Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ezo" data-source="post: 9347609" data-attributes="member: 7037866">Frankly, that gets into more infromation and discussion than I am really interested in getting into.But, I'll give you the quick-notes version of what I did:It isn't practical to look at all the possible variants of rolling for all six scores, so I went with 100000 samples of generated arrays.For each array, I calculated the total number of the scores as well as the total modifiers, sorted from using scores primarily and secondary by modifiers.For any array which generated totals below the standard array (and modifiers below the standard array), I replaced those 41000+ with the standard array and recaluclated the expected values.Of course, if a particular array is &quot;bad&quot; is subjective. In comparing our two &quot;inferior arrays&quot;, your 15 is higher than my 14, and I'll require the full ASI, as you wouldn't (could go with a half feat, etc.), but both your negatives require two increases to reduce the penalty, as where one ASI could be split to reduce both negatives for mine...It really just depends on how you weigh the positives vs. the negatives. I don't put as much emphasis on the &quot;prime stat&quot;, and there is little real benefit in having a +3 vs. a +2. Casters probably would value it more than martials.Anyway, I really don't like a -2 ability modifier, so even if I went with my array, my first ASI would be to raise my 9 to 10 and 7 to 8. Having more odd scores allow for faster improvement in overall ability modifiers.FInally, I just noticed while writing this post if I had my inferior array of 14, 13, 12, 11, 9, 7 and choose regular human, it would be 15, 14, 12, 12, 10, 8... or the normal 5E standard array! That just strikes me as funny. All the math I did, and I could have just said, &quot;Meh, just lower the standard array by 1 for each score&quot; and gotten the same result! Sigh...&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:"&nbsp; data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" />&nbsp; <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging&nbsp; &nbsp; :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="ezo, post: 9347609, member: 7037866"] Frankly, that gets into more infromation and discussion than I am really interested in getting into. But, I'll give you the quick-notes version of what I did: It isn't practical to look at all the possible variants of rolling for all six scores, so I went with 100000 samples of generated arrays. For each array, I calculated the total number of the scores as well as the total modifiers, sorted from using scores primarily and secondary by modifiers. For any array which generated totals below the standard array (and modifiers below the standard array), I replaced those 41000+ with the standard array and recaluclated the expected values. Of course, if a particular array is "bad" is subjective. In comparing our two "inferior arrays", your 15 is higher than my 14, and I'll require the full ASI, as you wouldn't (could go with a half feat, etc.), but both your negatives require two increases to reduce the penalty, as where one ASI could be split to reduce both negatives for mine... It really just depends on how you weigh the positives vs. the negatives. I don't put as much emphasis on the "prime stat", and there is little real benefit in having a +3 vs. a +2. Casters probably would value it more than martials. Anyway, I really don't like a -2 ability modifier, so even if I went with my array, my first ASI would be to raise my 9 to 10 and 7 to 8. Having more odd scores allow for faster improvement in overall ability modifiers. FInally, I just noticed while writing this post if I had my inferior array of 14, 13, 12, 11, 9, 7 and choose regular human, it would be 15, 14, 12, 12, 10, 8... or the normal 5E standard array! That just strikes me as funny. All the math I did, and I could have just said, "Meh, just lower the standard array by 1 for each score" and gotten the same result! Sigh... :rolleyes: 🤷‍♂️ [/QUOTE]

Verification