Flipped Die Rolls

[Captain Obvious]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

Well, I don't think I've ever seen a game system where rolling low for damage was good. Following the all-rolls-must-be-the-same logic, all games should use roll-high systems, which makes the venerable d% roll work out to rolling (100 - percentage chance to succeed) or higher. I guess that is easier.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

The only time a player bought a loaded die to a game, we all had a laugh: he'd got a piece of lead and nailed a dice to it.

 

It really would be a shame if people who played together felt the need to cheat at a game you can't win.

 

Still, so long as they don't mind the GM rolling behind his screen.....

LOL. Nice. If you're going to do it, do it blatantly!

 

Sadly, there are settings in which you have to worry about it. I've never really run into problems in the small, friendly, closed-group atmosphere I game in most often (when there is a player who decides to cheat, everyone tends to know it and you can all just roll your eyes and put up with it as best fits the situation). But in other atmospheres...well, it can be worth at least a little consideration. Tempers can become frayed and resentment build when there are feelings of unfairness.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

Well' date=' I don't think I've ever seen a game system where rolling low for damage was good. Following the all-rolls-must-be-the-same logic, all games should use roll-high systems, which makes the venerable d% roll work out to rolling (100 - percentage chance to succeed) or higher. I guess that [b']is[/b] easier.

Heh. A roll-high percentile system. :shudder: I guess it might make a tiny bit of sense if you tend to think about the chances that you will fail, or something bad will happen. Ah well. Rarely deal with percentile dice anymore anyway. I tend to go abstract enough to be able to just assign a value on the 3d6 scale. Once you get a good feel for the curve you can just say, "Hmm. That sounds like it would happen on maybe a 7 or less...."

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

Following the all-rolls-must-be-the-same logic' date=' all games should use roll-high systems, which makes the venerable d% roll work out to rolling (100 - percentage chance to succeed) or higher.[/quote']

 

I hadn't thought about that. So rather than having a 45% chance of success, and wanting <= 45, you'd have a 55% chance of failure, and you want to roll >= 55. Well, that's how grades in school work, so I suppose it's reasonably intuitive.

[David Blue]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

I hadn't thought about that. So rather than having a 45% chance of success' date=' and wanting <= 45, you'd have a 55% chance of failure, and you want to roll >= 55. Well, that's how grades in school work, so I suppose it's reasonably intuitive.[/quote']This is how Marvel Super Heroes, a very simple and good game, worked. I find rolling low on percentile dice more "natural" because I started with Superworld/Runequest, but shifting to high-is-good was no problem.

 

Of course in that game, you have one roll to hit and damage, that is you get fixed damage modified by whether you rolled white (low=miss), green, yellow or red (best) and what kind of attack you are using or what you were attempting to do. (For example the list of results for grappling is: white=miss, green=miss, yellow=partial, red=hold.) So you are in effect rolling high for damage as usual.

 

PS: Mayfair's first edition DC Heroes, which also combined hitting and doing damage in one roll, also asked for high rolls.

[Guyon]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

I am strongly with yamamura and Blue. I like like the rolls the way they are. And have played many systems where higher is better.

 

A little of history: I have played D&D off and on since 1976? Original, Advanced and then tired 3.5. D&D has problems, lots of them.

 

I also played 1st edition Champions. My feeling is why try and change such a great system? Maybe we should change D&D dice? :-)

[prestidigitator]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

I am strongly with yamamura and Blue. I like like the rolls the way they are. And have played many systems where higher is better.

 

A little of history: I have played D&D off and on since 1976? Original, Advanced and then tired 3.5. D&D has problems, lots of them.

 

I also played 1st edition Champions. My feeling is why try and change such a great system? Maybe we should change D&D dice? :-)

LOL. I wouldn't mind changing D&D...or eliminating it entirely. I find it both very complimentary and insulting that D&D 3.5 become so much more like Hero (don't need to argue that one here--just my opinion).

 

Anyway, the idea is that the system doesn't need to be changed at all! In some cases people's perception of the system and its, "complexity," is what needs to be changed. Maybe it is just a hurdle that I myself am having to overcome in my particular situation. It is interesting to hear when and how others consider similar adaptions, though.

[David Blue]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

If you want to combine rolling high to hit with one roll to hit and damage - and that was something I liked about Marvel and CD - techogre has come up with a table that uses Standard Effect except for 3d6 worth of variability.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27037&highlight=Standard+Effect

 

Example:

 

Giant-Man, with DEX 21 and STR 65 (Growth included), punches Wing Foo, a Martial Artist with 33 DEX. Giant-Man's OCV is (21/3=7) and he rolls 6+6+2=14: bonus +4 to hit, total OCV 11. (Good rolling by Giant-Man: he had less than a 10% chance to do that.) Wing Foo's DCV is 33/3=11: Giant-Man hit Wing Foo!

 

Now Giant-Man does all but the last three of his dice in Standard Damage: that will be 10d6 of Standard Damage: 10 BODY and 30 STUN. The last three dice, well he's already rolled and counted them. That's 5 BODY and 14 STUN. That adds up to 15 BODY total, and 44 STUN total.

 

Now, this is all nonsense if you like playing the game the way it already is. (And why not? It's such a great game!)

 

But you can say goodbye to rolling and counting lots of dice now, if you want to. (And I do. 3d6 is enough for me.)

