Is it possible to roll no more than four standard dice and get

File: fudge-dice.png (859KB, 1502x837px) Image search: [Google]

859KB, 1502x837px

You mean fudge dice? Oh, you want at least 15 possible results. Okay. Make it 4d6 -12.

>>46572091
>the most frequent result is 0

>>46571957
>1. A range of at least 15 different possible results
>2. The most frequent result is 0
>3. You are NOT equally likely to roll above 0 as below 0, instead having a ratio between 2:1 and 3:1
3D20-15
Every number below 0 IS 0.
Then you 1D3 or 1D4 (depending on preference. If the result is one, the previously rolled number is negative. Otherwise it's positive.

>>46572590
This system does not create a pretty bell curve though. In fact, the curve will have 2 peaks and behave completely irregular around 0. If you're fine with that, go for it.

You'll want a "roll and keep" system that subtract points to make zero the most common result.

In anydice that would look something like this:

output [highest 2 of 4d6]-10

>>46572590
That's not what I have in mind.
I need a possibility of rolling below 0 and a possibility of rolling above 0, and those two ranges of results must not have an equal chance of occurring, but between 2:1 and 3:1 ratio.
Also, could you do it without subtracting a constant? No -12, no -15, just dice.

>>46573446
>I need a possibility of rolling below 0 and a possibility of rolling above 0, and those two ranges of results must not have an equal chance of occurring, but between 2:1 and 3:1 ratio.
What you want is provided by my idea.

>could you do it without subtracting a constant?
Instead of 3D20-15 you could use 2D20-1D20.

>>46573617
>What you want is provided by my idea.
Only in the most convoluted and rules-lawyery way, that requires a second roll. The fact that I had to read it twice to understand is a bad sign.

Anyway, I remembered a rolling method I tried yesterday that works for my criteria today, so thanks for nothing!
output [highest 1 of 2d10]-1d10

>>46573843
That doesn't have 0 as the most frequent result.

>>46573843
Motherfucker! I just TOLD you about that!

>>46573426

>>46574017
No it subtracts a dice instead of a constant. Totally different things, buddy. At least you tried, even if you weren't helpful.

Wrong poster, numbnuts. I'm the poster who wrote "output [highest 2 of 4d6]-10" 20 minutes before you "remembered" about it.

>>46574196

Oh, wait. You *were* responding to my post. The point is, you "remembered" the "higher of" notation AFTER I pointed it out, and your "better version" that uses a die instead of a constant uses the exact same "innovation" that somebody else suggested.

Basically, you combined the advice two people gave you, then claimed you came up with it on your own.

File: 2d10kh1-1d10.png (4KB, 320x390px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 320x390px

>>46573883

>>46574278
I did. Yesterday. It's not my fault you're slow.

>>46574278
>you "remembered" the "higher of" notation AFTER I pointed it out
You mean the notation that's explained on the site, one click away? That notation? Yeah, you totally invented that. There's no way I could've done it without you.

>>46574360
And you're not me.

>>46574519
I know I'm not you. But I could be you. Why can't you let me make you have fun with me being you?

>>46574360

You asked us for help, then discarded the perfectly good advice we gave you with a dismissive "thanks for nothing." Frankly, that pisses me off. Your ego is bloated to the point where you thought it appropriate to insult people who did their best to help you, and I'm not going to give you the benefit of the doubt when you claim you "already figured it out".

Fuck me sideways, I confused Anon for another Anon.

Welp, I'm out. Sorry about that Anon, and Anon, you're a jackass.

>>46574609
>you're a jackass
Thanks. I tried.
Just having a giggle, friend.

>>46574338
This distribution representation looks like a nice perky breast.

>>46571957
What, you mean like 2d10-1d20?

>>46577616
I tried that. It gives you 55% chance of rolling 0 or higher, which is too low.

>>46574360
>>46574087
>>46573843
>op requests free help
>op is a jackass
this is why you don't respond to request threads

>>46577841
Only one of those is me.

>>46571957
Why do you even want this?

>>46574338
Looks like this works.

Ive got a request

Highest of 3d6. Doubles adds that die value to the total. Triples are considered crits, but valued separately from the total score.

