Quote from: finarvyn;1075317Well, that's the funky thing about dice probabilities. If you roll only a few characters there might not be any noticeable pattern. Probabilities are really designed to work for a pattern after thousands of rolls.

Both of your methods seem solid, but if you roll 4d6 and drop the low number you should be improving the odds for a high score for EACH STAT, but 3d6 straight where you re-roll the one low one will only affect a SINGLE STAT. Whether one method or the other seems better after a few dozen rolls would be hard to predict.

Rolling 3d6 should give an average roll of 10.5 for each statistic, but in only 6 rolls the number may be totally above or below that average. Tanking that character and re-rolling one low stat would help the one but not the others, but the advantage is that you are re-rolling the LOWEST one and not one at random. I haven't tried to work out the mathematics behind this but obviously the lower that roll the better the odds of improvement.

If I remember correctly, rolling 4 and keeping 3 gives an average of more like 12.25 for each statistic but again in only 6 rolls the number may be totally above or below that average.

I did not mean to abandon the thread, I had a funeral to attend this weekend.

I ended up rolling about 40 characters which was enough to give a feel. I think your analysis is about right and I finally decided on the 3d6 down the line replacing the lowest with 3d6 (as long as it is higher than the lowest).

I think this gives the grittier DCC feel zero levels while still leaving viable characters if they survive level 0.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1075482It's not clear to me exactly what the final goals are.  Do you want some substantial stats so that these grittier zero level characters can survive?  "Adequate" stats so that the player feels better about the grit?  Less variation in stats?  Etc.

However, reading between the lines, I'll offer another alternative that may cover some of those options.  The exact numbers need adjusting, but the math is easy on this one:

1. Every stat starts at 4
2. Player rolls 2d6, six times, assigns to each stat in order.
3. Player pick a stat, rolls d6, adds roll to it.  (Probably repeat this a second time with a different stat, if you want more player choice.)  Stats cannot go higher than 17 with these rolls.

The distribution of 2d6 is easy:  1/36 for 2 and 12; 2/36 for 3 and 11; ... 6/36 for 7.  So you are going to get 6-8 44% of the time (5+6+5)/36, 5-9 67% of the time (4+5+6+5+4)/36.  After step 2, your average character will have 4 of 6 stats between 9 and 13, and slightly skewed to the middle of that range, with one lower and one higher.  Minimum stat is 6.  Max is 16.

With step 3, the player has a real choice to make.  They can use those d6s to have a strong possibility of pushing a higher roll to the max, but at the cost of potentially "wasting" part of a very high roll.  Or if they have a particular character they want to play, they may have an obvious weakness that needs addressing.  Only step 3 requires any thought, and thus the process should be reasonably fast for the vast majority of players.

I should have been more clear. It is to come up with a character that is not a super hero but more "everyday" and possibly flawed and exceptional in one way.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1075338The game is designed to allow players to have a decent chance of success is their main stat is 14+.  Which is including their racial bonuses.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1075365As much as I agree with this, sometimes, having ONE low stat is both fun and amusing.  But it depends on your table.

I think they can have more than one low stat especially if they sync such as STR and DEX.  You can still have a perfectly survivable Arcane character if both of those stats are gimped but you get where I am going with this.

 

Quote from: Rhedyn;1075677I think it would be easier to convert what you want from 5e to DCC.

Rolling stats in 5e either doesn't work or gives everyone inflated stats. That's why I advocate nothing but point buy for 5e.

5e is meant to be the easy mode version of D&D with some vague similarities to older D&D. So everyone having EVEN MORE stats is a valid way to play, just don't expect people to be challenged.

This may ultimately be very true. Except two things: 1) D&D is the game I can get players for (in my current situation) and therefore I can shape that game or homebrew DCC that no one will play. 2) There is more in D&D 5e (classes, etc.) that I like and felt it was the easier one to adjust. (That it where I am starting to feel your valid point though as I want to change more and more).

But rolling 4d6 (drop lowest) stats in 5E does seem to come up with some super strong characters and I thought point buy was OP......

"This may ultimately be very true. Except two things: 1) D&D is the game I can get players for (in my current situation) and therefore I can shape that game or homebrew DCC that no one will play. 2) There is more in D&D 5e (classes, etc.) that I like and felt it was the easier one to adjust. (That it where I am starting to feel your valid point though as I want to change more and more)."


I agree that 5E is a good system to use for a starting point.  I like to home brew, and I own lots of D&D editions.  After reading through each edition, I always find things I like.  But if I have to choose one rule set to work around, 5E offers variety and balance

Quote from: MonsterSlayer;1075693But rolling 4d6 (drop lowest) stats in 5E does seem to come up with some super strong characters and I thought point buy was OP......

I find using best 3 of 5d6 in 5e comes up with characters who have a bunch of +2s and +3s, the occasional +4 or +0. I find that works really well in the context of 5e, actually. A +2 is equivalent to Proficiency at Tier I and gives a decent chance to save vs effects or succeed on checks. With DC 15 being 'moderate', having most PCs in the +2 to +5 range on checks works very well.