OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

[Colin Lee Moser]

So let's imagine, just for the sake of argument, that I wanted to make to-hit rolls roll-high instead of roll-low, to avoid having to do a lot of subtraction and make it easier to determine what DCV I hit without knowing the DCV of the NPC I'm attacking.

 

The way I figure it, OCV + 3D6 vs. DCV + 11 would give the same range of to-hit probabilities as the current system, without having to adjust the stats at all. Am I doing this right?

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

That's correct, and you've hit on a common house rule. It does not change the probabilities in the least.

 

Edit: I think you want DCV+10. Otherwise, yes.

[prestidigitator]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Almost correct. You actually want a hit to occur if 3d6+OCV is greater than or equal to 10+DCV. If you consider equal CVs, that means rolling 10 or higher on 3d6, which has the same probability as rolling 11 or lower in a roll-under scheme such as the standard 11+OCV-DCV.

 

I use this roll-high method for most of my games.

[ghost-angel]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Or 11 + OCV - 3D6 = DCV

[Colin Lee Moser]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Awesome, so 10+DCV it is. I forgot that because you're rolling high it should come down on the other side of the 11-10 split.

[dsatow]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Or 11 + OCV - 3D6 = DCV

 

The neat thing about this formula a friend showed me a long time ago for Fantasy Hero is how it works for Crits. Subtracting the 3d6 again from the formula gives you the DCV you critically hit (i.e. hit by 1/2 or more rounded down).

 

EX: If you have an OCV 8 and rolled a 7,

You hit a 11+8-7=12 DCV. You Crit a 11+8-7-7=5 DCV. The chance to critical a 5 DCV is (11+8-5)/2=7 or less.

[Manic Typist]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

I find that the easiest system is OCV+11= your To Hit Roll. Whatever you pass that by is the DCV you hit.

 

Ex: OCV 5+ 11= To Hit 16-. I roll 10, so I call out "DCV 10 or less!" The GM can then tell me whether or not I hit. THAT feels like the minimum of math to me.

[prestidigitator]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

I find that the easiest system is OCV+11= your To Hit Roll. Whatever you pass that by is the DCV you hit.

 

Ex: OCV 5+ 11= To Hit 16-. I roll 10, so I call out "DCV 10 or less!" The GM can then tell me whether or not I hit. THAT feels like the minimum of math to me.

Really? You might want to revisit how easy that is.

 

I like the roll high. If I roll an 8 and have OCV 6, it's just 8+6=14, so I hit DCV 4.

[archermoo]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Really? You might want to revisit how easy that is.

 

I like the roll high. If I roll an 8 and have OCV 6, it's just 8+6=14, so I hit DCV 4.

 

Whereas I like the roll low. If I roll an 8 with an OCV of 6 it is just (6+11)-8=9, so I hit a DCV of 9. As opposed to your 8+6=14 and 14-10=4. Both have an addition and a subtraction. Though the way I actually do it in my head when I'm gaming is ocv + (11-roll) = dcv. But that's just how my brain works...

[SteveZilla]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

There is no "One Right Way", or even "One Easiest Way", because everybody learns and processes information differently. What is easiest for one is not easiest for all.

[Manic Typist]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Really? You might want to revisit how easy that is.

 

I like the roll high. If I roll an 8 and have OCV 6, it's just 8+6=14, so I hit DCV 4.

 

Seems harder and less transparent, personally. Not HARD, just less facile.

 

Regardless, I've come to prefer methods where you just call out the DCV you hit so the GM can tell you without having to directly tell you the DCV or pause and do any math himself. He has to keep track of a lot, so hearing just that one number I find saves a lot of time.

[Susano]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

In the game I'm running, your OCV is x-. So a PC with a CV of 3 as a 14- OCV. He knows what DCV he hits by how much under his OCV he rolls. So if he rolls an 11, he rolled 3 under his 14- and hit a DCV of 3.

[archermoo]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

There is no "One Right Way"' date=' or even "One Easiest Way", because everybody learns and processes information differently. What is easiest for one is not easiest for all.[/quote']

 

Which was the point I was trying to make.