 

I also like more predicability than you get rolling lots of dice normally, yet perhaps not an absolutely standard effect. If you make a great roll to hit, you hit a little harder. That makes sense too.

 

The only clear problems I can see are apparent in the example:

(1) If a character with a small chance to hit does hit, it's going to be with a fairly good damage roll every time

(2) "Standard Effect" should be called "Sub-Standard Effect" because you get .5 STUN less damage per die as well as less variability. (Variability is a great advantage in attack, because it lets you punch through high defenses some of the time instead of never.)

 

I think Champions has gone a bit the wrong way in speeding up combats. Simplifying the game so you would have good options to play faster while getting more done should have been a priority. Instead, the game plays slow but you hope to end combats with less done by dropping the characters' defences so they are knocked out in fewer actions.

 

What I see here is a potential for faster play while also slightly dropping damage. So you might go round the table a little faster and maybe hit the foe an extra time. That's - um - ideal, to me, unless I've missed something.

 

(I will now return this thread to prestidigitator, who was discussing a good idea to make the game look simpler while not at all changing how it really plays.)

[Ki-rin]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

Just For The Record:

 

My House Rule for Standard effect is that each 1d6 does 3.5 points of effect (I roll 50/50 if we are talking about an effect that multiples out to "x.5" So 1d6 => 3 + 50/50 chance of 4, 2d6 => 7, etc

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

(2) "Standard Effect" should be called "Sub-Standard Effect" because you get .5 STUN less damage per die as well as less variability.

 

The typical time we use the Standard Effect rules is with Killing Attacks, in which case it "rolls" 0.5 higher than the statistical average. I am willing to accept that tradeoff as a compromise to get rid of the ridiculous Stun Lottery. As for less variability, I am in favor of that, generally speaking -- and definitely speaking, when it comes to Killing Attacks.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

If you want to combine rolling high to hit with one roll to hit and damage - and that was something I liked about Marvel and CD - techogre has come up with a table that uses Standard Effect except for 3d6 worth of variability.

...

(I will now return this thread to prestidigitator, who was discussing a good idea to make the game look simpler while not at all changing how it really plays.)

Actually, David, I really appreciate this contribution. It doesn't have to exactly align with my idea to be a great addition to the discussion. I haven't followed the link yet, but I will do that. Thank you.

[zornwil]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

If you want to combine rolling high to hit with one roll to hit and damage - and that was something I liked about Marvel and CD - techogre has come up with a table that uses Standard Effect except for 3d6 worth of variability.

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27037&highlight=Standard+Effect

 

Example:

 

Giant-Man, with DEX 21 and STR 65 (Growth included), punches Wing Foo, a Martial Artist with 33 DEX. Giant-Man's OCV is (21/3=7) and he rolls 6+6+2=14: bonus +4 to hit, total OCV 11. (Good rolling by Giant-Man: he had less than a 10% chance to do that.) Wing Foo's DCV is 33/3=11: Giant-Man hit Wing Foo!

 

Now Giant-Man does all but the last three of his dice in Standard Damage: that will be 10d6 of Standard Damage: 10 BODY and 30 STUN. The last three dice, well he's already rolled and counted them. That's 5 BODY and 14 STUN. That adds up to 15 BODY total, and 44 STUN total.

 

Now, this is all nonsense if you like playing the game the way it already is. (And why not? It's such a great game!)

 

But you can say goodbye to rolling and counting lots of dice now, if you want to. (And I do. 3d6 is enough for me.)

 

I also like more predicability than you get rolling lots of dice normally, yet perhaps not an absolutely standard effect. If you make a great roll to hit, you hit a little harder. That makes sense too.

 

The only clear problems I can see are apparent in the example:

(1) If a character with a small chance to hit does hit, it's going to be with a fairly good damage roll every time

(2) "Standard Effect" should be called "Sub-Standard Effect" because you get .5 STUN less damage per die as well as less variability. (Variability is a great advantage in attack, because it lets you punch through high defenses some of the time instead of never.)

 

I think Champions has gone a bit the wrong way in speeding up combats. Simplifying the game so you would have good options to play faster while getting more done should have been a priority. Instead, the game plays slow but you hope to end combats with less done by dropping the characters' defences so they are knocked out in fewer actions.

 

What I see here is a potential for faster play while also slightly dropping damage. So you might go round the table a little faster and maybe hit the foe an extra time. That's - um - ideal, to me, unless I've missed something.

 

(I will now return this thread to prestidigitator, who was discussing a good idea to make the game look simpler while not at all changing how it really plays.)

I see now what you're referring to, thx for the link here.

 

The only real issue I see with is that a "to hit" is more likely to occur in the smaller number range, so more hits will do a little less damage in general than one would have if rolling 3d6 divorced from the "to hit" roll. It does make sense, though, this way a lot more than other systems where the amount of damage is way too much directly dictated by how much one makes a single to hit roll.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Flipped Die Rolls

 

The only real issue I see with is that a "to hit" is more likely to occur in the smaller number range' date=' so more hits will do a little less damage in general than one would have if rolling 3d6 divorced from the "to hit" roll. It does make sense, though, this way a lot more than other systems where the amount of damage is way too much directly dictated by how much one makes a single to hit roll.[/quote']

I think this rule employs a high-rolling strategy. Otherwise his comment about characters with little chance to hit tending to do more damage with each hit would be reversed--which is interesting; perhaps this method would work better with the conventional low-rolling method of Hero.