Rolling lots of D6s

[sindyr]

If you have to roll a lot of D6's, say for a 15d6 EB, is there a method to maybe roll 5d6 and multiply by 3, or 5d6 + 3.5(the average) times 10 or something?

 

I want to have *some* dice rolled, to preserve some randomness, but to cut it down to a manageable number.

 

Thanks.

[caris]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Nothing official, AFAIR. There is Standard Effect which means you get a flat result of 3 for every full die. You could choose to institue a house rule of every die over the first 5 has to use standard effect.

[aylwin13]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

I can't help you on this one. Our group enjoys rolling all of the dice; even the 26d6 knockback damage at yesterday's game.

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

If you have to roll a lot of D6's, say for a 15d6 EB, is there a method to maybe roll 5d6 and multiply by 3, or 5d6 + 3.5(the average) times 10 or something?

 

I want to have *some* dice rolled, to preserve some randomness, but to cut it down to a manageable number.

 

There could be any number of ways that you might want to do it as GM. Rolling a set number and multiplying works. Using standard effect works. You might also want to check out a few threads on the boards that discuss using the success of the to hit roll to indicate the amount of damage done.

 

Or you might come up with another system...

 

 

Doc

[BNakagawa]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

I suppose you could roll 5d6 and add 35 stun, 10 body to it, or 30/10 if you're feeling less generous.

 

Once you get used to the simple techniques of grouping by 10s, it's pretty trivial to count up damage from even large batches of d6s.

 

Assuming you're actually counting them. The only guy who takes a long time to count damage is this one guy who has a habit of making 'math errors' - always in his favor

[Patriot]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Back In the day (like 3rd ed) there was a quick roll sheet program, 5-20 d6 using a percentile. I cant find it anywhere anymore.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

If you have a computer handy by the game table (like a laptop) you can use one of many available dice rolling programs.

 

here is one example:

http://www.wellington.org/champions/gspcinfo.htm

[NestorDRod]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

If you have a computer handy by the game table (like a laptop) you can use one of many available dice rolling programs.

 

here is one example:

http://www.wellington.org/champions/gspcinfo.htm

 

True, but in my experience, most GMs consider dice rolling programs to be tools of Satan.

[pinecone]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

If you have to roll a lot of D6's, say for a 15d6 EB, is there a method to maybe roll 5d6 and multiply by 3, or 5d6 + 3.5(the average) times 10 or something?

 

I want to have *some* dice rolled, to preserve some randomness, but to cut it down to a manageable number.

 

Thanks.

 

I ve used with mutual agreement 3.5(Number of dice)...the more dice you roll, the less random the result, so rolling a "few" will likely add too much randomness....

[Sean Waters]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Roll fewer dice? Blasphemy!

 

IMO even huge numbers of dice are easy enough to total. And fun to roll .

 

If this is just to speed things up and you don't want to have a laptop running at the game, get Excel to do a sheet of 1d6, a sheet of 2d6, a sheet of 4d6 and so on and just add. Or I can post some random number sheets.

 

Best solution I've seen if you really just want to add a little randomness to another wise set roll total AND speed things up is this: work out the average roll for (N-3)d6 where N is your DCs of damage (or whatever) then add the roll to hit.

 

So a 12d6 attack is 9x3.5=32 points (I'm rounding up) PLUS the roll you made to hit the target. Absolute minimum dice rolling but with a randomish result (it actually favours lower than average totals a little, but it is close enough for government work). It also rewards higher combat skill as you have the potential for higher damage without it becoming unbalancing.

 

I would seriously not encourage you to add much more randomness by rolling a smaller number of dice and multiplying, especially if you are keen on absolutes.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

The more dice you roll, the more statistically average the result becomes. So once you get beyond 15 or 20d6 you might just figure xd6 times 3.5 to get the result. 15d6: 52 Stun, 15 Body. 20d6: 70 Stun, 20 Body. It's an easy way to speed up battles.

 

Me, I prefer to roll lots of dice for damage. There's something about the Dice Rattle of Doom that appeals to my evil side.

[sindyr]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

So a 12d6 attack is 9x3.5=32 points (I'm rounding up) PLUS the roll you made to hit the target. Absolute minimum dice rolling but with a randomish result (it actually favours lower than average totals a little, but it is close enough for government work). It also rewards higher combat skill as you have the potential for higher damage without it becoming unbalancing.