[Tasha]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

kk lets try this again We do Roll low, though I do yearn for the days of Fuzion where we rolled high.

 

I roll the die subtract 11 from the result. If the die roll was lower than 11, I take the result of subtracting 11 and add it to my OCV which then gives the DCV I hit. If I roll higher than 11, I subtract the value from my ocv. Basically thinking about the negative and positive numbers tends to give me headaches. So this is my mental shorthand for doing it right.

 

time to take a look at this in action (aka a window to Tasha's brain)

Character has an OCV of 9 to make the strike. I roll an 8 to hit which is 3 less than 11. I rolled under 11 so I know to add the value to my OCV knowing that I hit DCV 12

 

Same OCV 9 rolling a 13. gives me a 2 that I subtract from my ocv (having rolled higher than 11) meaning I hit an OCV 7

 

That's my "easy" way to figure out what DCV I hit. It works well for me and it works around my mathematical shortcomings. YMMV.

 

Though I do often wonder if We should transition to an easier system and roll high.

ie OCV + 3d6 vs DCV +10 Rolling the DCV or better would be a hit. I'll tell you the math would be FAR easier. Also working the skills this way would also give the illusion of the skill system being open ended vs the current illusion of it being a closed loop with the range being 3-18 and 3 being the best. On top of that, using target numbers like this would make it far easier for d20 players to wrap their brains around the system.

 

I know that it will never happen. Roll high would cause an outcry worse than removing Figured Characteristics.

[prestidigitator]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Though I do often wonder if We should transition to an easier system and roll high.

ie OCV + 3d6 vs DCV +10 Rolling the DCV or better would be a hit. I'll tell you the math would be FAR easier. Also working the skills this way would also give the illusion of the skill system being open ended vs the current illusion of it being a closed loop with the range being 3-18 and 3 being the best. On top of that, using target numbers like this would make it far easier for d20 players to wrap their brains around the system.

 

I know that it will never happen. Roll high would cause an outcry worse than removing Figured Characteristics.

Yeah. That's exactly what I already do, skill and characteristic rolls and all. And yes, I find it helps a great deal when introducing D&D/D20 players to Hero, which I've been doing a lot of lately. I even go one step further and de-couple skills from characteristics, then ask for a skill/characteristic combination for skill rolls (or skill+2 for most rolls with Background Skills), similar to the way it worked in the old World of Darkness. I find it really simple, easy, and almost fun. Heh.

[archermoo]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Though I do often wonder if We should transition to an easier system and roll high.

ie OCV + 3d6 vs DCV +10 Rolling the DCV or better would be a hit. I'll tell you the math would be FAR easier.

 

If it would be easier for you, and you find the math easier, no reason why you shouldn't. Objectively it isn't any easier, but if it increases your enjoyment no reason you shouldn't do it in games that you run.

 

And your way of doing it is what I was talking about with my "the way I actually do it" formula. OCV + (11-3d6) = DCV hit. For your first example, 11-8 is 3, added to 9 gives you 12. For the second 11-13 is -2, added to 9 gives you 7.

[prestidigitator]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

If it would be easier for you' date=' and you find the math easier, no reason why you shouldn't. Objectively it isn't any easier, but....[/quote']

That seems like a pretty subjective (or at least unsupported) claim of what is or isn't objective....

[Tasha]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

If it would be easier for you, and you find the math easier, no reason why you shouldn't. Objectively it isn't any easier, but if it increases your enjoyment no reason you shouldn't do it in games that you run.

 

And your way of doing it is what I was talking about with my "the way I actually do it" formula. OCV + (11-3d6) = DCV hit. For your first example, 11-8 is 3, added to 9 gives you 12. For the second 11-13 is -2, added to 9 gives you 7.

 

Yeah, we do it basically the same way. It's just dealing with negative numbers tends to freeze my brain solid esp when I am tired, stressed or people are waiting for me to produce the answer. So I do it the way I do so I don't have to deal with -2 being added to my OCV.

