5 percent) | 8 |
06-15 (10 percent) | 9 |
16-30 (15 percent) | 10 |
31-50 (20 percent) | 11 |
51-70 (20 percent) | 12 |
71-85 (15 percent) | 13 |
86-95 (10 percent) | 14 |
96-00 (5 percent) | 15 |
This has the same issue as Methods 2 and 3 in the OP. I know you can do it with a table, but I would rather not have to require players to look up their results to determine their scores.I mean you could just roll percentile against a chart with 8 values (8, 9, 10 etc), and create whatever probability curve you desired with values of each.
LOL you really don't get the part about wanting the average to be 12-12.5, do you???6 + 1d3 + 1d6.
Yeah, this follows the same line of thought for the best solution I came up with yesterday.Back in ADnD we had some luck with 3d6 and roll some more d6 to add to any number you like, but it has to stay below 18.
So my method would be:
6 times 7 + 1d8 (average of 11.5)
Then you add d4s. Since every d4 increases the total by 2.5. You want to add 0.75 on average to get to 12.25.
So you have to add 0.75*6 = 4.5
This means that you have to roll 2 d4, which adds 5 to the average. If you consider that in edge cases you might not be able to add something extra because you rolled to well, your average should be somewhere between 12.25 and 12.5 with some flexibility.
If you want to be exactly at 12.25 you might consider rolling a single d8 to add to your stats and divide those points as you wish (high risk but a lot of flexibility if you roll good).
You might consider rolling 7d8 and you may use the median of those rolls, or even flip the middle one over, to counter out bad luck a bit.
I edited my post a bit with some changes and an example.Yeah, this follows the same line of thought for the best solution I came up with yesterday.
D&D 5E - Different Methods for Rolling Ability Scores (8-15 range)
Start with a 12 as your number in each attribute. For each attribute, Roll a d6 and 3d12. Discard all 1s and 2s and 3s. For 4 to 6, Subtract 1 from your number. For 7 to 12, above, add 1 to your number. The d6 has a 50% chance to be nothing, and a 50% chance to reduce (net reduction: 66%)...www.enworld.org
I suggested the extra d8 added to the lowest roll, capped at 15, but I like your idea of a d4 or maybe 2d4 also. I'll have to look at that.
Thanks!
No. I just like watching people use math trying manipulate random probabilities rather than use the obvious solutions. (The answers are always Point buy and standard arrays.)LOL you really don't get the part about wanting the average to be 12-12.5, do you???
(FYI, your method still has an average of 11.5.)
Point buys and standard arrays are boring. Manipulating dice to get some variety is fun though.No. I just like watching people use math trying manipulate random probabilities rather than use the obvious solutions. (The answers are always Point buy and standard arrays.)
Point buys and standard arrays are boring. Manipulating dice to get some variety is fun though.
This has the same issue as Methods 2 and 3 in the OP. I know you can do it with a table, but I would rather not have to require players to look up their results to determine their scores.
I'm guessing you didn't read the spoiler? (Which is fine, after all, it IS in the spoiler...)
I have another method:Ok then, for a bell curve:
6 + (d5, d4).
Or 5 + (d4, d3 d3).
Or 4 + (d3, d3, d3, d2)
Or 3 + 4d2+d4
Depends on how steep you want the curve. With the last method your odds of a stat of 15 are 1 in 64.
For the playing card method, it's actually pretty easy (unless my math is really screwed up here.)
The cards are whole numbers so we can't get an average of 12.5, but let's say average of 12 across the six scores.
Six scores at 12 points each is a total of 72 points.
Now we will do decks of 2 cards per ability score, which is a total of 12 cards. We need the numbers of all 12 cards added together to equal 72 (so when you divide it by 6 it will equal 12.) You want the possibility of an 8 and a 15, which means you need at least two '4's, and can have only one '8' (two or more could give the possibility of a 16 or higher.) So a card distribution could be this:
two 4s (8 points)
two 5s (10 points)
three 6s (18 points)
four 7s (28 points)
one 8 (8 points)
8+10+18+28+8=72
Now when a player wants to create scores, they shuffle the 12 cards and deal out facedown 6 piles of 2 cards, flip them over and add them together. They will have 6 scores that in total will average 12. Usually to create more interesting characters when I do this method I make the players use the scores in order, which makes them have to come up with classes they ordinarily might not get to play because their highest score was in an ability they wouldn't ordinarily have chosen. It also will occasionally give you PCs that won't have a CON of 14 or higher, which almost always seems to happen when you go with Point Buy. No one ever buys a low CON. This method means they occasionally might.
If I've screwed up or misunderstood what you mean by 'an average of 12 or 12.5', then this method wouldn't necessarily work. But if I got your 12s across six scores right, then in theory this should work.
Very nice! I'll grab some cards and give it a try when I get home. If it works well in practice, I'll add it as a method.For the playing card method, it's actually pretty easy (unless my math is really screwed up here.)
The cards are whole numbers so we can't get an average of 12.5, but let's say average of 12 across the six scores.
Six scores at 12 points each is a total of 72 points.
Now we will do decks of 2 cards per ability score, which is a total of 12 cards. We need the numbers of all 12 cards added together to equal 72 (so when you divide it by 6 it will equal 12.) You want the possibility of an 8 and a 15, which means you need at least two '4's, and can have only one '8' (two or more could give the possibility of a 16 or higher.) So a card distribution could be this:
two 4s (8 points)
two 5s (10 points)
three 6s (18 points)
four 7s (28 points)
one 8 (8 points)
8+10+18+28+8=72
Now when a player wants to create scores, they shuffle the 12 cards and deal out facedown 6 piles of 2 cards, flip them over and add them together. They will have 6 scores that in total will average 12. Usually to create more interesting characters when I do this method I make the players use the scores in order, which makes them have to come up with classes they ordinarily might not get to play because their highest score was in an ability they wouldn't ordinarily have chosen. It also will occasionally give you PCs that won't have a CON of 14 or higher, which almost always seems to happen when you go with Point Buy. No one ever buys a low CON. This method means they occasionally might.
If I've screwed up or misunderstood what you mean by 'an average of 12 or 12.5', then this method wouldn't necessarily work. But if I got your 12s across six scores right, then in theory this should work.
The curve is nice, of course, but these all average 11.5, while the goal is to get an average from 12-12.5, preferably around 12.25 or so.Ok then, for a bell curve:
6 + (d5, d4).
Or 5 + (d4, d3 d3).
Or 4 + (d3, d3, d3, d2)
Or 3 + 4d2+d4
Depends on how steep you want the curve. With the last method your odds of a stat of 15 are 1 in 64.