Optional dice rolling system for those without Fudge Dice

[theDwarf]

Wow really? Ummm, yeah... so let me get this straight you come up with some insane system to use regular D6s for FUDGE Dice. My group we do not use FUDGE dice we use regular D6s following what what page 16 in Your Story book says:

So when rolling a D6 the result is the following:

• 1,2 = -
  
• 3,4 = 0
  
• 5,6 = +

Actually, I was responding to the OP and posting possible corrections to how he mapped it.
My own recommendation is the 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 as -, 0 and + respectively
but I would not want to see people trying to use an incorrectly mapped system thus the discussion (and instruction) on permutations, a little insight on how to test if a map may be reasonable, and a couple of options that can yield credible results (one easier to follow but less accurate, one more accurate but more scattered) in case people run afoul the mapping (see your post) or the d6-d6 system suggested in the book.

FYI ... 1d6-1d6 yields a chevron distribution.  
See thread on      "Using both Fudge dice and d6-d6?" for chevron distribution of d6-d6 and permutations for 4 Fudge dice.

[JosephKell]

Or you could use a 2d10, then treat:
1: -2
2: -1
3: -1
3: 0
4: 0
5: 0
6: 0
7: +1
8: +1
9: +2
10: re-roll.

But this is just getting ridiculous.  The 4d6 with 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 seems the best solution (or the baby fudge dice).

I remember reading something in the books about a very specific (read "rare") case where you can lock down one of your opponents dice in the event they can re-roll.  So that is something to consider when trying to use an alternative rolling system.

[ryanroyce]

Wow really? Ummm, yeah... so let me get this straight you come up with some insane system to use regular D6s for FUDGE Dice. My group we do not use FUDGE dice we use regular D6s following what what page 16 in Your Story book says:

So when rolling a D6 the result is the following:

• 1,2 = -
  
• 3,4 = 0
  
• 5,6 = +

Before I got my set of Fudge dice, I used a slight variation on that system.  
1,6 = +
2,5 = <null>
3,4 = -

This keeps the matching values on opposite sides of the die, just as a real Fudge die does.  It's nit-picky as hell and I don't even need to do this anymore, but there it is anyway.

[evilnerf]

Another way to do things if you have a program that rolls die for you, you can do "1d3-2", it gives you a result of -1, 0 or +1.  I'm not good enough at math to figure it out, but 4d3-8 should you give you the same probability with a much faster result.

[TheMouse]

Or you can use any number of dice roller program. There are web sites that java applet dice rollers. you can download apps. Lots of options, so long as they support either 4dF or 4d3-8 (which are exactly the same thing).

I use rolldice on my netbook. Go to command line and type "rolldice 50x4d3-8" and it ouputs 50 iterations of Fudge dice rolls. Then I can copy/paste to a notepad and erase them as they're used. Simple and fast, although not nearly as satisfying as rolling 4dF, I must admit.

[Esoteric Wombat]

A good probability program, for anybody interested. I already plugged in 4dF, 1d6-1d6, and 2d6 centered to 0.
http://anydice.com/program/11a

As an aside, I've found fudge dice to be a subjective thing. My group used them for a few sessions, then decided they didn't like them. It wasn't anything big, but 4dF creates a very sharp and predictable curve, which just didn't fit the groups love of zany, off-the-wall action. As players they decided that they actually liked less predictable rolls, where there was more chance to succeed and fail dramatically. 2d6 fits the players a lot better, and works in the rules as long as it is used consistently.

[SaintAndSinner]

If you have d4's then d4 minus d4 gives you a range pretty close to d4F.  Not as wild as d6 minus d6.

[theDwarf]

If you have d4's then d4 minus d4 gives you a range pretty close to d4F.  Not as wild as d6 minus d6.

But caps at +/-3 rather than +/-4.

For the full +/-4 then d5-d5 would work.
d5's can be found and faceted crystal rollers or 10-siders with 1-5 repeated twice.
 

[TheMouse]

But caps at +/-3 rather than +/-4.

Although, to be fair, you only get results at +/-4 a little more than 2% of the time. It's not a really huge difference.

[theDwarf]

Although, to be fair, you only get results at +/-4 a little more than 2% of the time. It's not a really huge difference.

How do you figure?
Are you talking about the Fudge dice OR what I was talking about (d4-d4 compared to d5-d5).  In the case of the d5-d5 the chance of getting a +4 is 1/25th (aka, 4%) and a -4 is also 4%.  In the case of Fudge dice it is 1.23% for a +4 and 1.23% for a -4.  The chance of getting a +4 or better on d6-d6 is 8.33%.

Now then, you may be saying to yourself "look, you are proving my point" but I have seen too many players roll 00's on d% to think that 2% "is not a huge difference" especially when it comes to capping a level one lower (or higher).