D&D 5E Different Methods for Rolling Ability Scores (8-15 range)

[guachi]

That is pretty good, too, and has a higher chance of getting an 8...

I am not thrilled about capping every score at 15 if you roll higher, though. Still, some more food for thought.

You can dispense with capping rolls at 15 and allow an occasional 16 or 17. It's a little easier and the average is 12.50 if you do so it's still within your desired overall average.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I mean, the game is designed around 4d6 drop the lowest, that's always worked pretty well in practice.

Sure, it works well, but since the other methods have a compressed range of 8-15, I would just like a way to roll the same range within the criteria I've outlined in the thread.

game works far better with point buy or standard array than with rolling.

IMO the only issue with rolling 4d6 drop lowest is when one player gets really lucky and their success due to higher ability scores starts to disrupt other players. It isn't a huge problem IME, but it does seem to surface from time to time.

Personally, I love point-buy as a player and stick with it, another player in my group uses the standard array most of the time, but the other players usually want to roll.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You can dispense with capping rolls at 15 and allow an occasional 16 or 17. It's a little easier and the average is 12.50 if you do so it's still within your desired overall average.

I really can't though, due to other factors in our house-rules.

With racial ASIs you can turn 15's into 17's, but at character creation that is the highest we want PCs to go.

 

[Parmandur]

Sure, it works well, but since the other methods have a compressed range of 8-15, I would just like a way to roll the same range within the criteria I've outlined in the thread.

Roll 4d4, drop the lowest, treat 16-18 as 15, and anything under 8 as an automatic 8. Done.

 

[Parmandur]

game works far better with point buy or standard array than with rolling.

I mean,not really: as noted in the OP, the average is identical, and the difference from abilities on the higher or lower ends of the aprectrum is essentially non-existant.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Roll 4d4, drop the lowest, treat 16-18 as 15, and anything under 8 as an automatic 8. Done.

Umm... I hate to break this to you, but 4d4 only goes to 16... so the -18 part isn't really needed.

Also, the average is only 10, WAY below where I wanted it.

Maybe you meant 4d4+2 and its a simple omission?

Also, who wants to have to deal with picking up those pesky d4's!?!

 

[Parmandur]

Umm... I hate to break this to you, but 4d4 only goes to 16... so the -18 part isn't really needed.

Also, the average is only 10, WAY below where I wanted it.

Maybe you meant 4d4+2 and its a simple omission?

Also, who wants to have to deal with picking up those pesky d4's!?!

Sorry, typo, 4d6 like normal, but putting a floor and a ceiling in place. 8 and 15 would become marginally more common, but the average is a wash with the array or point buy.

 

[DeviousQuail]

1d8+7+Pity Method:
Roll 1d8+7 six times and assign your scores. If the total of your rolls is less than 73 or 74 (Depends if you want 12.166 or 12.333 average) you add one point to each attribute from lowest to highest excluding any score already at 15, repeating as necessary until you reach the target number. If your total is higher you subtract from any attribute in any order you want so long as you don't reduce any attribute below 8. Since the average of 1d8+7 is 11.5 it is more likely a player will increase attributes instead of decreasing them. Players who roll above the threshold get the benefit of more control over their attributes. Everyone ends up with the same total number of points so there is little worry about fairness amongst players.

Spoiler: Math

If 73 is the target number then 72.9% of players will be adding to their rolls, 5.5% will hit it exact, and 21.6% will need to subtract. For 74 the numbers are 78.4%, 4.8%, and 16.8%. All numbers rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent.

 

[Flamestrike]

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.

Then allow a re-roll (take the highest) of the d4. That bumps the median roll from the d4 up from 2.5 to 3.125

6 + (d5) then (d4, roll twice take highest).

Or 5 + (2d3) then (d4, roll twice take highest)

Or 3 + (4d2)+ (d4, roll twice take highest)

All have a range of between 8 and 15, with an average of 12.125. Just with increasing bell curves depending on which option you select.

You could get an exact 12.25 median by altering the re-roll dice, but you're probably splitting hairs now.

 

[LoganRan]

Roll 2d4 + 7. Which would result in a range of 9-15 so do the following...

In the event a player rolls two ones on the two d4s (normally generating a value of '2'), roll a d20, if the result of the d20 is 1-10, the roll is set to '1', if the result of the d20 is 11-20 the roll is set to '2'.

Examples:

die 1 = 1, die 2 = 3 result of 4
die 1 = 4, die 2 = 4 result of 8
die 1 = 1, die 2 = 1, die 3 = 9 result of 1
die 1 = 1, die 2 = 1, die 3 = 16 result of 2

This will make lower scores of 8 and 9 slightly less likely (I expect your players will be okay with that ) but would eliminate the completely linear result of using a single d8 and get an average value pretty close to your stated goal.