Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill check

[neaceul]

My players are having difficulty with the roll low for attack and roll high for damage (kind of reminds me of AD&D: roll low for saving throws, roll high for attack and damage). They are also getting somewhat confused with the subtracting to find the DCV they can hit. It would make more sense to them to have roll high is always good, rolling low is not so good, and limit the subtracting to find the DCV hit. So I was thinking of a way to make it easier for them.

Here are my thoughts on how that can work:

 

 

COMBAT

1. Instead of the OCV being added to 11 why not have the DCV added to 10. This then becomes the target’s DVC (I think this will help because this is similar to figuring AC. My player’s have played D&D 3.5 before and we are presently playing in a Pathfinder campaign right now. So this will be familiar to them). For example, if the defender has a DCV of 3 they add that 3 to 10 to get their new DCV. Their new DCV will be 13.

2. The attacker rolls 3d6. Adds the dice roll together with any modifiers. Finally the attacker adds their OCV to this total. For example, an attacker’s OCV is 5. The player rolls 10 total on the 3d6. Adding the 5 from the OCV to the dice total will give this attacker an attack roll of 15.

3. If the attacker’s OCV total (from 2 above) is equal to or higher than the defender’s DCV (from 1 above) the attack hits. If the attacker’s OCV total is lower than the defender’s DVC the attack missed. For example, the attacker from above would hit any DCV of 15 or lower and would miss any DCV of 16 or higher.

 

 

The way I figured it would not change the odds that much is if you inverse the results. In the case above the character needed to roll an 8 or higher to hit the DCV of 13. That is 11 difference between the minimum and maximum total the dice could have rolled to successfully hit the target (8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18). In Hero Systems present way of doing it the player would need a roll of 13 or less. That is 11 difference between the minimum and maximum total the dice could have rolled to successfully hit the target (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13).

 

 

 

SKILLS

1. The player will add his stat bonuses and skill levels together. This is the character’s mod for the skill roll. For example, a character with a 10 strength would have a +2 modifier to his roll.

2. The player rolls 3d6. Add the dice together. Finally, the player adds the modifier total from 1 above. This is the character’s skill check for that roll. For example, if the player rolls a 12 total on the dice and adds the +2 from above the player’s total for the skill check will be 14.

3. The GM has a target number the player must be equal to or beat in order for the character to be successful at the skill. The starting target number will be 12. The GM will also modify this starting target number with modifiers as needed. For example, a character wants to climb up the side of a building. The building modifier is +2 for 90 degree incline however it has many handholds for a modifier of -2 and it is slippery because it is raining for an additional +2 modifier. The total modifiers are +2-2+2=+2. The modifiers’ total is added to starting target number of 12 to find the target number the character needs to climb the building. In this case 12 + 2 = 14. The player needs 14 or higher (from 2 above) to have his character successfully scale the building.

 

The way I figured it would not change the odds that much is if you inverse the results. In the case above the character needed to roll a 12 or higher to hit the skill target number of 14. That is 7 difference between the minimum and maximum total the dice could have rolled to successfully hit the target (12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18). In Hero Systems present way of doing it the player would need a roll of 9 or less. That is 7 difference between the minimum and maximum total the dice could have rolled to successfully hit the target (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).

 

 

 

 

So these are my thoughts on making it easier for my players without drastically changing the odds. From what I have tested so far nothing has really changed the odds too much by doing it this way. Let me know your thoughts and suggestions. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

Happy gaming

[Greywind]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Why not just get them a copy of the combat grid that has the OCV, DCV and the attack number needed?

[neaceul]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I would rather keep the chart keeping/looking up to a minimum. This is their first time playing hero system and I am trying to make it easier for them. Keeping a chart and looking it up will not make it easier for them. The less they have to look stuff up the better.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

It's not that complex ... all task resolution is low.

[Greywind]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I would rather keep the chart keeping/looking up to a minimum. This is their first time playing hero system and I am trying to make it easier for them. Keeping a chart and looking it up will not make it easier for them. The less they have to look stuff up the better.

That's why you give each a copy. Familiarity makes things easier over time.

