Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

As for the flaming book example' date=' i figure if i keep repeating that bit of nonsense often enough, it will probably get to be believed like the auto-fail on skills in d20 is here.[/quote']

 

I think this gets confused because some of us discuss combat examples, where the autofail and autosuccess does exist, and others extrapolate this to all rolls having the autofail/autosuccess factor.

 

That some d20 games, and some d20 gamers, apply this rule to all rolls further muddies the water, but it's not fair to blame the d20 system for a house rule adopted by some games/gamers, any more than it's reasonable to write a nasty letter to Parker Brothers about putting $500 under free parking.

 

To me, the issue at question is not about autofail or autosuccess, but about the manner in which rolling d20 instead of 3d6 would vary the impact of modifiers, and change the manner in which both skills and combat rolls work in Hero.

 

PS: Thanks for explaining the whole flaming pea soup thing - now I get it!

[Zanthis]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

Neat, no auto-failure. Does this apply to combat? It's unclear if it does. If so, give me a few minutes and I'll have a character that never rolls dice in combat. I can just sit back and magnamisouly say "I think those evil agents over there should take, say, 60 BODY damage". No roll to hit needed. No damage rolls needed. Nothing! Muwhahaha, I won't even need to bring dice to the game . Kinda ruins the spirit of combat though.

 

Of course, since you are clearly stating that skills have no auto-failure chance, similar things can be done with skills. Breakfall, Roll With Punches and Power to name a few. Heck, I'll by every single power with RSR and have a 20+ skill. Hmm, some extra skill levels in perception rolls and I'll be able to predict exactly what I can and cannot spot. "I didn't notice that? Given the description you've given Mr. GM, I'm only coming up with a -7 penalty to my perception roll. Since I've got 35 perception skill, I'd have noticed that even with twice the penalty."

 

On a side note, I wonder what effect a d20 combat roll would have on the advantage Autofire?

[Trebuchet]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

Neat, no auto-failure. Does this apply to combat? It's unclear if it does. If so, give me a few minutes and I'll have a character that never rolls dice in combat. I can just sit back and magnamisouly say "I think those evil agents over there should take, say, 60 BODY damage". No roll to hit needed. No damage rolls needed. Nothing! Muwhahaha, I won't even need to bring dice to the game . Kinda ruins the spirit of combat though.

 

Of course, since you are clearly stating that skills have no auto-failure chance, similar things can be done with skills. Breakfall, Roll With Punches and Power to name a few. Heck, I'll by every single power with RSR and have a 20+ skill. Hmm, some extra skill levels in perception rolls and I'll be able to predict exactly what I can and cannot spot. "I didn't notice that? Given the description you've given Mr. GM, I'm only coming up with a -7 penalty to my perception roll. Since I've got 35 perception skill, I'd have noticed that even with twice the penalty."

 

On a side note, I wonder what effect a d20 combat roll would have on the advantage Autofire?

Hero still has an automatic failure on an unadjusted 3d6 roll of "18" for any task. So there is always a 0.5% chance of failure no matter how high the skill level is. That's not necessarily going to be a fumble; it simply means the character did not succeed. Buying a skill up to the 20+ level just means any applied penalties are less likely to result in failure. But that small chance is always there.

 

Is a failure in d20 an automatic fumble/something bad happens?

[Zanthis]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I was refering to the proposed d20 replacement for 3d6, which appears to have been suggested without an autofailure chance, meaning with a 20 skill, you will succeed 100% of the time.

 

Now, the suggested d10+5 option is better than d20 and allows for failure even by highly skilled persons. Its just a bit clunky, and I think 3d6 is just as easy to work with. Although, I really do like the Shadowrun d6 system, but hey, maybe I'm just weird.

[tesuji]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

Is a failure in d20 an automatic fumble/something bad happens?

 

it depends on what you are doing and how badly you fail.

 

usually failing just means failing. no good thing happens.

 

In a lot of cases, failure by 5 under or 10 under means something bad happens. Failing a use magic check by 10 or more means a mishap occurs, for instance. Failing a balance check by 1-4 means you stop. failing it by 5 or more means you fall.

