Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

[Trebuchet]

Our new player in our Champions game is building a sonic-based EB, and was trying to come up with a way to construct the classic "sound shatters crystal" except he wanted to apply it to any inanimate object. That's simple enough to build (I'd probably buy such an attack with a "Requires Skill Roll" Limitation), but in the course of the e-mail discussion he had this little tidbit:

 

It's also not very random; one of the scenes I pictured the character in was trying repeatedly to find just the right frequency to shatter an unusual object - a child's balloon ought to be as difficult to as a bank vault. An all-or-nothing limitation or requiring an exact roll would work.

 

That got me to thinking: What would the Limitation value be for requiring a specific number be rolled rather than that number or less? For example, what if instead of needing an 11 or less the character had to roll "11" on 3d6; and if that exact number wasn't rolled there would be no effect? What are percentages to roll any specific number (3 - 18) from a 3d6 roll? I know "11" has the highest probability of being rolled on 3d6, but IIRC that's still only about a 10% chance. Any of our number crunchers want to take a stab at this?

[OddHat]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

Guessing, but 215:1, just like rolling a critical.

 

As to the limitation value, about -4 sounds right.

 

However, I'd probably just tell him that this would almost never work, and instead have him use requires a skill roll, with a really low skill. Then he could take extra time to get it to work.

[zornwil]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

It's not like rolling a critical because you have different combinations of dice that can make an 11.

 

Treb, the chance of an 11 is 12.5%.

 

PS -

n twin div +/- decimal pct cum

----------------------------------------------

3 [18] - 1/216 (--) = 0.00463 = 0.5% --

4 [17] - 3/216 (+2) = 0.01851 = 1.9% 1.9%

5 [16] - 6/216 (+3) = 0.02778 = 2.8% 4.7%

6 [15] - 10/216 (+4) = 0.04629 = 4.6% 9.3%

7 [14] - 15/216 (+5) = 0.06944 = 6.9% 16.2%

8 [13] - 21/216 (+6) = 0.09722 = 9.7% 25.9%

9 [12] - 25/216 (+4) = 0.11574 = 11.6% 37.5%

10 [11] - 27/216 (+2) = 0.125 = 12.5% 50.0%

11 [10] - 27/216 (+2) = 0.125 = 12.5% 62.5%

12 [ 9] - 25/216 (+4) = 0.11574 = 11.6% 74.1%

13 [ 8] - 21/216 (+6) = 0.09722 = 9.7% 83.8%

14 [ 7] - 15/216 (+5) = 0.06944 = 6.9% 90.7%

15 [ 6] - 10/216 (+4) = 0.04629 = 4.6% 95.3%

16 [ 5] - 6/216 (+3) = 0.02778 = 2.8% 98.1%

17 [ 4] - 3/216 (+2) = 0.01851 = 1.9% 100.0%

18 [ 3] - 1/216 (--) = 0.00463 = 0.5% --

 

source http://codepoet.org/~markw/gurps/musings/3d6prob.txt

 

I have something like this among my files but it's usually quicker even to google online.

[OddHat]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

It's not like rolling a critical because you have different combinations of dice that can make an 11.

 

Argh. I plead no sleep.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

The most likely rolls on 3d6 are a 10 or an 11. Each has a 12.5% chance of coming up.

 

The odds of rolling 7 or less is 16.2%, and the odds of 6 or less is 9.26%, so needing any exact roll, even the most common, would be considerably more limiting than even an 8- activation roll, which is 25.93%.

 

"Requires an exact roll" will mean the power almost never works. What about using Extra Time instead, to simulate the character requiring some timeframe to locate the correct frequency. Perhaps that Extra Time could be modified in some fashion so an exceptional skill roll would cut down the extra time required.

 

Alternatively, RSR may work on its own since the character can take extra time to enhance their skill roll.

[Rapier]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

That got me to thinking: What would the Limitation value be for requiring a specific number be rolled rather than that number or less? For example' date=' what if instead of needing an 11 or less the character had to roll "11" on 3d6; and if that exact number wasn't rolled there would be no effect? What are percentages to roll any specific number (3 - 18) from a 3d6 roll? I know "11" has the highest probability of being rolled on 3d6, but IIRC that's still only about a 10% chance. Any of our number crunchers want to take a stab at this?[/quote']

 

In theory, it depends on the number. To roll a 3 requires a specific set of rolls, while rolling an 11 can happen in a number of different combinations. However, to simplify things, I would probably got with the 5- RSR value. That should fairly well simulate the difficulty in hitting any number directly on the nose.