[neaceul]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Please let me clarify my situation. The players are not liking the subtracting to find DCV and roll low to hit but roll high for damage. I am trying to accommodate them so they will enjoy playing Hero System instead of being frustrated. By me making the changes I suggested in the first post the system becomes more intuitive to them and more familar to them. They enjoy Pathfinder so why not modify Hero System to something familiar that they enjoy but doesn't change how Hero System works for the most part (the odds remain the same to succeed or fail). If the players become too frustrated they will decide Hero System is not worth playing. That is something I don't want. In addition, they won't want to keep looking at charts during combat to see if they are successful. I understand Hero System and have no problem with it. However, keep in mind what my players want: No charts, no subtracting to find DCV hit, and no roll low to hit and roll high for damage. This is what I am trying to fix so they will enjoy the game and we will continue playing it. Please keep suggestions with the players' wishes in mind. If my players don't like the system they won't play it after a while.

I mainly wanted suggestions to see if what I posted in the first post is viable. I may have made a mathemetical mistake. I put it there for others to check. I want to go with this or similar if there is a mistake. I need to change Hero System to fit my players so they will enjoy it but not changing Hero System's odds for rolls or generally how it works.

 

 

 

Happy gaming

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

To the initial question, your approach keeps the odds unchanged, so it won't change the probabilities at all. The only issue you may have to contend with is any roll where making the roll by half, say, carries an extra benefit. For example, rolling half or less of the required Danger Sense roll allows the character to sense the type and location of the danger accurately enough to attack with full OCV. Making an Analyze skill roll by half provides extra benefits, and a breakfall roll made by half results in no damage from a fall, and interaction skills made by half grant an extra PRE attack bonus.

 

I can't think of any issues other than the need to replace "made by half" for the few instances where it is relevant.

[neaceul]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I didn't think about the beat by half. I will have to work on that. Thanks for the suggestions.

 

 

 

 

Happy gaming

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Honestly, the "made roll by half" thing is not a huge, critically important mechanic; you could just go with "made by 6 or more" and be fine.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I agree the "made by half" mechanic should not be a huge impediment. It's a pretty uncommon mechanic (although it seems to feature strongly in a lot of house rules). However, I don't see any way to implement it in a roll high structure without changing the probabilities. Let's compare:

 

The character is highly skilled and has a 16- chance of success. He will succeed 98.15% of attempts. but "only" 25.93% will be made by half (8-). Under the "made by 6" model, he has a 50% shot, almost twice as often, to realize this critical success.

 

It's iffy - the character has a 10- chance of success. He will succeed 50% of attempts. but only 4.63% will be made by half (5-). Under the "made by 6" model, he has a 1.85% chance at a critical success.

 

It's unlikely - the character has a 8- chance of success. He will succeed 25.93% of attempts. but only 1.85% will be made by half (4-). Under the "made by 6" model, he either needs a 3 (0.46%) if we assume a 3 is always a critical success, or he has no chance at a critical success.

 

At extremely high levels of ability, the "made by 6" approach makes critical success much more likely. At lower levels, it's less likely, but critical success is highly unlikely under either model at those levels. If the game won't feature extremely high skill levels, the difference should be minimal.

[Thanee]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I agree the "made by half" mechanic should not be a huge impediment. It's a pretty uncommon mechanic (although it seems to feature strongly in a lot of house rules). However' date=' I don't see any way to implement it in a roll high structure without changing the probabilities.[/quote']

 

18- -> 09- ~+~ 03+ -> 12+ => Delta 9

17- -> 08- ~+~ 04+ -> 13+ => Delta 9

16- -> 08- ~+~ 05+ -> 13+ => Delta 8

15- -> 07- ~+~ 06+ -> 14+ => Delta 8

14- -> 07- ~+~ 07+ -> 14+ => Delta 7

13- -> 06- ~+~ 08+ -> 15+ => Delta 7

12- -> 06- ~+~ 09+ -> 15+ => Delta 6

11- -> 05- ~+~ 10+ -> 16+ => Delta 6

10- -> 05- ~+~ 11+ -> 16+ => Delta 5

09- -> 04- ~+~ 12+ -> 17+ => Delta 5

08- -> 04- ~+~ 13+ -> 17+ => Delta 4

07- -> 03- ~+~ 14+ -> 18+ => Delta 4

06- -> 03- ~+~ 15+ -> 18+ => Delta 3

05- -> 03- ~+~ 16+ -> 18+ => **

04- -> 03- ~+~ 17+ -> 18+ => **

03- -> 03- ~+~ 18+ -> 18+ => **

 