 

that type of thing.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I was refering to the proposed d20 replacement for 3d6' date=' which appears to have been suggested without an autofailure chance, meaning with a 20 skill, you will succeed 100% of the time..[/quote']Thanks for clarifying that. I agree that no matter how good you are at something, there should always be a slight chance you miss/fail. I also think it's only fair, however, that any character with an 18+ chance of success who fails only due to a roll of 18 should have a lesser chance of a catastrophic result if he fails than the guy with a 12-. If Batman fails his tightrope walking roll because of an 18 he'll probably catch the tightrope before he falls. Joe Agent will probably go splat.

[Turin]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

If people don't like the crit/error system in stargate, they should be griping about stargate, not d20. d20 does not have a 1/20 rule for skills. Criticizing d20 for the 1/20 rule for skills is as accurate as complaining about the massive damage threshold set at equal to con making d20 not work right for DND. (D20 sets the MDT at 50, not CON, but SOME D20 GAMES do set it at con, just like SOME d20 games have 1/20.)

 

 

 

That good reason being that people are often wrong and speak without checking the facts!

 

 

OK how is this then, don't assume that they are talking about the SRD if they don't say they are. D20 is more then just the SRD, perhaps they were relating the auto failure to D20 SG1 which is D20 and you had mentioned earlier.

 

Or since they listed the autofailure as apart of d20 not D20 then maybe they are attributing it to using a d20 in Hero which has the highest value that can normally be rolled 18 as an auto failure. So if you switch from 3d6 to d20 you would have a 5% failure rate. Especially since that is the subject of this thread. Either way "they" wouldn't be the only ones wrong and spoke with out checking the facts!

 

For rolls of 18 in Hero I make the player roll again and based on his success or failure of the second roll I determin if it is a "Critical" failure or not. Most of the time the character just looses what ever time it took to attempt the skill. I still haven't had anyone roll two 18s in a row, but we have only been playing for a few months now.

[tesuji]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

OK how is this then, don't assume that they are talking about the SRD if they don't say they are. D20 is more then just the SRD, perhaps they were relating the auto failure to D20 SG1 which is D20 and you had mentioned earlier.

 

Or since they listed the autofailure as apart of d20 not D20 then maybe they are attributing it to using a d20 in Hero which has the highest value that can normally be rolled 18 as an auto failure. So if you switch from 3d6 to d20 you would have a 5% failure rate. Especially since that is the subject of this thread. Either way "they" wouldn't be the only ones wrong and spoke with out checking the facts!

 

So, in order to avoid having people actually learn and speak correctly about a ruleset, we instead undefine the term d20 so it can apply for any of the various ruleset or even house rules here or there making it effectively a meaningless term?

 

cool.

[Zanthis]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I've been completely ignoring the critical failure/success issue, since it seems entirely separate to me from the issue of replacing 3d6 with d20. Critical success/failure tends to become very house ruled in most cases.

 

We once had an AD&D 2nd edition critical success/failure table so complex, we had a fumbled attack roll result in Orcus and 4 lesser demons appearing and attacking the offending character (the critically fumbled roll yielded a roll on the wandering monster table which yielded a roll on the extra-planar table which resulted in a roll on the named extra-planar creatures table which turned up Orcus who had a special note that he came with 2d4 lesser demons.) Another time, a fighter fumbled, got attack on nearest ally which was the paladin 10' away who had just been healed back to consciousness in the same round. Based on previous precedent, the DM ruled that the fighter's sword flew from his hand and struck the paladin. The fighter rolled a critical hit: x5 damage and sever a limb, resulting in the death of the paladin and the lose of his arm!

 

Come to think of it, maybe I should bring back the insane crit tables.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

Hmm' date=' some extra skill levels in perception rolls and I'll be able to predict exactly what I can and cannot spot. "I didn't notice that? Given the description you've given Mr. GM, I'm only coming up with a -7 penalty to my perception roll. Since I've got 35 perception skill, I'd have noticed that even with twice the penalty."[/quote']

 

No autofail or 0.5% autofail is about the same - virtual certainty of success. So I'll address the above.