 

I would seriously not encourage you to add much more randomness by rolling a smaller number of dice and multiplying, especially if you are keen on absolutes.

 

Okay, let's not consider 5d6 x 3, which *would* increase the randomness, but if I did 15d6 as 12*3.5 + 3d6 wouldn't that be less random?

 

In fact, is this not an easy way to control the degree of randomnes? For each die of rolling you replace with 3.5 is one less random? Makes me think you could have an advantage for something like this, such as:

 

+1/2 (or maybe 1/4): Predictable. Instead of rolling, take 3.5 per d6, and/or 1 Body.

 

or even:

 

-1/2 (or maybe -1/4): Random. Instead of rolling Xd6, roll 1d6, multiple the result times 6.

 

This is mostly joking. Mostly. ;p

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Back In the day (like 3rd ed) there was a quick roll sheet program' date=' 5-20 d6 using a percentile. I cant find it anywhere anymore.[/quote']Gary on the the Hero boards came up with a spreadsheet that displayed the odds of rolling under, exactly, or over a given total with a given number of dice (total and number of dice input by the user). I dunno if I still have a copy or not; I'll poke around for it.

 

To roll less dice, I'd take say half or two-thirds of the dice (nearest even number) and use 3.5 Stun and 1 Body for those, then roll the rest.

[lemming]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Bah. Once you get used to large numbers of dice, it's easy.

[Utech]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Make a bunch of rolls before the game ever starts. Keep them on a list. Group them if you wish. (3d6 rolls, 5d6 rolls, 12d6 rolls, etc.)

 

Each time a roll is required in the game, go to the list and cross off the next at the top. You may wish to mask the list so that no one knows what to expect next.

 

Naturally, you may roll any number of dice at the table you wish and simply use the list to add dice you don't wish to roll.

Examples:

1. GM uses the list for all 3d6 rolls required by the bad guys.
   
2. GM uses the list for all Skill rolls required by the PCs -- when the players should not know the result of the roll. (Stealth, etc.)
   
3. PC can do 15d6 of damage. Player chooses to roll only 5d6 and adds another 10d6 from the list.
   

 

It's a simple matter to make the list using available die rolling tools for your computer.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

The system can do what you want to a certain extent.

 

Standard Effect is a -0 Limitation on a Power.

If you build your Power as a Partially Limited Power with part of it using the Standard Effect Limitation you can have part of the Effect be predictable, and part of it random.

[CTaylor]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

I don't know how common this is, and it's slightly off topic, but related:

 

I have a hard time counting my own dice. I can read other peoples' no problem, group them up bam got a number, here's the body. My own, I stare at like a dull child, counting dots duhhhh...

[Istaran]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Okay, let's not consider 5d6 x 3, which *would* increase the randomness, but if I did 15d6 as 12*3.5 + 3d6 wouldn't that be less random?

 

In fact, is this not an easy way to control the degree of randomnes? For each die of rolling you replace with 3.5 is one less random? Makes me think you could have an advantage for something like this, such as:

 

It depends what you mean by 'less random'? If you mean 'less likely to swing wildly from one extreme to another' then perhaps not. Basically, the more dice you roll, the more likely the result is to be close to the average and the less likely it is to be toward the extremes. For example, on 1d6, the average is 2 or less 2/6 times (0.333 probability), but on 3d6 the average is 2 or less 17/216 times (0.078 probability). As you get higher numbers of dice, the extremes become increasingly unlikely and the middle becomes increasingly likely.

 

So taking a small number of dice and multiplying the result up makes it much more swingy. Taking a small number of dice and using standard effect for the rest actually makes it less 'random' though by any definition I can see using.

 

+1/2 (or maybe 1/4): Predictable. Instead of rolling, take 3.5 per d6, and/or 1 Body.

 

or even:

 

-1/2 (or maybe -1/4): Random. Instead of rolling Xd6, roll 1d6, multiple the result times 6.

 

This is mostly joking. Mostly. ;p

 

Predictable as listed is basically the standard effect rule, which is a +0. You no longer risk rolling low (and maybe bouncing) but you no longer can roll high (and for many foes will lose the ability to Stun them).