A formula to calculate the number by which you need to exceed the result (i.e. if your roll is 10+ that number is 6, since a 16+ would be equivalent to "made by half"):

 

11 - ( 1/2 the number you need at least to succeed normally (rounded up) )

 

 

For example:

 

You need to roll a 13+ (equivalent to an 8- roll). 13/2 (rd.up) is 7. 11 - 7 is 4. So you need to beat the 13+ by 4 or more (i.e. 17+) in order to be "made by half".

 

Not simple, but it should be accurate, and you won't need it a lot.

 

You could also simply write down a table (as above, just the two numbers after the '~+~' ).

 

Bye

Thanee

[Kraven Kor]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Give them each a copy of the "HERO System in 2 Pages" cheatsheet that some kind HEROphile whose name escapes me created. It really is very handy.

 

For my game, I just ask them what their OCV is and what they rolled and do the math for them if they have trouble with it. I tried the change to roll high and yeah it honestly confused things for both me and the players.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

A formula to calculate the number by which you need to exceed the result (i.e. if your roll is 10+ that number is 6, since a 16+ would be equivalent to "made by half"):

 

11 - ( 1/2 the number you need at least to succeed normally (rounded up) )

 

 

For example:

 

You need to roll a 13+ (equivalent to an 8- roll). 13/2 (rd.up) is 7. 11 - 7 is 4. So you need to beat the 13+ by 4 or more (i.e. 17+) in order to be "made by half".

 

Not simple, but it should be accurate, and you won't need it a lot.

 

You could also simply write down a table (as above, just the two numbers after the '~+~' ).

 

Bye

Thanee

 

Given the OP's concerns, I doubt formuli and charts, especially of this complexity, would not be much of a solution. The mechanic isn't used often anyway. In the absence of a really high roll for one of the relevant mechanical applications of the "succed by half" mechanic, I'd be inclined to go with "made it by X" and be done with it. The ability which seems most likely to routinely have this issue is Danger Sense, which is rarely modified, so you could do the math for each character having this ability to set a level where the odds of succeeding by X is similar to the odds of a roll being made by half.

[Thanee]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Given the OP's concerns' date=' I doubt formuli and charts, especially of this complexity, would not be much of a solution.[/quote']

 

Well, it's mostly something the GM needs to check, anyways. It could be completely out of the hands of the players.

 

But yeah, the players obvously wouldn't be happy with it.

 

Bye

Thanee

[Christopher]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Given the OP's concerns' date=' I doubt formuli and charts, especially of this complexity, would not be much of a solution.[/quote']

Not a solution for this OP and the specific situation, but a possible solution for all those wanting high rolls and are not afraid of a little formulae or a single table none the less...

[neaceul]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Here is what I think I'll use for "made by half". Since I will know the target number needed for success my players will not have to memorize the chart or look anything up. I can put this on my GM screen or keep nearby as needed.

 

Target Number----------Made By Half Target Number

12 -------------------> 15

13 -------------------> 16

14 -------------------> 18

15 -------------------> 19

16 -------------------> 21

17 -------------------> 22

18 -------------------> 24

19 -------------------> 25

20 -------------------> 27

21 ------------------> 28

22 ------------------> 30

23 ------------------> 31

24 ------------------> 33

25 ------------------> 34

 

 

 

 

Happy Gaming

[Tasha]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

[ATTACH]39616[/ATTACH]Here's a nice Excel spreadsheet that prints out an 8.5 x11 chart for OCV vs DCV to hit. with Hit location chart.

 

It's an xlsx file so you need a version of Excel (or compatable) that can open that kind of file. There's no macros etc.

 

Hope this helps your players

[redner]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I don't know if this makes sense to all of you guys, but it makes sense to me. Feel free to criticize. I say keep the target number to a static 10. No modifications are applied to it. All the modifications are only applied to the attacker's attack roll including the calculation OCV - DCV. The greater the DCV, the less likely the attacker to succeed. Anyway, if the attacker rolls a 10+, he succeeds. But if he rolls a 15+, he succeeds with a "made by half".