 

Gaming isn't just about me. It's about the other 4-6 people I play with too. They are pretty comfortable with the system as is. Honestly I am a bit too lazy to suggest the change. Though I am not above suggesting it here and seeing what everyone says about it.

 

I find that the less math that people have to do the better things go as a whole. My Partner can do all kinds of freaky math in her head. Shes' a freaking living calculator (yeah she bought Lightning Calculator on her RL character sheet). Me on the other hand struggle with a mild form of dyslexia when dealing with numbers, so simple is easier. The other people at the table's mathmatical prowess tends to be between my partner's and my extremes.

 

The beauty of the roll high system and dealing with target numbers (like DCV) is that all but the roll's math is done before combat. Then you just need to add the roll to their OCV and compare it to their oppositions DCV +10. The math is still easy if the defender is dealing with combat effects 1/2 DCV +10 is still easy math. I guess it offloads some of the math to the defender and leaves the GM freer to deal with keeping the combat interesting.

[Markdoc]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Yeah' date=' we do it basically the same way. It's just dealing with negative numbers tends to freeze my brain solid esp when I am tired, stressed or people are waiting for me to produce the answer. So I do it the way I do so I don't have to deal with -2 being added to my OCV.[/quote']

 

You're not alone. I've taught Hero to a lot of noobies and my experience is that about a quarter to a third of people have the same problem. The objectively easiest system is simply to add (as part of chargen) 10 to the base DCV. Then you are left with the very simple calculation OCV+3d6 = DCV hit.

 

It's so simple and straightforward that it's now the standard for all the games I run. It's very minor change and retains the exact same probabilities, so there's no mechanical reason not to.

 

cheers, Mark

[archermoo]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

That seems like a pretty subjective (or at least unsupported) claim of what is or isn't objective....

 

I'm not saying it isn't easier for you. I'm just saying that just because it is easier for you doesn't mean that it is easier for everyone. I don't see anything about the way you prefer things that is objectively easier.

 

As to support for claims, that's easy. I can support that it isn't objectively easier by the simple fact that it isn't easier for me. If it was objectively easier, it would be easier for everyone. Just being easier for one group of people doesn't mean it is easier for everyone.

[archermoo]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

Yeah' date=' we do it basically the same way. It's just dealing with negative numbers tends to freeze my brain solid esp when I am tired, stressed or people are waiting for me to produce the answer. So I do it the way I do so I don't have to deal with -2 being added to my OCV.[/quote']

 

I understand, though of note adding a negative 2 to a number and subtracting 2 from a number are just two different ways of saying the same thing.

 

Gaming isn't just about me. It's about the other 4-6 people I play with too. They are pretty comfortable with the system as is. Honestly I am a bit too lazy to suggest the change. Though I am not above suggesting it here and seeing what everyone says about it.

 

I find that the less math that people have to do the better things go as a whole. My Partner can do all kinds of freaky math in her head. Shes' a freaking living calculator (yeah she bought Lightning Calculator on her RL character sheet). Me on the other hand struggle with a mild form of dyslexia when dealing with numbers, so simple is easier. The other people at the table's mathmatical prowess tends to be between my partner's and my extremes.

 

The beauty of the roll high system and dealing with target numbers (like DCV) is that all but the roll's math is done before combat. Then you just need to add the roll to their OCV and compare it to their oppositions DCV +10. The math is still easy if the defender is dealing with combat effects 1/2 DCV +10 is still easy math. I guess it offloads some of the math to the defender and leaves the GM freer to deal with keeping the combat interesting.

 

And you can set up roll low such that the only math that needs to be done during combat is for the roll as well. I know a number of people, particularly for Con games and teaching games, write people's OCV on their character sheet as their "normal" OCV + 11. In combat they just subtract a 3d6 roll from that to determine what DCV they hit. Though neither way of doing things is without difficulties. Regardless of how many minuses to OCV or DCV, the "prefigured" one should never drop below the number that was added to it, and it makes things like 1/2 DCV and 1/2 OCV more difficult. I.e. if you are using the prefigured DCV + 10 for a roll high, regardless of the minuses that number should never be below 10. And if you are at 1/2 DCV the number should really be 1/2 of the base DCV + 10. Same for using 11+OCV.