 

However, I doubt the utility of the skill. It's almost NEVER going to be useful. Instead I would say that while tuning the thing up and down you get some feedback that allows you to narrow the beam and eventually narrow in on the right freq. Call that a simple 8-, 11- RSR or give it extra time (only to activate the first time).

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

Extra Time, RSR (Stat, -3/4 - STAT is likely INT to guage exact frequency) and using STAT will likely put a stringent enough restriction seeing as the PC can never "improve" the ability, unless they buy the RSR down to a skill (power stunt). I agree, though, that 'Exact Roll' is not a limitation I would want, although I've considered using "exact roll" as a form of critical roll.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

I wasn't really thinking of using this as a Limitation, and I don't think the player was either. I was just curious as to the probabilities of rolling any particular number on 3d6 and what the Limitation value might be. Pretty high, obviously.

[Christougher]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

As the vict^H^H^H^Hplayer in question, the Requires Skill Roll suggestion was received, appreciated, and applied. However, to throw a bit of a twist into the question, the "exact roll required" was originally a damage roll. To properly shatter an unusual object, the exact DEF+Body would have to be rolled.

[Trebuchet]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

However' date=' to throw a bit of a twist into the question, the "exact roll required" was originally a damage roll. To properly shatter an unusual object, the exact DEF+Body would have to be rolled.[/quote']Ooo, that'd be very difficult to value within Hero. How do you model doing 1 BODY to shatter a DEF 0 BODY 1 crystal goblet and also the appropriate damage to a DEF 10 BODY 14 bank vault using the same attack?

 

I think the RSR approach works much better. That way extra time can be used to gain an appropriate bonus to the roll. (As a GM, I of course also reserve the right to apply penalties to the skill roll for unusual substances or objects whose "subharmonic death frequency" is comfortably outside normal parameters.)

[Thia Halmades]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

Yeep. Well, in order to do it as a lim it would simply be: "Damage to target object must be exact, (-2), Additional Time based on Object Density (-2, use OAF chart to determine viability of target), Only targets which can be Shattered (-1/4, common sense - glass shatters, water doesn't)."

 

Some thoughts.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

As the vict^H^H^H^Hplayer in question' date=' the Requires Skill Roll suggestion was received, appreciated, and applied. However, to throw a bit of a twist into the question, the "exact roll required" was originally a damage roll. To properly shatter an unusual object, the exact DEF+Body would have to be rolled.[/quote']

How does the ultimate effect (a destroyed object) differ here than from anything equal to or greater than the target's DEF+BODY? Destroyed is destroyed; shattered is just SFX.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

Our new player in our Champions game is building a sonic-based EB' date=' and was trying to come up with a way to construct the classic "sound shatters crystal" except he wanted to apply it to any inanimate object. That's simple enough to build (I'd probably buy such an attack with a "Requires Skill Roll" Limitation), but in the course of the e-mail discussion he had this little tidbit:[/quote']

 

A PC in my long ago Champs game had an ability like this. We bought it as Find Weakness with Sonic Attacks, Only Versus Rigid Materials (-1) with a rather high roll. The end effect was that he sonic screams were just loud and destructive, but if she spent some time attuning them to her target she would learn/discover the target's unique sympathetic frequency and be able to shatter it with a single blast (or maybe only one or two depending on how many rolls she managed to make, or had time for, before firing).

[OddHat]

Re: Limitation: Exact Roll Required?

 

A PC in my long ago Champs game had an ability like this. We bought it as Find Weakness with Sonic Attacks' date=' Only Versus Rigid Materials (-1) with a rather high roll. The end effect was that he sonic screams were just loud and destructive, but if she spent some time attuning them to her target she would learn/discover the target's unique sympathetic frequency and be able to shatter it with a single blast (or maybe only one or two depending on how many rolls she managed to make, or had time for, before firing).[/quote']

 

Good solution, and repped.