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Here is what I think I'll use for "made by half". Since I will know the target number needed for success my players will not have to memorize the chart or look anything up. I can put this on my GM screen or keep nearby as needed.

 

Target Number----------Made By Half Target Number

12 -------------------> 15

13 -------------------> 16

14 -------------------> 18

15 -------------------> 19

16 -------------------> 21

17 -------------------> 22

18 -------------------> 24

19 -------------------> 25

20 -------------------> 27

21 ------------------> 28

22 ------------------> 30

23 ------------------> 31

24 ------------------> 33

25 ------------------> 34

 

The chart starts at 12, but I would suggest it needs to start at 10 (if I have Danger Sense 11-, my target number becomes 10 so I have the same 62.5% chance of success). Maybe it needs to start even lower for tasks that would have a bonus, but I'm not sure any are relevant for the 1/2 roll (I guess having a Familiarity would impose a -3 penalty on my roll, rather than changing the target number, right? or a 10- skill would penalize my roll by 1).

 

Juts to pick one and see the math similarity, if my target number is 13, that equates to a 3 point penalty. Let’s assume a breakfall check, and my skill is 11-. Under “roll low”, I need a 8- (25.93%) to succeed or a 4- (1.85%) to make it by half. I get no bonuses, so under your system I need to roll 13+ (25.93%) to succeed and 16+ (4.63%) for a critical success, so my odds of critical success are enhanced. My target number for a critical needs to be 17+ to avoid changing the odds of a critical success.

 

Let’s assume I have a 17- roll (I’m really good!). I need a 14- to succeed (90.74%) and a 7- (16.2%) for a critical success. I have a bonus of +6, and my target number is 13, so I need a 7 (+6 = 13) under your model to succeed (90.74%) and a 10 (+6 = 16) for a critical success (62.5%), so again, I’m much more likely to get a critical success. My target number for a critical needs to be 20 (ie a roll of 14 or more, +6) to avoid changing the odds of a critical success.

 

Let’s finally assume I’m the best ever at this skill and have a roll of 25- (or a +14 bonus). That 3 point penalty means nothing to me – I will succeed unless I roll an 18, and achieve a critical success on an 11- (62.5% chance). Under your model, I succeed unless I roll a 3 (assuming 3 remains an autofail like 18 is now), and achieve a critical success unless I roll a 3 (3 + 14 is still 17, beating the target for critical success) – way more likely to get that critical success.

 

To test, let's pick another target number, say 20 (a 10 point penalty, so a virtually impossible task). If my skill is 11-, under “roll low”, I need a 1- so I will only succeed on a 3.

 

Let’s assume I have a 17- roll (I’m really good!). I need a 7- to succeed (16.2%) and a 4- (1.85%) for a critical success. I have a bonus of +6, and my target number is 20, so I need a 14 (+6 = 20) under your model to succeed (16.2%) and a 21 (+6 = 27) for a critical success (only if you allow 18 as an autosuccess, and then only a 0.46% chance), so I’m much less likely to get a critical success. My target number for a critical needs to be 23 (ie a roll of 17 or more, +6) to avoid changing the odds of a critical success.

 

Let’s finally assume I’m the best ever at this skill and have a roll of 25- (or a +14 bonus). That 10 point penalty means I will succeed on a 15- (95.37 – yes, I am the best!), and achieve a critical success on an 8- (25.93% chance). Under your model, I need to roll 6 (+14 = 20) to succeed (95.37%) and 13 (+14 = 27) to achieve a critical success (25.93% chance) – same odds to achieve critical success so, by luck, I picked the break even bonus for this target number.

 

Summary:You’re not going to be able to recreate the probabilities with a single target number under your system. What you may want to do is pick a skill roll you consider a baseline (maybe that’s 13-, say) and set the target critical number based on that skill roll. Anyone with a lesser skill will be less likely to benefit from a critical success than under the “roll low” system, while someone with a greater skill level will be more likely to achieve a critical success. You'll have to decide how much of a change in likeliness you want at various levels of skill.

