2d10

[Realmsbard]

What do you think of replacing the d20 with 2d10. I think it would tone down some of the wild failures in the roll. I feel that any professional would not fail at his craft fifty percent of the time. That seems to happen if a PC needs a 10 + adds. Would you go to a doctor who cures only 50% of his patients?

Im old and tired so be gentle.
_________________
Listen to the song. For in the tale there may be truth.

[serleran]

It also makes anything remotely hard near impossible; that is, if you must roll an 18 -20, the odds of doing so are dramatically decreased. Remember, in C&C, "routine" things probably don't have a difficulty, and so, don't need to be checked, ever.

[shane]

Go for broke, man! Use 3d6.

From the Unearthed Arcana. It applies to 2d10 as well.

Quote:
In general, this variant leads to a grittier D&D game, because there will be far fewer very good or very bad rolls. Not only can you no longer roll 1, 2, 19, or 20, but most rolls will be clustered around the average of 10.5. With a d20, every result is equally likely; you have a 5% chance of rolling an 18 and a 5% chance of rolling a 10. With 3d6, theres only one possible combination of dice that results in an 18 (three sixes, obviously), but there are twenty-four combinations that result in a 10. Players used to the thrill of rolling high and the agony of the natural 1 will get that feeling less oftenbut it may be more meaningful when it does happen. Good die rolls are a fundamental reward of the game, and it changes the character of the game when the rewards are somewhat stronger but much less frequent. Game balance shifts subtly when you use the bell curve variant.

Rolling 3d6 gives you a lot more average rolls, which favors the stronger side in a combat. And in the D&D game, thats almost always the PCs. Many monstersespecially low-CR mon sters encountered in groupsrely heavily on a lucky shot to damage PCs. When rolling 3d6, those lucky shots are fewer and farther between. In a fair fight in which everyone rolls a 10, the PCs should win almost every time. The bell curve variant adheres more tightly to that average (which is the reason behind the reduction in CR for monsters encountered in groups).

Another subtle change to the game is that the bell curve variant rewards bonuses relatively more and the die roll relatively less, simply because the die roll is almost always within a few points of 10. A characters skill ranks, ability scores, and gear have a much bigger impact on success and failure than they do in the standard D&D rules.

_________________
::: Shane

::: Rational thought, not superstition

[Treebore]

Realmsbard wrote:
What do you think of replacing the d20 with 2d10. I think it would tone down some of the wild failures in the roll. I feel that any professional would not fail at his craft fifty percent of the time. That seems to happen if a PC needs a 10 + adds. Would you go to a doctor who cures only 50% of his patients?

Im old and tired so be gentle.

It sounds like your simply using rolls to determine too many things. If you think the doctor should be able to heal their patient why are you even making a roll? Simply say, "after a week of care your all better."

If you think the armoror or weaponsmith should be able to make that armor or sword, then they made it, no roll necessary.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[rabindranath72]

shane wrote:
Go for broke, man! Use 3d6.

From the Unearthed Arcana. It applies to 2d10 as well.

Yes, it applies to 2d10 as well, but "with caveats". You need to rescale the modifiers to the rolls, otherwise you get nonsensical results. Keep in mind that this means saves and BtH. A +1 on d20 has a much different impact than a +1 on 2d10. It is not easy to scale things down so that the game keeps working well. Good luck!

[CharlieRock]

Try it. Or let it be a player option:

"I only need an eight to make this ... but I don't trust my d20 after that last critical fumble. Maybe 2d10s would give me better odds."
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[Realmsbard]

Treebore wrote:
It sounds like your simply using rolls to determine too many things. If you think the doctor should be able to heal their patient why are you even making a roll? Simply say, "after a week of care your all better."

If you think the armoror or weaponsmith should be able to make that armor or sword, then they made it, no roll necessary.

Thats fine for non combat. But what about when

Badaxe the fighter misses three times in a row.
_________________
Listen to the song. For in the tale there may be truth.

[CharlieRock]

Realmsbard wrote:
Thats fine for non combat. But what about when

Badaxe the fighter misses three times in a row.

Check the haft. It may have gotten warped.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[mordrene]

I think another PC should taunt Badaxe and say, "Maybe combat isn't your thing. I know, lets have a spelling contest."

in all seriousness, maybe Badaxe has attacked something he shouldn't have and needs to run away.

