archermoo

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Presenting it as "Roll low to determine if you succeed, roll high to determine how successful you are" has pretty much always worked for me.

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? To expand on my statement, I will certainly say that using the straight formula out of the original book has certainly caused a lot of problems, which is why I don't use it as written. But the problems weren't of the "rolling low vs rolling high" sort. They were a matter of the formula not being a very good representation of what you need to actually do in combat. Reorganizing it to OCV + (11-roll) = DCV has cleared it up for everyone I've ever taught the system to. Specifically I give them the verbal description of: "Roll the 3d6. If it is above 11 subtract how far above it is from 11 from your OCV. If it is below 11, add how far below it is from 11 to your OCV. The result is the DCV that you hit." Which looks more complicated written than it sounds spoken. Even the math-phobes that I've taught haven't had a problem with it.

Re: The move to FTP

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Whereas I've never really looked at die rolling like that. For me what result I'm looking for has always been situational. It has always been "okay, in this system, for this kind of roll, what am I trying to do?". Maybe I'm just weird. Wouldn't be the first time...

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? I actually have done very little gaming at cons in my life. I've taught Hero to experienced gamers that have just never played Hero before. I've taught Hero to avid wargamers who were interested in picking up RPGs. I've taught Hero to D&D gamers that wanted something "more" out of a system. And I've taught Hero to people whose idea of gaming is playing Pictionary but were interested in finding out what this Role Playing stuff was all about. 99% of the difficulty with all of the above groups has centered around chargen. After explaining the basics of how combat works to them to start with I'll generally run the numbers myself during combat, while showing them my work so to speak. Almost all of them have picked it up pretty quickly, and generally by the end of the first combat they're counting Body and Stun and telling me what DCV their attack hits just fine. Maybe not as fast as someone with a bit more experience, but they generally manage it. I guess it is just a different way of teaching things. When I'm looking at teaching something I'm not generally looking at how I can change the subject matter to make it easier to learn. I look at the subject matter and the person in I'm trying to teach and figure out how to best present the subject matter so that they understand it. It probably also helps that I've only rarely been in the position of teaching Hero to someone who wasn't already a friend, or at least a friendly acquaintance. Though I'll admit the hardest to teach have been the people who would rather have been playing a different system, but were playing Hero because they'd rather play in a game that I'm running in a system that isn't their first choice than run a game in their favorite system.

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Sorry, it seems that of the several concepts floating around there is beginning to be overlap. On the roll high vs roll low I'll agree that rolling high isn't more difficult, though I don't agree that it is by nature any easier. It might be slightly easier for some people, it might be slightly more difficult for others. At which point to me it seems like a change just to make a change. What seems more complicated to me without really making things any easier is presenting DCV+10 as DCV. It has the benefit of simplifying what is already the simplest case, but it makes more complicated cases even more complex. With Markdoc's clarification of what he does I can see it being of limited use, but it seems like a lot of extra work to set up. And of note, what grates on me and seems a bit defensive on the flip side is the use of terms like "better" to describe what is just a different way of doing things.

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER We got married on a Sunday. One of the more major reasons was that venues were about 2/3 to 1/2 price on a Sunday as opposed to a Friday or Saturday. Another being that it made it easier for some of the out of town people to make it to the rehearsal.

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Unless I'm mistaken Hugh isn't addressing it from a roll high vs roll low perspective. He is addressing it from the pre add the normal target number or not perspective. You mentioned that the number you write down on your character sheets for "DCV" is the "normal" DCV for the system plus 10. Since 1/2 DCV now isn't figured the same as it is under the normal rules, you pre-figure that one as well. The problem there is that it makes figuring out what the 1/2 DCV value is even more difficult if you have things modifying DCV on the fly. Granted the problems aren't insurmountable, but it is just another way that it seems to make things more complicated rather than less.

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? And again, if some of the people you're introducing to the game find it easier, cool. I just don't see any reason to extrapolate from that that it is objectively an easier way of doing things. To me it seems like a needless complication of something that already works great.

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER

Re: Longest Running Thread EVER In the US this Thursday is Veterans Day. So I (and at least some others here) have it off. Unfortunately I have to be back at work the next day.

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Cool, but I didn't ask about 1/2 DCV. I asked about a situation where the total DCV modifier was -6. As to halving number in your head, if you're using a system where you think of your DCV as being the base DCV+10, then it is a matter of subtracting 10, halving the number, and then adding 10. Which is what I assumed. It just seems like an extra complication that I don't really see as adding anything to the game. Obviously it works for others, and more power to 'em.

Re: OCV/DCV Am I doing the math right? Simply stating "I'm right, and if you don't work that way you're weird" doesn't actually prove anything. The most "proof" I've ever seen for your POV is a few studies that show that people are marginally faster at adding than they are at subtracting. I don't find either that or the "Obviously it is easier for everyone since it is easier for me" to be very convincing. I'm not quite sure why people get so defensive about the whole roll high thing. The fact that it works better for them doesn't seem to be enough, nor does just sharing it so that others that have the same issues that they do can try it as an alternative. If it stayed at that level I'd never comment on the topic. When people feel the need to go the extra step and decide that since they like roll high better it has to be objectively a better way to do things that I generally feel the need to comment. The roll high vs roll low thing is one of those things that I've only ever seen even be any kind of an issue in the online community. I've never actually gamed with anyone who found rolling low to be a problem that needed "fixing". The first 20 years of my time playing Hero it never even occurred to me that there was the possibility of it being an issue. It never came up once, among the literally hundreds of people I taught or played Hero with during that time. I've also never actually gamed with anyone who had any problem with "roll low to determine success, roll high to determine effect". Or anyone who has been confused by the term "Stunned". Or any of a number of other supposed "weaknesses" of the Hero system that seem to be popular in online communities.

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

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

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

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.

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

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

Re: DCV vs. beneficial "attack"

Re: The cranky thread Ick. You have my sympathy. Not entirely sure what I'd do in that situation. Fortunately Keri hasn't shown any signs of doing anything like that...

Re: The cranky thread

Re: DCV vs. beneficial "attack"