 

I don't know if this makes sense to all of you guys' date=' but it makes sense to me. Feel free to criticize. I say keep the target number to a static 10. No modifications are applied to it. All the modifications are only applied to the attacker's attack roll including the calculation OCV - DCV. The greater the DCV, the less likely the attacker to succeed. Anyway, if the attacker rolls a 10+, he succeeds. But if he rolls a 15+, he succeeds with a "made by half".[/quote']

 

This deviates from the "just roll and add to see if you reach the target number" desired by the OP, but it would be just as effective at keeping the probability of success. Looking at my examples above:

 

Target # 13 is a 3 point penalty. If my skill is 11-, I need to roll a 13 - 3 = 10 and an 18 - 3 = 15 for a critical success, so the critical is much less likely. If my skill is 17-, I need to roll a 7 + 6 - 3 = 10 to succeed (62.5%) and a 12 + 6 - 3 = 15 for a critical (9.26%, so my odds are reduced from the roll low system). If it's 25-, I'll succeed and critical unless I roll a 3 (3 + 14 - 3 = 17, above that 15 target). A fixed target can never equate the "made by half" probabilities.

 

To the gaming aspect ("my players like it this way"), I typically don't tell the players what they need, I ask what they rolled. Whether they add their bonuses and I compare to a variable target number, or they add their bonuses and I subtract penalties to compare to a static target number will make little difference. I think it's easier for me to determine a target number so I don't have to subtract every time they toss a roll out at me - one less step.

[aylwin13]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Give them each a copy of the "HERO System in 2 Pages" cheatsheet that some kind HEROphile whose name escapes me created. It really is very handy...

 

It was done by teh ebil Bunneh and our favorite Mouse, Narf. You can find it here.

[Markdoc]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I've had exactly the problem you described, with new players.

A simple halfway solution is:

Leave skill rolls as they are: explain them to players as "This is your target number - you need to roll under it." That seems to go over pretty well, because there's no math on the player side - it's a static number.

Change the combat roll to roll high and explain it as "Your OCV is a modifier on your to hit roll, just like BAB. Your target's DCV+10 functions just like AC. " That's the kind of math they are already programmed to do and it will solve your problem: I've been through this with multiple groups.

 

cheers, Mark

[Tom Carman]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I've had exactly the problem you described, with new players.

A simple halfway solution is:

Leave skill rolls as they are: explain them to players as "This is your target number - you need to roll under it." That seems to go over pretty well, because there's no math on the player side - it's a static number.

Change the combat roll to roll high and explain it as "Your OCV is a modifier on your to hit roll, just like BAB. Your target's DCV+10 functions just like AC. " That's the kind of math they are already programmed to do and it will solve your problem: I've been through this with multiple groups.

 

cheers, Mark

 

I mostly play with skill and to-hit rolls as written in the manuals. But if the game is still going in the wee hours and I'm losing focus, then I often switch over to the additive roll-high approach, exactly as the OP described.

[neaceul]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

The chart starts at 12' date=' but I would suggest it needs to start at 10 (if I have Danger Sense 11-, my target number becomes 10 so I have the same 62.5% chance of success). Maybe it needs to start even lower for tasks that would have a bonus, but I'm not sure any are relevant for the 1/2 roll (I guess having a Familiarity would impose a -3 penalty on my roll, rather than changing the target number, right? or a 10- skill would penalize my roll by 1).[/quote']

 

I think I did make a mistake on my original calculations for “made by half” target number needed in one of my earlier posts. So I redid my calculations shown on the second chart below.

 

Well actually under the roll high system an 11- would be 10+. Let's look at inverses. 3 is the best roll under Hero System and 18 is the best roll under the roll high system.

3------->18

4------->17

5------->16

6------->15

7------->14

8------->13

9------->12

10------->11

11------->10

12------->9

13------->8

14------->7

15------->6

16------->5

17------->4

18------->3

 

So as shown by the chart above a roll in Hero System of 14- would need a 7+ in roll high. The odds have not changed. Therefore, the reason I started with 12 is because most skills start at 9 (without any modifiers) in Hero System. That way the odds have not changed. The player will add thier modifiers to the roll not the target number. If the skill in Hero System is an 11- it will convert to 10+ in roll high system.