Can this be done on anydice?

Roll 2 fudge dies, and a d10. If either of the fudge dice rolls a plus, then you take the result of your d10 as a positive number. If there are no pluses, but there's at least one minus, then you take the result of your d10 as a negative number. If both dice are blank, then the result is 0 and you ignore the d10.

11.11% of the time the result will be zero.
5.55% of the time the result will be any given positive number (a 7, for instance)
3.33% of the time the result will be any given negative number (a -3, for instance)

If you want to increase the likelihood of rolling a zero, have the "0" face on the d10 represent zero rather than 10 (so that you can get a zero result either by rolling two blank fudge dice, or by getting a result of +0 or -0). At that point, your chance of rolling zero becomes 20%.

>>46582172
Oops. Missed the bit about having a ratio between 2:1 and 3:1. Well, you could do that by having blank be the trump value in that case. If either of the fudge dice is a blank, the result is 0. If there are no blanks, and either (or both) of the fudge dice is a plus, then take the d10 as a positive number. Only if both fudge dice are minuses do you take the d10 as a negative number.

This means that you get a zero 5/9 of the time, a positive number 3/9 of the time, and a negative number 1/9 of the time.

>>46582155
>Highest of 3d6. Doubles adds that die value to the total. Triples are considered crits, but valued separately from the total score.

I don't quite follow. So let's say you roll 2, 3 and 5. The result would be 5, right? But what if you rolled 2, 2 and 5? What's the result there? What if it's 2, 2 and 2?

>>46571957
Everyone in this thread is making this way too complicated.

output [lowest 3 of 4d6] - 8

>>46582431
5
5+2=7
2+2=4, crit

>>46582530
Followup - if you don't like the random non-dice 8 in there:

output [highest 2 of 3d6] - 1d12

>>46582540
Okay, one more question. What's 2, 5 and 5? Is that 10 or 7?

>>46582564
10.
In retropspect this skews things quite far towards 12

>>46582588
Not sure how to do it in anydice, but I can do it in excel. Not sure how you want the crits notated though. Does a crit 4 count as a 4 or a completely separate result?

File: #thang.jpg (26KB, 507x302px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 507x302px

>>46582588
>>46582747
>>46582155
Here's a graph with the crits mixed in with the other numbers.

>>46582747
Just ignore crits for now

>>46582868
really? I figured that things would skew higher since high doubles don't need a good third roll.

Can anyone tell me how to see the statistics of rolling a bunch of d6s (lets assume 5d6) and seeing how many times i roll 5 or 6?

Bonus points if there is a way to add the explode on 6 once mechanic.

>>46583037
I know for sure that count and explode functions exist for that, but you'll need to ask someone else on actually using them.

>>46573446
First, roll twenty 1d3s.
1 & 2 = negative.
3 = positive.

If you roll 1, roll 1d2 to specify how much you subtract.
If you roll 2, roll 1d3 to specify how much you subtract.
If you roll 3, roll 1d4 to specify how much you add.

Add all results.
Do this for ALL stats.

File: CHFAEM.png (169KB, 500x458px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 500x458px

>>46583103
Forgot a picture.

File: #thang2.png (4KB, 161x254px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 161x254px

>>46582988
I just ran the numbers and don't claim to be able to explain them, but I suppose some of it comes down to the fact that the majority of the time you won't have any doubles, and if you don't have doubles, 6 is strongly favored, with 5 next in line, then 4. Also, some of the doubles (and triples) fall in the 2 to 6 range as well.

File: #thang3.png (53KB, 171x4969px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 171x4969px

>>46583161
Here are the results, if you wanted to make sure I didn't fuck up how your system works. Everything else is simply having Excel tally the number of results for each number, which is kind of hard to fuck up (especially after I double checked things).

>>46583161
>>46583362
thanks, I really appreciate it.

I'm considering 4-8 to be "normal". Relatively low chance of true fuckups, and doing something well becomes pretty swingy and hard to rely on.

Crits, rather than auto-succeses, are when DESTINY happens. Whether that means gods start taking action or a climactic opportunity occurs, I'm not sure. The roll that accompanies it is simply "what were you doing when the most important thing happened?"