 

The second, Random, is clearly an advantage, as it replicates the effects of the STUN Lotto on killing attacks. You have a greater risk of your attack bouncing, but a much higher chance of Stunning someone or putting someone into 1 rec/minute or GM Option than your attack would normally possess.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

The system can do what you want to a certain extent.

 

Standard Effect is a -0 Limitation on a Power.

If you build your Power as a Partially Limited Power with part of it using the Standard Effect Limitation you can have part of the Effect be predictable, and part of it random.

 

I never quite understood that.

 

Roll 12d6 and you get 42, on average. 12d6 Standard Effect (SE) is 35. Taking a -1/4 limitation on a result of 42 (I know that's not really how it works) yields 33.6, so it seems it is a definite limtiation.

 

The story does not end there though. Look at ACTUAL results, which in this case means damage through defences. Assuming defences = about 2xDC then (42-24)=18 and (35-24)=11. A -1/2 limtiation on 18 (I know it doesn't work like that) would yield a result of 12.

 

The only 'advantage' of SE is the predictability, but, really, that predictability is false - the chances of getting less than 35 on 12d6 are well under 10%, and the situations in which you absolutely must roll 35 are pretty vanishingly small. To me the disadvantages far, far outweigh the advantages.

 

Now to be balanced, I have to conceed that with smaller die totals there is far more apparent randomness in the result and I can see the point of SE to an extent, but even at 6d6 the chance of a result of less than 18 is about 1 in 5.

 

Against that predictability you have to balance the ability to exceed normal maxima: a 12d6 SE EB will never, ever (bar aid or pushing or such) knock a hole in a 12 DEF wall - predictability carries a price quite apart from teh redduced die total. I'd argue that the inability to exceed a total balances the guarantee of a certain total, or at least addresses the balance, and the lower total tips it over completely.

 

So, formal proposal: For any power which counts the dice TOTAL (not just Body) Standard Effect is a -1/4 limitation.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Okay, let's not consider 5d6 x 3, which *would* increase the randomness, but if I did 15d6 as 12*3.5 + 3d6 wouldn't that be less random?

 

In fact, is this not an easy way to control the degree of randomnes? For each die of rolling you replace with 3.5 is one less random? Makes me think you could have an advantage for something like this, such as:

 

+1/2 (or maybe 1/4): Predictable. Instead of rolling, take 3.5 per d6, and/or 1 Body.

 

or even:

 

-1/2 (or maybe -1/4): Random. Instead of rolling Xd6, roll 1d6, multiple the result times 6.

 

This is mostly joking. Mostly. ;p

 

I think you put a much higher premium on predictability than I do. You also need to think about the mechanics of what is actually happening a lot more.

 

60 points of 'Predictable' EB gives you (by your suggestion) an 8d6 EB, which averages 28 Stun and 8 Body (and as you are applying average values...). You would never roll that low on 12d6 - it simply is not worth it. Even at +1/4 you are rolling 9 1/2 dice and averaging 33 stun/9 or 10 Body - still very unlikley results against rolling 12d6.

 

The thing about Standard Effect is that it does not run off average values - if it did then -0 would be fine - it runs off 3 points per die. See above post

As for random - OMG - 60 points of 'random' EB and (if I have the idea) you roll 1d6 and multiply by the DC? So 1d6x12. The possible results are 12,24,36,48,60 or 72. Don't look at averages before defences, the are misleading in Hero, look at damage through defences (DTD). Assuming an average defence of DCx2, the DTD is 0,0,12,24,36,48. That increases the average DTD but more importantly gives a 1 in 3 chance (maybe even 1 in 2 for a number of opponents in a superhero game) of massive damage likely to stun or even KO an opponent instantly. That is unbalancing. Moreover it makes Body results very difficult: if you have a 1 in 6 chance of doing 24 Body the world becomes a much more fragile place. Realistically you are never going to roll a maximum result on anything over about 4 or 5 dice and even that is vanishingly rare.

[Istaran]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

I never quite understood that.

 

Roll 12d6 and you get 42, on average. 12d6 Standard Effect (SE) is 35. Taking a -1/4 limitation on a result of 42 (I know that's not really how it works) yields 33.6, so it seems it is a definite limtiation.

 

The story does not end there though. Look at ACTUAL results, which in this case means damage through defences. Assuming defences = about 2xDC then (42-24)=18 and (35-24)=11. A -1/2 limtiation on 18 (I know it doesn't work like that) would yield a result of 12.