 

Juts to pick one and see the math similarity' date=' if my target number is 13, that equates to a 3 point penalty. Let’s assume a breakfall check, and my skill is 11-. Under “roll low”, I need a 8- (25.93%) to succeed or a 4- (1.85%) to make it by half. I get no bonuses, so under your system I need to roll 13+ (25.93%) to succeed and 16+ (4.63%) for a critical success, so my odds of critical success are enhanced. My target number for a critical needs to be 17+ to avoid changing the odds of a critical success.[/font']

 

Let’s assume I have a 17- roll (I’m really good!). I need a 14- to succeed (90.74%) and a 7- (16.2%) for a critical success. I have a bonus of +6, and my target number is 13, so I need a 7 (+6 = 13) under your model to succeed (90.74%) and a 10 (+6 = 16) for a critical success (62.5%), so again, I’m much more likely to get a critical success. My target number for a critical needs to be 20 (ie a roll of 14 or more, +6) to avoid changing the odds of a critical success.

 

Let’s finally assume I’m the best ever at this skill and have a roll of 25- (or a +14 bonus). That 3 point penalty means nothing to me – I will succeed unless I roll an 18, and achieve a critical success on an 11- (62.5% chance). Under your model, I succeed unless I roll a 3 (assuming 3 remains an autofail like 18 is now), and achieve a critical success unless I roll a 3 (3 + 14 is still 17, beating the target for critical success) – way more likely to get that critical success.

 

To test, let's pick another target number, say 20 (a 10 point penalty, so a virtually impossible task). If my skill is 11-, under “roll low”, I need a 1- so I will only succeed on a 3.

 

Let’s assume I have a 17- roll (I’m really good!). I need a 7- to succeed (16.2%) and a 4- (1.85%) for a critical success. I have a bonus of +6, and my target number is 20, so I need a 14 (+6 = 20) under your model to succeed (16.2%) and a 21 (+6 = 27) for a critical success (only if you allow 18 as an autosuccess, and then only a 0.46% chance), so I’m much less likely to get a critical success. My target number for a critical needs to be 23 (ie a roll of 17 or more, +6) to avoid changing the odds of a critical success.

 

Let’s finally assume I’m the best ever at this skill and have a roll of 25- (or a +14 bonus). That 10 point penalty means I will succeed on a 15- (95.37 – yes, I am the best!), and achieve a critical success on an 8- (25.93% chance). Under your model, I need to roll 6 (+14 = 20) to succeed (95.37%) and 13 (+14 = 27) to achieve a critical success (25.93% chance) – same odds to achieve critical success so, by luck, I picked the break even bonus for this target number.

 

Summary:You’re not going to be able to recreate the probabilities with a single target number under your system. What you may want to do is pick a skill roll you consider a baseline (maybe that’s 13-, say) and set the target critical number based on that skill roll. Anyone with a lesser skill will be less likely to benefit from a critical success than under the “roll low” system, while someone with a greater skill level will be more likely to achieve a critical success. You'll have to decide how much of a change in likeliness you want at various levels of skill.

 

 

 

This deviates from the "just roll and add to see if you reach the target number" desired by the OP, but it would be just as effective at keeping the probability of success. Looking at my examples above:

 

Target # 13 is a 3 point penalty. If my skill is 11-, I need to roll a 13 - 3 = 10 and an 18 - 3 = 15 for a critical success, so the critical is much less likely. If my skill is 17-, I need to roll a 7 + 6 - 3 = 10 to succeed (62.5%) and a 12 + 6 - 3 = 15 for a critical (9.26%, so my odds are reduced from the roll low system). If it's 25-, I'll succeed and critical unless I roll a 3 (3 + 14 - 3 = 17, above that 15 target). A fixed target can never equate the "made by half" probabilities.

 

To the gaming aspect ("my players like it this way"), I typically don't tell the players what they need, I ask what they rolled. Whether they add their bonuses and I compare to a variable target number, or they add their bonuses and I subtract penalties to compare to a static target number will make little difference. I think it's easier for me to determine a target number so I don't have to subtract every time they toss a roll out at me - one less step.

