It was just something sparked by another thread that was discussing the best spells to Empower, and why; it seemed that spells that give low numbers of d4s are best, which led to the realization that, at those ranges, it's non-trivial to calculate exactly what the result is. (Take time stop, or enervation, for example.)
Also I am, in general, highly dedicated to best practices.
Yeah, D&D's rounding rules are messed up, and die quantization is unavoidable, but I believe it's possible to get a really good match, even if it's not perfect.I understand your point, but there are some problems that work against a smooth distribution, like the rules on rounding and the fact that dice give inevitably discrete results.
It sort of does. It avoids gaps, certainly, and it closely matches what I suspect the ideal distribution to be, but it's not quite right, probably due to rounding. It's also not unambiguously correct: a strict reading of the rules may indicate it's disallowed, and it's not the only distribution that is similarly close.I just noticed that you already did: 3d4+(3d4/2) named "partial multiplication". This should give the right distribution (except the fact that 3d4/2 is rounded) and avoid 'holes' in distribution.
Didn't it work?
OTOH, there's only really one other serious candidate: minimal partial multiplication, which is a shortcut to reduce the amount of division you have to do at the table. But here's a shortlist graph anyway.