[Traveller]

Realmsbard wrote:
Thats fine for non combat. But what about when

Badaxe the fighter misses three times in a row.

Tough luck for Badaxe then. Using 2d10 would make Badaxe miss even more often than with 1d20 since he's more likely to roll an 11 on 2d10 (5 possibilities, 10+1, 9+2, 8+3, 7+4, 6+5) than 20 (1 possibility, 10+10).
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

[Realmsbard]

CharlieRock wrote:
Check the haft. It may have gotten warped.

It is now. He broke the handle over the chuckling clerics head. He crushed his d20 into the dungeon floor.

Tore off his horned helm and hit the orc in the face with it for 8 damage.
_________________
Listen to the song. For in the tale there may be truth.

[Fizz]

I've brought this up before too. I like the idea myself. But to be statistically fair, you probably want to change the CB for non-prime abilities. I reduce it to 16. (Otherwise, non-prime abilities are ridiculously difficult.)

See this discussion.

-Fizz

[CharlieRock]

Realmsbard wrote:
It is now. He broke the handle over the chuckling clerics head. He crushed his d20 into the dungeon floor.

Tore off his horned helm and hit the orc in the face with it for 8 damage.

This one time in a D&D3.0 campaign my old buddy playing a barbarian was having a particularly bad day and missed everything. He even used up his rage without connecting once. All up until the very end when a Yuan-ti dominated him into attacking my roommate's fighter. Then he rolls two twenties and maxes the damage roll.

Way to break the miss streak, dude.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[adaen]

Another option that is between the steepness of the 3d6 curve and the flatness of the straight d20 is to throw 3 d20's and take the median (a.k.a., the mid20).

There is a lot that can be done with this mechanic. If one is using any type of Fate/Luck points, they can be spent to use the high result rather than the median (e.g., hi20).

Food for thought.

~AoB
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

[serleran]

Rolling 3d20 and taking the median one ensures a natural twenty practically never happens. There is a 1:8000 chance it happens. First, one must roll a 20, and another, and, the last as well, for it to be a median. 20 x 20 x 20 = 8000. The same sort of thing happens for any very high result, and nearly guarantees something in the 7-13 result. Might as well just roll 5d4. At least then the odds of rolling a 20 is 1:1024.

Changing the die mechanic requires careful consideration. If you do such, you should (nearly always) make some ruling that a roll of a natural 20 = automatic success because it is unlikely to happen with any regularity.

Also, when multiple dice are involved, you're cutting out the "critical failure" option, totally. If you roll 5 dice, you can't get a 1. "twould be more effective (and easier) to just reduce the difficulties... but, if it goes to zero or lower, why are you rolling for it?

[adaen]

serleran wrote:
Rolling 3d20 and taking the median one ensures a natural twenty practically never happens. There is a 1:8000 chance it happens. First, one must roll a 20, and another, and, the last as well, for it to be a median. 20 x 20 x 20 = 8000. The same sort of thing happens for any very high result, and nearly guarantees something in the 7-13 result. Might as well just roll 5d4. At least then the odds of rolling a 20 is 1:1024.

Actually, you only need 2 out of 3 to be twenty for the median result to be a twenty.....the probability works out to 0.725%. Though your point is taken, 1's and 20's will be rare. That is sort of the point. Decreasing the randomness favors the players (they are less likely to be taken out by a lucky shot).

One thing to note is that the middle of the curve is much less steep than a 3d6....the highest probability for any result is ~7%.

serleran wrote:
Changing the die mechanic requires careful consideration.

Agreed. This will change the game. It is interesting to note that the mid20 will change the game notibly less than the 3d6 or 2d10. The probability distribution is intermediate of 1d20 and 3d6/2d10. It also doesn't require one to add up dice, just compare (which the human brain is supposed to be faster at doing).

Anyway, I think it is a feather in the cap of C&C that it can handle any of these sorts of tweaks really well. D&D has much more of a problem (what with critical hits and Feats based off of the assumed critical hit system).

Best,

~AoB
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

[Fizz]

Yeah, Adaen is right. Gotta be careful with all them fancy math terms!
Mean = the average number

Median = the middle number

Mode = the most common number

Too many dice or a roll-and-pick system is too fancy for my liking. I like 2d10 system provides a nice balance of randomness, speed, and ease of use.