 

Let’s use this inverse relation to make a reference chart to see about what it would take to “Made By Half” if you change the rolls to needing high instead of low.

 

Hero System Target Number--------Made By Half Target Number---------Made By Half Difference----------New Target Number---------------New Made By Half Target Number

5--------------------------------------------3------------------------------------------------2-----------------------------------------16--------------------------------------18

6--------------------------------------------3------------------------------------------------3-----------------------------------------15--------------------------------------18

7-------------------------------------------4-------------------------------------------------3-----------------------------------------14--------------------------------------17

8-------------------------------------------4-------------------------------------------------4-----------------------------------------13--------------------------------------17

9-------------------------------------------5-------------------------------------------------4-----------------------------------------12--------------------------------------16

10-----------------------------------------5-------------------------------------------------5-----------------------------------------11--------------------------------------16

11-----------------------------------------6-------------------------------------------------5-----------------------------------------10--------------------------------------15

12-----------------------------------------6------------------------------------------------6------------------------------------------9---------------------------------------15

13-----------------------------------------7------------------------------------------------6------------------------------------------8---------------------------------------14

14-----------------------------------------7------------------------------------------------7------------------------------------------7---------------------------------------14

15-----------------------------------------8------------------------------------------------7------------------------------------------6---------------------------------------13

16-----------------------------------------8------------------------------------------------8------------------------------------------5---------------------------------------13

17-----------------------------------------9------------------------------------------------8------------------------------------------4---------------------------------------12

18-----------------------------------------9------------------------------------------------9------------------------------------------3---------------------------------------12

 

Hero System Target Number: This is the target number of the roll needed for success. A player must roll equal to or less than this number.

 

Made By Half Target Number: This is the target number of the roll needed to get the made by half bonus. A player must roll equal to or less than this number for the “made by half” bonus.

 

Made By Half Difference: This is the difference between the Hero System Target Number and the Made By Half Target Number

 

New Target Number: This is the inverse of Hero System Target Number. This is the new roll high system target number. A player must roll equal to or higher than this number to be successful.

 

New Made By Half Target Number: This is the target number of the roll needed to get the “made by half” bonus for the roll high system. This target number is figured out by taking the Made By Half Difference and adding it to the New Target Number. A player must roll equal to or higher than this new number for the “made by half” bonus.

 

 

 

If the skill check was 12- you needed a 6 or less to make by half. In the roll high system you would have to beat the 9+ by 6 which would be 15 to "made by half".

 

If the skill check is 14- you would have to make 7 or less to make by half. In the roll high system you would still need to beat the roll by 7. The 14- converts to 7+ so you would need to make a 14 or higher to "made by half".

 

If the skill check is 18- you would have to make 9 or less to make by half. In the roll high system you would still need to beat the roll by 9. The inverse of 18- is 3+ so you would need 12 or higher to "make by half".

 

 

Seems like strange math but by using this chart for my conversions I tried to make sure the odds have not changed when converting from roll low to roll high. Again my players will never have to look this up. I will have a target number they need to reach and I then have the reference as to what is needed to "made by half".

 

 

 

 

Happy Gaming

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

Practically, you only really need to tell the players to roll and you can then tell them whether they succeed or not. You might want to tell them the target number in some cases and not others (for example, The Acrobat probably has a pretty good idea of his odds of success under normal circumstances, but The Archer doesn't automatically know his opponent's DCV and the demolitions expert doesn't know how tricky this arming system might be). There's no reason they need to know the target number for "made by half" - they tell you their roll, you tell them if they succeeded (if you didn't give them the target number) and when it succeeds spectacularly well (when they made the higher target).

 

I think you've got a solid handle on the probabilities, so I expect your chart will deliver the same results as the roll low system would. More importantly, even if it doesn't, you've got what you wanted for your players - if the odds of a critical success change a bit, no big deal. And if you don't like the frequency of critical successes, it's easy enough to change the target numbers, just like the "roll by half" rule can be changed in a standard roll low model.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Changing the roll low to hit and skill check to a roll high to hit and skill chec

 

I've been using a roll-high method for years. Works great. No problem for versatile Hero players to adapt to, and new players have much less trouble with it in my experience.