 

The only 'advantage' of SE is the predictability, but, really, that predictability is false - the chances of getting less than 35 on 12d6 are well under 10%, and the situations in which you absolutely must roll 35 are pretty vanishingly small. To me the disadvantages far, far outweigh the advantages.

 

Now to be balanced, I have to conceed that with smaller die totals there is far more apparent randomness in the result and I can see the point of SE to an extent, but even at 6d6 the chance of a result of less than 18 is about 1 in 5.

 

Against that predictability you have to balance the ability to exceed normal maxima: a 12d6 SE EB will never, ever (bar aid or pushing or such) knock a hole in a 12 DEF wall - predictability carries a price quite apart from teh redduced die total. I'd argue that the inability to exceed a total balances the guarantee of a certain total, or at least addresses the balance, and the lower total tips it over completely.

 

So, formal proposal: For any power which counts the dice TOTAL (not just Body) Standard Effect is a -1/4 limitation.

 

Shouldn't 12d6 Standard effect be 36?

Oh, and pump 24 3pt levels into damage (superheroic rules) and get 72 STUN per hit, no rolling. Wee.

Okay, extreme case, but as CSLs used for damage approaches 2xraw DCs, standard effect becomes increasingly valuable.

 

Note that's raw DCs. 12 3pt levels can push a 6d6 to full 36 pts even if it's AOE (+1), or Armor Piercing + One Hex (+1), etc.

 

The rest of the time though, you're right. And we all know how popular CSLs are.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Shouldn't 12d6 Standard effect be 36?

Oh, and pump 24 3pt levels into damage (superheroic rules) and get 72 STUN per hit, no rolling. Wee.

Okay, extreme case, but as CSLs used for damage approaches 2xraw DCs, standard effect becomes increasingly valuable.

 

Note that's raw DCs. 12 3pt levels can push a 6d6 to full 36 pts even if it's AOE (+1), or Armor Piercing + One Hex (+1), etc.

 

The rest of the time though, you're right. And we all know how popular CSLs are.

 

Er...yes, well spotted

 

Same principle applies though, just slightly less so.

[Jagged]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

If you have to roll a lot of D6's, say for a 15d6 EB, is there a method to maybe roll 5d6 and multiply by 3, or 5d6 + 3.5(the average) times 10 or something?

 

I want to have *some* dice rolled, to preserve some randomness, but to cut it down to a manageable number.

 

Thanks.

 

Holding tons of dice in your hand before attacking that villain is a simple pleasure but one I enjoy. So I have no idea why you'd want to roll less dice

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Okay' date=' let's not consider 5d6 x 3, which *would* increase the randomness, but if I did 15d6 as 12*3.5 + 3d6 wouldn't that be less random?[/quote']

 

It's less volatile. I'm not sure whether it's less random (as in will result in a lower spread of results).

 

Makes me think you could have an advantage for something like this, such as:

 

+1/2 (or maybe 1/4): Predictable. Instead of rolling, take 3.5 per d6, and/or 1 Body.

 

or even:

 

-1/2 (or maybe -1/4): Random. Instead of rolling Xd6, roll 1d6, multiple the result times 6.

 

In practice, this is backwards. A high level of volatility tends to work to the character's advantage. Check out the many threads on killing attacks and stun multiples for greater details. As a simplistic example, let's assume you have a 12d6 attack. Would you rather do:

 

- 42 STUN every time?

- a random sequence of 20, 30, 35, 40, 50, 60 [average 39 1/6]

- alternating between 0 and 70 [average 35]

 

Well, if that opponent has defenses of 30, to pick a number, then you do:

 

- 12 STUN every time - you will never STUN the target

 

- 0,0,5,10,20,30 for an average of 21 2/3 STUN per hit, and stun the target one time in 6 assuming a CON under 30 but 20+

 

- alternate between 0 and 40 for an average of 20 STUN, but you will stun the target half the time

 

The non-variable choice is clearly inferior. The more volatile choices will average more STUN. And for a loss of 1 2/3 STUN from the average hit, I'd rather Stun the target half the time than 1/6 the time.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Rolling lots of D6s

 

Holding tons of dice in your hand before attacking that villain is a simple pleasure but one I enjoy. So I have no idea why you'd want to roll less dice

 

Hear, hear!