 

From the GM perspective, I would consider the fact that a character who has bought his PER rolls up to 35- IS going to detect pretty much anything. And I would assess the implications of this on my scenarios before approving the character.

 

From the player perspective, I would expect that, having spent upwards of 40 character points (+20 levels w/ one sense) on this ability, I'd better make my PER rolls. If the GM intended to handwave it away, why not just deny me the ability to begin with and let me buy something I will get 40 points of value from?

 

To me, a virtual "autosuccess" skill is not inconsistent with the superheroic genre. Using your PER example, how often does Daredevil or Wolverine fail to notice something?

[Turin]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

So, in order to avoid having people actually learn and speak correctly about a ruleset, we instead undefine the term d20 so it can apply for any of the various ruleset or even house rules here or there making it effectively a meaningless term?

 

cool.

 

Or that they are not talking about a rule set and are talking about using a 20 sided die that is used instead of three six sided dice for use in Hero System.

 

As for d20 system, since it is licensed those who obey the System Guide are d20 products. So the only real "base" is the character creation and application of experience towards advancement, which is only obtained through WotC books. Everything that is in the SRD is for reference and can be changed and still have the official d20 logo. I am only putting this in since you talked about "actually learn and speak correctly about a rule set" which in its very nature is undefined with the exceptions about creation and experience.

 

I personally don't have a problem with d20 system but since the only standard rule set within it deals with character creation and experience it is difficult to "speak correctly" about other rules that are officially licensed as not being apart of the d20 rule set. So the rule set for d20 is, by its nature, for the most part undefined. I am not suggesting that we "undefine the term d20" I am suggesting that since it is already mostly undefined that we should define what aspect we are talking about for greater communication.

 

So if someone says that d20 System has automatic failure for skill check on a natural roll of one they are correct. Just like someone is correct when they say that d20 System doesn't make a roll of one an automatic failure for skill checks. So lets all please try and learn to talk correctly about d20 System and its rule set.

[Turin]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I've been completely ignoring the critical failure/success issue, since it seems entirely separate to me from the issue of replacing 3d6 with d20. Critical success/failure tends to become very house ruled in most cases.

 

We once had an AD&D 2nd edition critical success/failure table so complex, we had a fumbled attack roll result in Orcus and 4 lesser demons appearing and attacking the offending character (the critically fumbled roll yielded a roll on the wandering monster table which yielded a roll on the extra-planar table which resulted in a roll on the named extra-planar creatures table which turned up Orcus who had a special note that he came with 2d4 lesser demons.) Another time, a fighter fumbled, got attack on nearest ally which was the paladin 10' away who had just been healed back to consciousness in the same round. Based on previous precedent, the DM ruled that the fighter's sword flew from his hand and struck the paladin. The fighter rolled a critical hit: x5 damage and sever a limb, resulting in the death of the paladin and the lose of his arm!

 

Come to think of it, maybe I should bring back the insane crit tables.

 

 

Well how likely was it that swords would become dancing swords of Paladin slaying?

 

We had a fairly detailed chart for AD&D but most of the results were dropping weapons or loosing your attacks for the round. One friend was know as Traven the sabre thrower for his luck at tossing his weapon in combat.

 

We also used the fumble chart in Rolemaster Arms law for a while. In one round of fighting both the PC and the drow both almost stepped on an invisible imaginary turtle and lost their actions. The turtle had somehow followed us into the underdark since it had been spotted before.

 

I like critical failures that just randomly happen, but I think that the method that Tesuji mentioned from SG1 works well as the GM or players commit to the "critical" nature of it. I would like to see something like action dice with in hero for other aspects also.

[Gunrunner]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I was actually thinking of creating a house rule for HERO to give lower-skilled warriors a fighting chance against higher-skilled ones and make combat a bit more random. I personally don't like the fact that a small difference in OCV/DCV can determine the outcome of a fight.