-Fizz

[adaen]

Fizz wrote:
Too many dice or a roll-and-pick system is too fancy for my liking. I like 2d10 system provides a nice balance of randomness, speed, and ease of use.

To each, his own!

~AoB
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

[Fizz]

adaen wrote:
To each, his own!

~AoB

Oh of course. It's one of the things that i like about C&C: it's relative maleability.

-Fizz

[Eisenmann]

And even though getting a natural 20 will be quite rare, with any kind of positive modifier the chances of "rolling" high is quite possible.

[adaen]

Eisenmann wrote:
And even though getting a natural 20 will be quite rare, with any kind of positive modifier the chances of "rolling" high is quite possible.

For sure.
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

[serleran]

Then, if you're simply looking for high results, that's easy... don't change what is being rolled... just triple the bonuses.
Or, reduce the likelihood of failure - shift the Prime/non-Prime to something like 6 / 12. Cut ACs in half.

Really, you can make whatever numbers you want. That's the glory of math.

[Eisenmann]

serleran wrote:
Then, if you're simply looking for high results, that's easy... don't change what is being rolled... just triple the bonuses.
Or, reduce the likelihood of failure - shift the Prime/non-Prime to something like 6 / 12. Cut ACs in half.

Really, you can make whatever numbers you want. That's the glory of math.

True. True. But I don't think that anyone is just looking for high results. I think the greatest benefit to using two dice is that it's not a flat line periodic system. And it doesn't disrupt the game very much. Though with all that said, I'll probably stick with just 1D20 and massage the system other ways.

[adaen]

To me, its all about keeping the toolkit broad enough to fulfill the requirements of a given player group, game, campaign, etc. To my mind, mid20 is a good addition to that toolkit.

~AoB
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

[serleran]

I just like to argue. Doesn't make me right, or you wrong, but I like to think there are always more ways to see things... even if I'm right, and you're wrong.

[Eisenmann]

serleran wrote:
I just like to argue. Doesn't make me right, or you wrong, but I like to think there are always more ways to see things... even if I'm right, and you're wrong.

LOL Heads I win, Tales you lose.

[serleran]

Quote:
Heads I win, Tales you lose.

Good thing all my coins come with training wheels.

[Realmsbard]

serleran wrote:
Then, if you're simply looking for high results, that's easy... don't change what is being rolled... just triple the bonuses.
Or, reduce the likelihood of failure - shift the Prime/non-Prime to something like 6 / 12. Cut ACs in half.

Really, you can make whatever numbers you want. That's the glory of math.

No I dont want to just make things easy. And I am not talking about non combat actions. If I think a PC should be able to do a thing he does it. My concern is that a PC who is proficient at his fighting craft should score a hit more often than not. With any one roll of a 1d whatever their is 50% chance of hitting or missing. You might as well flip a coin. Yes there should be a chance of failure, but 50%?

All this applies to the monsters as well.

I hate it when the PCs have fought through three levels of a dungeon full of goblins, orcs, and bears --- to get to the big badass boss monster and he misses the first three swings. The players look at you and ask is the real boss in the next room?
_________________
Listen to the song. For in the tale there may be truth.

[serleran]

There is an old trick, called "fudging" that seems to work wonders, you know. Some people consider it "cheating" and others consider it "welcome," but, if you really don't want that big badass boss monster missing three times in a row... it doesn't have to.

Remember the first rule... the rules are your servant. That includes when the dice get tossed. You can always justify it after the fact, or before the fact, or during the fact. Maybe that big badass boss monster has just finished gobbling down a potion that gives him three automatic hits; since it was used up, there's no fear the party will get it. Or, maybe he's got some magic item that only works for his species... again, no chance (or very little) the party will make use of it.

Quote:
With any one roll of a 1d whatever their is 50% chance of hitting or missing.

No, there is not (unless you mean: you either miss, or don't miss.) A 20th level fighter against an AC of 20 will hit every single time. The worst he can roll is 21. That's 100%. The same fighter at 1st level will hit 10% of the time (on a 19 and 20.) These are vastly different than 50% chance.

If your issue is with the hit probabilities, change the ACs since that is what is being compared. Reduce them, improve them... use situations. There are hundreds of ways to make the game "work" the way you want... one of them is changing the foundation of the game itself.

Doesn't really matter, in the end, if you like what you made. Otherwise, what a waste of time.