Alternate Attack Rolls

[Bud Gray]

We have some new players coming into our game. And they are unfamiliar with, and a little intimidated by, the Hero System. One of the things that seems to cause new players difficulty in my experience, is the attack roll. Since they are familiar with D&D, I was thinking of making the attack roll simply 3d6 + OCV vs 11+DCV. Is there anything wrong with this solution? Will it unbalance the game? Or are there other solutions that would work better?

Thanks.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

This is a fairly common variation that some HERO players use. Many of us advocate for changing the system to this "roll high" method. I think it would be a little simpler.

 

However, your math is slightly off. To preserve the same odds, the formula should be 3d6 + OCV vs 10 + DCV. Of course, you could change this to 11 if you want to, it just makes hits slightly harder to make (50%, as opposed to 62.5% currently, with the 10).

 

The method works perfectly well, and can even be applied to Skill Rolls and Characteristic Rolls. "11 or less" becomes "10 or more". "9 + CHA/5 or less" becomes "score 12 or more on 3d6 + CHA/5".

[Old Man]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

D&Ders shouldn't have too much trouble really. Think about it.

 

For instance, if a rogue has climb walls at 80% then he has to roll 80 or less on the % dice right? Same with HERO skills and to-hits.

 

You have a 14- roll for Climbing, you need to roll 14 or less on 3d6.

 

Or maybe it just sounds simple because I'm already familiar with the system?

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

D&Ders shouldn't have too much trouble really. Think about it.

 

For instance, if a rogue has climb walls at 80% then he has to roll 80 or less on the % dice right? Same with HERO skills and to-hits.

 

You have a 14- roll for Climbing, you need to roll 14 or less on 3d6.

 

Or maybe it just sounds simple because I'm already familiar with the system?

 

Actually, D&D (3rd Edition, as opposed to AD&D) is a 'roll high always' system now. Instead of a Climb Walls percentage, a rogue would have, say, a climb modifier of +10 (randomly picked number), and a target Difficulty Class (DC) number based on the smoothness, wetness, etc. of the wall in question. We'll say it's rough, but somewhat worked, natural stone walls, for a DC of 15. If d20+Climb skill bonus is equal to or greater than 15, you've succeeded on the check (how many you need depends on how far you're climbing).

 

The same basic principle applies to attack rolls (d20+attack bonus vs target's AC) and saving throws (d20+save bonus vs the save DC of the spell/whatever).

[Bud Gray]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

This is a fairly common variation that some HERO players use. Many of us advocate for changing the system to this "roll high" method. I think it would be a little simpler.

 

However, your math is slightly off. To preserve the same odds, the formula should be 3d6 + OCV vs 10 + DCV. Of course, you could change this to 11 if you want to, it just makes hits slightly harder to make (50%, as opposed to 62.5% currently, with the 10).

 

The method works perfectly well, and can even be applied to Skill Rolls and Characteristic Rolls. "11 or less" becomes "10 or more". "9 + CHA/5 or less" becomes "score 12 or more on 3d6 + CHA/5".

 

This helps a lot. Now is there any way to make these changes to the Herodesigner?

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

One main problem with the attack roll as written is that you factor in the DCV of the opponent into the equation. This is not a value the players should know. I go with an alternative (I think this is in the book):

Attack roll: 11 + OCV - 3d6

 

If (attack roll >= DCV) it hits. It's a bit clunky though, my players don't like the "roll low" thing for some reason. I had a similar thought as Bud. I would give everybody a +10 on their DCV and the attack roll becomes OCV + 3d6. If it's >= the DCV it hits. I haven't done this yet. Things like dropping to 1/2 DCV become ugly and I feel that messing with the attack roll too much can end up being more confusing in the long run.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

One main problem with the attack roll as written is that you factor in the DCV of the opponent into the equation. This is not a value the players should know. I go with an alternative (I think this is in the book):

Attack roll: 11 + OCV - 3d6

 

If (attack roll >= DCV) it hits. It's a bit clunky though, my players don't like the "roll low" thing for some reason. I had a similar thought as Bud. I would give everybody a +10 on their DCV and the attack roll becomes OCV + 3d6. If it's >= the DCV it hits. I haven't done this yet. Things like dropping to 1/2 DCV become ugly and I feel that messing with the attack roll too much can end up being more confusing in the long run.

