"The point of rolling is to get something I wouldn't think to do normally. I like building characters, and like having new things to solve."
Question: what would you think of
Roll 4d6, discard lowest, add remainder. If total is greater than 15, discard score and roll over.
If you truly arent interested in 4d6 to get stats higher thsn point buy (which maxes out at 15) , would you accept a rule from dm that said you cant roll higher than a 15?
Point Buy also minimizes at 8, so if you're trying to emulate point buy, would the "no roll higher than 15" rule also come with a second rule which says "no roll lower than 6"?
No problem. You want variation, then roll 4d6 and then remove the HIGHEST. That will give you the precise same amount of customizing, RP, or whatever you want as the method you support.
So it's an either/or thing now?
There all kinds of people who tell me about how 4d6 allows for all kinds of variation and customizing options and RP opportunities compared to the fair and balanced methods of creating a char. Those same people grow very quiet when I suggest that the 4d6 method, but removing the highest, provides them all things that 4d6 remove the lowest does.
4d6 drop lowest results in an average of a little over 12, with 13 your most common number. Something that is not great, but still on the lower end of playable and means with standard deviations you are likely to see something playable for your primary stat. 4d6 drop highest puts your most common number at an 8 - the lowest possible score on point buy. That makes it extremely likely someone ends up with unplayable stats and no playable primary attribute.
Sure, it gives you random stats - but it gives you statistically unplayable stats, likely even eclipsed by standard array. Mathematically your idea is not a very good one. It does not add anything 4d6 drop lowest does not already do, and does the same thing in a way that is statistically terrible for players.
"4d6 drop lowest puts your most common number at an 8"
Uhm, i dont think so.
Your statistical average is.somewhere around 12 or 13.
Also, rolling 6 times means you have average high score of 16. If you roll 4d6 drop lowest and repeat six times, your highest ability scroe, out of all six scores, on average, is a 16.
Thats on average. And you do have a smaller chance of your highest score being a 17. I think its like 30%. And you have like a sliver of a chance (5% i think) of your highest star being an 18.
"4d6 drop lowest puts your most common number at an 8"
Uhm, i dont think so.
As is obvious from context, that was supposed to be “highest” and sleep deprivation/habit of writing the more common system took over. I have since corrected the post. The numbers are, however, correct - 4d6 drop highest gives you a mode of 8, and an average of 8.76, and standard deviation a bit over 2. That does not lend itself to a viable stat spread.
That isnt true at all. It might provide variation in the stats, but its not going to provide the variation in what is actually viable to build. And that is the pt. You cant compare the two. Dropping the highest v dropping the lowest is NOT going to give you the same result. By definition. So why in the world would anyone WANT to drop the highest score and make definitively far worst characters (mechanically)? I mean, sure I guess there are some drama/narrative only people who think this might be fun...but its generally I cant see it. Again, it just seems that people have shifted from thinking powerful characters are good to this idea that flawed/weak/sub optimal is the goal...and I just wont get that perspective. No character, ok few characters, are actually going to be able to pull off being super good at everything (even with 4d6/drop lowest) and that is total reasonable, but that doesnt mean you need to gimp yourself. Doesnt real life to that to people enough?? LOL.
Sure, it gives you random stats - but it gives you statistically unplayable stats, likely even eclipsed by standard array. Mathematically your idea is not a very good one. It does not add anything 4d6 drop lowest does not already do, and does the same thing in a way that is statistically terrible for players.
I mean, I'm playing in a campaign right now where we were given the option of rolling straight d20s for our stats (I did... it didn't go great :P), so I'm game for just about anything, but 4d6 drop highest sounds like the kind of antagonistic 'DM vs. players' nonsense we should have left behind in the last century
Point buy/array is designed to give you a total of about 72. 4d6 drop lowest comes in a little above that (roughly 74 on average), but not by a whole lot. 4d6 drop highest would come in significantly below that 72 target
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I dont mind there being a nice competition between DM and players. Again, this is DnD, which to me invokes dungeons and epic fights and if the DM isnt going 100 percent best they can, I dont think its satisfying. I been playing since 1982 or so, and ya this is probably a generational thing. That isnt to say the DM just makes unwinnable encounters, just that I'd rather they dont pull punches or put in mechanics that basically save them at the last moment. Its why I hate Death Saves so much. It doesnt teach players to be smarter, more cautious, and attentive.
I been playing since 1982 or so, and ya this is probably a generational thing.