 

For combat and some situations where randomness plays as much importance as skill, I would make what I call a wild 3d6 roll. If I rolled double one's, two's or three's on 3d6, I would subtract the highest die and take the result - sort of a good luck bonus if you will. For example, if I rolled a 5, 2, and 2 on 3d6, I would subtract the 5 for an effective die roll of 4 - much better than the normal 9 I would have had. Similarly if I rolled double four's, five's or six's on 3d6, I would roll an extra die and add it the result - a bad luck penalty. So if I rolled a 5, 5, and 4 on 3d6, I would roll the extra die (let's say I roll a 4) - So the effective die roll is 18; pretty crappy luck!

 

I don't know why everyone's still debating, I offered you guys and gals a solution that's better than using d20 because you still only need 3d6 for a more linear/random roll

[Funksaw]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I didn't make my point well. I am NOT NOT NOT talking about making HERO into a D20/OGL system!!! All I'm saying is that using a twenty-sided die (instead of 3d6) to resolve test rolls would mean that any modifiers applied to the roll would be the same across the board' date=' no matter what your skill level is. But with 3d6, a penalty is entirely different from a %age standpoint depending on your present skill level. Therefore a GM needs to take into account just what a -2 penalty (or whatever) is actually doing.[/quote']

So you're essentially saying that the thing we've known about bell curves all along - that not all penalties are equal - is something you'd like to eliminate because you want to make all penalties equal.

 

That's a valid choice. It's not one I would make - indeed, I think that the unequal distribution of penalties makes the bell curve system extremely useful, but hey, some people prefer a flat tax.

 

-- Funksaw

[Funksaw]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

You seem to be implying that the 3d6 makes this happen.

 

Novice OCV +4

Veteran OCV +8 (thru skill levels or whatever)

 

Both shoot at Novice (DCV 4) at range of 25m. (+4 DCV)

Both are handed +1 accuracy Bow.

 

Novice gains 9.7% (hitting on 21 more chances in 216)

Veteran gains 11.6% (hitting 25 more times in 216.)

I think you're wrong here - The novice with a OCV of 4 vs. a DCV of 4 would go from 11- to 12-, while the expert would go from 15- to 16-. (remember, OCV base is 11)

 

16 comes up 6/216 while 12 comes up 25/216

 

Keep in mind that when you're on the back-end of the bellcurve, the bonuses are greater for the "more skilled" - but that's kinda cheating. See, you're describing a novice and someone skilled - but NOT an expert - because while the two are relatively different, it only matters what the absolute position on the curve is. In other words, a contest between 4 and 8 is going to be radically different between 8 and 12 or 12 and 16 because unlike a linear system, what matters is not the relative position of stats but the absolute position of the number on the curve.

 

If you prefer the "features" of the bellcurve with out the "back-end" problem, you might want to consider asymptotically-approaching zero (dicepool) systems which progress much like a bell-curve but have no back end.

[Turin]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

So you're essentially saying that the thing we've known about bell curves all along - that not all penalties are equal - is something you'd like to eliminate because you want to make all penalties equal.

 

That's a valid choice. It's not one I would make - indeed, I think that the unequal distribution of penalties makes the bell curve system extremely useful, but hey, some people prefer a flat tax.

 

-- Funksaw

 

Hey I prefer a flat tax and the bell curve! Those aren't mutually exclusive.

[tesuji]

Re: Using d20 instead of 3d6 (DON'T KILL ME!)

 

I think you're wrong here - The novice with a OCV of 4 vs. a DCV of 4 would go from 11- to 12-, while the expert would go from 15- to 16-. (remember, OCV base is 11)

 

16 comes up 6/216 while 12 comes up 25/216

 

At the risk of spinning this discussion into a new realm where we undefine dcv rather than bother with accuracy, i will simply point out that you apparently missed the explicit 25m range and +4 dcv mentioned in the very lines you quoted. which make the examples attacking 4 dcv targets with a range penalty of 4, not 4 dcv targets with no range penalties.

 

of course, there are probably HERo games out there who use different house rules for range modifiers and in some of those there may not even be range penalties so, in fact, by the standards we use here, you are probably correct and I am probably correct also.

 

What a wonderful world where everyone is correct but no one knows what the other is saying!