 

I know someone who's trying to go to a 'roll high to hit' system for HERO, but it's getting really screwed up somewhere, along the lines you mentioned ... it also becomes MORE difficult to hit a hex for some reason, though I think this may have been an arbitrary ruling rather than F'ed up math on his part to make AE attacks less accurate (which I don't get).

 

I usually don't have to do the math like that, though. I've mentally shorthanded it to saying 'OCV 8, DCV 6, up two, 13 or less' or 'OCV 4, DCV 8, down 4, 7 or less'. I do the (OCV-DCV) calculation first ... it seems to be faster than (11+OCV)-DCV, at least for me. Your Mileage May Vary.

[concord]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

To prevent a mess when figuring an attack against 1/2 DCV just remember the 10 is added after the DCV is modified... it is a constant, just like the 11 in the standard combat roll, and is not adjusted...

 

Example: Target has DCV of 10, so an attack against the target would be successful if OCV + 3d6 was 20 or greater... if the same target was at half DCV then an attack would be successful if OCV + 3d6 was 15 or greater...

 

 

As for hitting a hex with the roll high system... an attack would be successful if OCV + 3d6 was 13 or greater... if the result your GM was giving was something different, then he was fooling around with the hit probability of AE attacks...

 

 

I knew my time as a Fuzion Heretic would come in handy some day...

[Erkenfresh]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

I usually don't have to do the math like that' date=' though. I've mentally shorthanded it to saying 'OCV 8, DCV 6, up two, 13 or less' or 'OCV 4, DCV 8, down 4, 7 or less'. I do the (OCV-DCV) calculation first ... it seems to be faster than (11+OCV)-DCV, at least for me. Your Mileage May Vary.[/quote']

 

I agree this is the simplest way to do things but I don't tell my players what DCV they are trying to hit. This gives them knowledge they shouldn't know that can affect the maneuvers and/or CSL allocation they choose. "Ohhh, he's got a nice DCV so I better use my grenades instead of my pistol."

 

True, that's metagame thinking but it's something players really can't help but do given the extra info.

 

I may try out the "roll high" approach this week and see how it turns out. Wish me luck...

[Bud Gray]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

We tried it in our game tonight. It worked great. I like to give the skill options a try, But that would take a little convincing. Thanks again.

[MorpheousXO]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

If I ever get to run a HERO game I'm going to be using this method (oddly enough it'll probably be D&D HERO that I do...).

 

Also if you want to make it easier for them to convert, you could make skill rolls have a base of 10 as well. Basically you do like d20 (sort of). 10 in an Ability is +0, 15 is +1, 20 is +2, 5 is -1, and 0 is -2. I believe this gives the same chance of success as everything is still the same, and it doesn't affect the CV's (since they're still DEX/3). Also, only having a Familiarity would be a -3 on the roll with no +/- for abilities.

 

If you choose to not use that, just stick with the 12 or more as a base. Anyways, please correct me if I'm wrong on any of this as I did it all in my head.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

One thing I watch work well in Cons is to treat the Attack Roll like all other rolls in the game - add up the OCV + 11 first and write it down. Now you have a number to subtract the die roll from.

 

And if you have skill levels or modifiers they add or subtract directly from the DCV Hit. Everyone at cons I've seen use it pick up on it immediately, especially since it looks like all the other rolls in the game.

 

Now, if you want to switch everything to a Roll High score there's several threads around that have ideas for that.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

The only way the roll high system is "more complicated" is if you've screwed up the math (deliberately or accidentally). And you don't need to tell the players their opponent's DCV.* It's just OCV + 3d6 - 10 = the highest DCV they could have hit. If my OCV is 7, and I rolled a 12, I hit my opponent if his DCV is 9 or less (7+12-10=9). And you don't have to treat hexes and 1/2 DCV circumstances any differently. Hexes still have a DCV of 3 (or 0 if they're adjacent). 1/2 DCVs are still 1/2 DCVs. Bunuses and penalties to OCV and DCV are still the same bonuses and penalties.

 

*Though it's fairly easy to figure out, whichever method you use. If I hit on a 12, and miss on an 11, I know his DCV is 2 higher than my OCV (assuming he didn't have any bonuses or penalties).

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

I agree this is the simplest way to do things but I don't tell my players what DCV they are trying to hit. This gives them knowledge they shouldn't know that can affect the maneuvers and/or CSL allocation they choose. "Ohhh, he's got a nice DCV so I better use my grenades instead of my pistol."