I've been playing since AD&D/Red Box. I still remember the days of programming my VIC-20 to spit out sets of 3d6 and sifting through them looking for a playable PC. Frankly, generating stats that way sucked -- even the AD&D DMG offered better ways to generate stats than just straight 3d6 six times
DMs are there to guide the players toward the best/most entertaining story for the group. For most tables, that isn't going to involve the DM saying right from the jump, "y'all are going to have bad stats. Deal with it"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I dont mind there being a nice competition between DM and players. Again, this is DnD, which to me invokes dungeons and epic fights and if the DM isnt going 100 percent best they can, I dont think its satisfying. I been playing since 1982 or so, and ya this is probably a generational thing. That isnt to say the DM just makes unwinnable encounters, just that I'd rather they dont pull punches or put in mechanics that basically save them at the last moment. Its why I hate Death Saves so much. It doesnt teach players to be smarter, more cautious, and attentive.
DMs not pulling punches is certainly a valid play style. You don't need to adjust stats to do that though. You just... don't pull punches in fights. In many ways, it's easier when that stats are higher because you can afford to punch harder.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Point Buy also minimizes at 8, so if you're trying to emulate point buy, would the "no roll higher than 15" rule also come with a second rule which says "no roll lower than 6"?
4d6 drop lowest results in an average of a little over 12, with 13 your most common number. Something that is not great, but still on the lower end of playable and means with standard deviations you are likely to see something playable for your primary stat. 4d6 drop highest puts your most common number at an 8 - the lowest possible score on point buy. That makes it extremely likely someone ends up with unplayable stats and no playable primary attribute.
Sure, it gives you random stats - but it gives you statistically unplayable stats, likely even eclipsed by standard array. Mathematically your idea is not a very good one. It does not add anything 4d6 drop lowest does not already do, and does the same thing in a way that is statistically terrible for players.
"4d6 drop lowest puts your most common number at an 8"
Uhm, i dont think so.
Your statistical average is.somewhere around 12 or 13.
Also, rolling 6 times means you have average high score of 16. If you roll 4d6 drop lowest and repeat six times, your highest ability scroe, out of all six scores, on average, is a 16.
Thats on average. And you do have a smaller chance of your highest score being a 17. I think its like 30%. And you have like a sliver of a chance (5% i think) of your highest star being an 18.
As is obvious from context, that was supposed to be “highest” and sleep deprivation/habit of writing the more common system took over. I have since corrected the post. The numbers are, however, correct - 4d6 drop highest gives you a mode of 8, and an average of 8.76, and standard deviation a bit over 2. That does not lend itself to a viable stat spread.
That isnt true at all. It might provide variation in the stats, but its not going to provide the variation in what is actually viable to build. And that is the pt. You cant compare the two. Dropping the highest v dropping the lowest is NOT going to give you the same result. By definition. So why in the world would anyone WANT to drop the highest score and make definitively far worst characters (mechanically)? I mean, sure I guess there are some drama/narrative only people who think this might be fun...but its generally I cant see it. Again, it just seems that people have shifted from thinking powerful characters are good to this idea that flawed/weak/sub optimal is the goal...and I just wont get that perspective. No character, ok few characters, are actually going to be able to pull off being super good at everything (even with 4d6/drop lowest) and that is total reasonable, but that doesnt mean you need to gimp yourself. Doesnt real life to that to people enough?? LOL.
I mean, I'm playing in a campaign right now where we were given the option of rolling straight d20s for our stats (I did... it didn't go great :P), so I'm game for just about anything, but 4d6 drop highest sounds like the kind of antagonistic 'DM vs. players' nonsense we should have left behind in the last century
Point buy/array is designed to give you a total of about 72. 4d6 drop lowest comes in a little above that (roughly 74 on average), but not by a whole lot. 4d6 drop highest would come in significantly below that 72 target
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I dont mind there being a nice competition between DM and players. Again, this is DnD, which to me invokes dungeons and epic fights and if the DM isnt going 100 percent best they can, I dont think its satisfying. I been playing since 1982 or so, and ya this is probably a generational thing. That isnt to say the DM just makes unwinnable encounters, just that I'd rather they dont pull punches or put in mechanics that basically save them at the last moment. Its why I hate Death Saves so much. It doesnt teach players to be smarter, more cautious, and attentive.
I've been playing since AD&D/Red Box. I still remember the days of programming my VIC-20 to spit out sets of 3d6 and sifting through them looking for a playable PC. Frankly, generating stats that way sucked -- even the AD&D DMG offered better ways to generate stats than just straight 3d6 six times
DMs are there to guide the players toward the best/most entertaining story for the group. For most tables, that isn't going to involve the DM saying right from the jump, "y'all are going to have bad stats. Deal with it"
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
DMs not pulling punches is certainly a valid play style. You don't need to adjust stats to do that though. You just... don't pull punches in fights. In many ways, it's easier when that stats are higher because you can afford to punch harder.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.