 

Personally I've never had any issues teaching it to people as the way both you and I actually do it. Take the difference between 11 and what you roll, and then add or subtract that from your OCV depending on whether you roll above or below 11. I've taught Hero to a LOT of people over the years, including some severe mathphobes, and none of them has ever had a problem with it. And it has the advantage of not having the problems I mention above.

[archermoo]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

You're not alone. I've taught Hero to a lot of noobies and my experience is that about a quarter to a third of people have the same problem. The objectively easiest system is simply to add (as part of chargen) 10 to the base DCV. Then you are left with the very simple calculation OCV+3d6 = DCV hit.

 

It's so simple and straightforward that it's now the standard for all the games I run. It's very minor change and retains the exact same probabilities, so there's no mechanical reason not to.

 

cheers, Mark

 

So how do you deal with DCV modifiers? When someone is at 1/2 DCV, is it 1/2 of their DCV + 10? Or if they have a DCV+10 of 14 and they are at a -6 to their DCV, do they have a 10 or an 8?

[Starcloud]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

So, OCV + 3d6 - 10 = DCV hit? That's a pretty easy calculation to do in your head.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

So' date=' OCV + 3d6 - 10 = DCV hit? That's a pretty easy calculation to do in your head.[/quote']

 

By the book it's 11 + OCV - DCV or less on 3d6. Variations on that are just using algebra to move the various bits from one side to the other.

 

If you're flipping it from low to high, 11- is equivalent to 10+.

[Tasha]

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right?

 

I understand, though of note adding a negative 2 to a number and subtracting 2 from a number are just two different ways of saying the same thing.

 

And you can set up roll low such that the only math that needs to be done during combat is for the roll as well. I know a number of people, particularly for Con games and teaching games, write people's OCV on their character sheet as their "normal" OCV + 11. In combat they just subtract a 3d6 roll from that to determine what DCV they hit. Though neither way of doing things is without difficulties. Regardless of how many minuses to OCV or DCV, the "prefigured" one should never drop below the number that was added to it, and it makes things like 1/2 DCV and 1/2 OCV more difficult. I.e. if you are using the prefigured DCV + 10 for a roll high, regardless of the minuses that number should never be below 10. And if you are at 1/2 DCV the number should really be 1/2 of the base DCV + 10. Same for using 11+OCV.

 

Personally I've never had any issues teaching it to people as the way both you and I actually do it. Take the difference between 11 and what you roll, and then add or subtract that from your OCV depending on whether you roll above or below 11. I've taught Hero to a LOT of people over the years, including some severe mathphobes, and none of them has ever had a problem with it. And it has the advantage of not having the problems I mention above.

 

Yes I know that adding a negative number to a positive number is the same as subtraction. Unfortunatly that uses the part of my brain that fracks math up. By thinking about it the way I do, it keeps it simple enough for me to get the right answer. Also any system that I can just add simple numbers like 10 to is one that makes things much easier to me.

 

Also don't give me the "I have taught hero the normal way to people for x years blah blah" Well guess what, I have too. I have been playing since the dawn of time and have taught the system to many many people. Some Noobs can understand how to figure out what DCV you hit and others never get it. Hell it took me 20 years to get to the point where I could simplify the math so I could keep it in my head. (I could always do it the "normal" way from the rulebook). I have found that people that have problems with it tend to just say to the GM (My OCV is X and I rolled a Y did I hit?) leaving the math to the GM. We have one person who made herself a chart to do the math (which was pretty useful). I have seen lots of players though the years have trouble with this "simple" math.

 

Also the one flaw in my roll high scheme are the things that make someone 1/2 DCV, or hell even 0 DCV can be weird. Of course the answer is to have a place on the character sheet that lists the values at Full and Half DCV (with something mentioning that Skill levels are Halved when DCV is too).