 

True, that's metagame thinking but it's something players really can't help but do given the extra info.

 

I may try out the "roll high" approach this week and see how it turns out. Wish me luck...

 

I generally don't worry about it, given that any reasonably competent player who's paying attention can get a ballpark figure of any target's DCV based on when he goes in the DEX lineup. If he went on DEX 23, you can reasonably suspect his DCV will be around 8, barring any descriptions of increased size. I tried the 'hidden DCV' once when I was running Fantasy HERO, but my players kept fumbling the math.*

 

I usually don't say it out loud (so saying 'I just say OCV #, DCV #' was somewhat misleading) ... so, to re-explain.

 

1. Player declares target, states OCV.

2. I decide if target is going to Dodge, etc. Compute DCV

3. In brain, think 'OCV 5, DCV 8, down 3, 8 or less'.

4. Player throws dice, result calculated.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

I typically start off with a system similar to Erkenfresh's OCV+11-3d6. The player will roll this, and the result is the DCV he has successfully hit. If the target has that DCV or less, the attack is successful. The attacker need not know what the DCV of the target is, just how well they rolled. This quickly evolves into a simple "my OCV is 8, I roll a 12, that's one highter than 11 so minus one from my OCV and I hit a 7 DCV"." Okay when I type it out it doesn't sound simple, but it tends to fly through a player's mind a lot faster than "my OCV is 8, plus 11 is 19, I roll a 12, subtract that from 19 and I hit a DCV of 7."

 

As for switching to a roll high method, I'd suggest against it. It's typically a lot more work in the long run. The GM has to to all the initial conversions and then remember then when the game is going on, and then everyone in the group still has to get used to what dice to roll and what they mean anyway. It's generally easier to work with the roll low system as presented, as the players will adapt to it just as quicky as they will to rolling 3d6 instead of a d20.

[Hierax]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

Another "Alternate Attack Roll" that you can do is to allow the Defender to Roll with their DCV instead of the Attacker with their OCV -- it's great for letting the players handle their own fate when they are being attacked; it also keeps them more involved in the game and frees up the GM a bit.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

Here's a link to an alternate rolling method I posted a few months ago. I really have little preference between it and the standard rolling method. In my latest fantasy game I used the roll-high method and it worked well (I had at least two veteran D&D2 players who were new to Hero).

[prestidigitator]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

Another "Alternate Attack Roll" that you can do is to allow the Defender to Roll with their DCV instead of the Attacker with their OCV -- it's great for letting the players handle their own fate when they are being attacked; it also keeps them more involved in the game and frees up the GM a bit.

Or you can make it a, "Skill-vs-Skill," contest between the attacker's OCV and the defender's DCV. It probably does change the distribution a bit. I'd have to think about that. But anyway it should still have about the same feel.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

Another "Alternate Attack Roll" that you can do is to allow the Defender to Roll with their DCV instead of the Attacker with their OCV -- it's great for letting the players handle their own fate when they are being attacked; it also keeps them more involved in the game and frees up the GM a bit.

 

I've never liked this method. To me, it seems a bit of a jip just up and tell someone, sorry, you missed, with no further explination. At least when you make your own roll, you know if your shot sucked or not. But if you're just told, oh by the way, you get shot, you don't need any further explination; you just weren't fast enough to get out of the way.

[Hierax]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

No, you got it backwards, the point is that the player can roll to see if the NPC hit them, instead of the GM rolling to see if the PC is hit.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

No' date=' you got it backwards, the point is that the player can roll to see if the NPC hit them, instead of the GM rolling to see if the PC is hit.[/quote']

Hmm. Better really trust your players.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

No' date=' you got it backwards, the point is that the player can roll to see if the NPC hit them, instead of the GM rolling to see if the PC is hit.[/quote']

 

So, this is basically just a cop out on the GM's part so he doesn't have to roll all those dice? (meaning the PCs still roll their own attack rolls, and the GM doesn't roll to see if the PCs hit the NPCs?)

[Hierax]

Re: Alternate Attack Rolls

 

Basically, yeah.

 

It is an option that you as GM can toggle between at will.

 

Some players feel more involved in the game if they get to roll the dice themsleves and this helps them get that feeling without really changing anything -- except your ability to fudge rolls, but they can't blame you for their roll either