Post/Author/DateTime	Post
fischsemmel 06-11-06, 01:47 PM	Well I admit I didn't search the forums very thoroughly for any other threads on this topic before I posted, but I did scroll back a few pages and didn't see anything. Anyways, does anyone use the bell curve rolling system from UA? Before I ever knew of this variant I always wondered if there wasn't some way to deal with the annoying d20... I just can't stand the fact that some buff human who could, for example, lift hundreds of pounds above their head and not think anything of it (str 30+) could be bested in an arm wrestling tournament by an 8 strength halfling as often as 1 time in 5, or more! Basically, I just was always wishing there was a way to eliminate some, not all, but some of the randomness that goes with a d20 roll for attacks, skill checks, ability checks, saves, etc. So anyways, has anyone put the bell curve rolling (for anyone who doesn't know, d20 rolls are changed into 3d6 rolls with the rules for taking 20 and crits altered) to use in their campaign(s) and enjoyed it? Found that your players enjoyed it? My players seem appalled at the idea of rolling 3d6s around instead of a d20, and while I admit that it seems simpler to stick with the d20, part of me just yearns for a character's ability score bonus or attack bonus to mean as much or more than the random roll of a die.
Mufflon 06-11-06, 03:44 PM	Though I haven't tried the Bell Curve variant in D&D I have played several other, similar, RPG:s that employ that method. It isn't really a hard transition between the two methods, all it does is make the extreme results more rare. Its really just a matter of taste, weather you like a lot of critical succeses (and failures) or not. Oh, and if your players are to appaled by the idea of rolling 3d6 you can always use 2d10, which is kind of a middle ground.
Millennium 06-12-06, 11:11 AM	The problem with bell-curve rolling and D&D is that there is no real way to represent how well you do something: there is success and there is failure, but there is nothing between or beyond these. This is why D&D uses a linear statistical model. When there's nothing but success or failure, any chance situation resolves to flat odds for whether or not you succeed, and so a linear model holds. By itself, all that bell-curve rolls do is require characters to have more ranks before they can be confident in their success. In effect, it weakens the players, because its method of randomness doesn't fit the statistical model being used. Round pegs don't fit in square holes. However, that only happens if bell-curve rolling is the only change you make. You can get around it by also using a different statistical model, where what you roll determines not just whether you succeed or fail, but how well (or how poorly) you do. That's getting beyond the scope of this thread, because it actually requires some fairly far-reaching changes. But it's not impossible.
Verelor 06-12-06, 07:29 PM	Let's see, bell curve rolls. That's like literally saying: I want my gameplay experience to be more predictalble and have less potential for suspense and excitement, and the bell curve rolling method helps me accomplish that! :D
Mufflon 06-13-06, 08:04 AM	Verelor said: Let's see, bell curve rolls. That's like literally saying: I want my gameplay experience to be more predictalble and have less potential for suspense and excitement, and the bell curve rolling method helps me accomplish that! I must admit that my excitement-o-meter doesn't hit the top everytime I roll a 20 (or, for that matter, a 1), as this is a very frequent occurance. I have found that one of the ways to create suspence and excitement is add some degree of rarity to the event in question, and since the odds of rolling a 1 or a 20 is 10% it happens a lot. By instead using a bell curve method you could add some more spectacular results to the results in the extreme parts of the spectrum, so that when you roll a 3 or an 18 there's bound to be some excitement. Then again, it might be your idea of excitement to have a 5% chance to fail miserably at even the most menial tasks. But even if that is the case I feel confindent in saying that's not most people cup of tea. Using the bell curve method does, in my opinion, at a slight, and in some cases needed, measure of realism. Millennium said: The problem with bell-curve rolling and D&D is that there is no real way to represent how well you do something: there is success and there is failure, but there is nothing between or beyond these. We are talking about rolling 3d6 here, not flipping a coin. There is a very clear way to determine how well you have succeeded (or how badly you have failed) the bell curve metod simply makes it more probable to do an avarage job (rolling 10-11) than an extraordinary one (rolling a 1 or a 20). Millenium said: By itself, all that bell-curve rolls do is require characters to have more ranks before they can be confident in their success. Ok, thats just plain wrong. When using the bell curve method you can be quite confident in your success if your modifier + 10 is higher than the DC. Because the normal system has a higher degree of randomness it requires more ranks before the chance of succeeding is high enough that you can be confident.
Arcade 06-13-06, 08:47 AM	The problem with bell-curve rolling and D&D is that there is no real way to represent how well you do something: there is success and there is failure, but there is nothing between or beyond these. This is why D&D uses a linear statistical model. When there's nothing but success or failure, any chance situation resolves to flat odds for whether or not you succeed, and so a linear model holds. By itself, all that bell-curve rolls do is require characters to have more ranks before they can be confident in their success. In effect, it weakens the players, because its method of randomness doesn't fit the statistical model being used. Round pegs don't fit in square holes. In the standard campaign, this is wrong. The characters are, in general, more powerful than their foes and a lack of randomness actually helps the characters. There's a reason why characters gain special abilities of "allowed to take 10 on x skill"- it's because it's an assured success for those characters. In almost every situation, lack of randomness helps players. However, you can modify the odds to still keep randomness alive. For instance, criticals on 16+ is approximately the same odds as 1 in 20. You will definitely see characters start to excel at what they do. A rogue with 5 more ranks in hide than the monster spotting him is a huge advantage- much more likely to succeed than in in the d20 method. And any items which provide bonuses are much more valuable than what they are currently costed at because of this.
ninjeff 06-13-06, 12:57 PM	Then again, it might be your idea of excitement to have a 5% chance to fail miserably at even the most menial tasks.Skill checks don't automatically fail on a 1, and attack rolls and saves are not menial tasks.
Verelor 06-13-06, 03:09 PM	Skill checks don't automatically fail on a 1, and attack rolls and saves are not menial tasks. How true. :D And I am one of the DMs that houserules a natural 1 or 20 as -10 and +30, respectively.
Mufflon 06-13-06, 04:32 PM	Skill checks don't automatically fail on a 1, and attack rolls and saves are not menial tasks. But indeed they can be. If you are attacking, for example, an immobile object or a creature that is much weaker than you, such as a level 20 fighter attacking a house cat. Oh and Verelor, if rolling a 1 equals -10 then there is a very real possibility of failing menial skill checks.
Ilium 06-13-06, 04:55 PM	I actually did the opposite of this once. The PCs in my GURPS Space game traveled to a world where magic worked (basically a D&D-type world). While they were there, we rolled 1d20 everywhere you would normally roll 3d6. It definitely changed the flavor of the game considerably. Using 3d6 will give you a much more reliable, "realistic" feel where the better, more skilled character will win most of the time. I specifically DON'T want that in my D&D, so I prefer the d20. :)
Sinaz 06-13-06, 06:00 PM	I ran a short campaign where we did a 2d10 bell curve variant. We had to switch some things up. First, I have to say that at first, it was cool that we were trying something different... but it got old real fast. Especially since we didn't see any crits... we had to change things up to get those crits to appear. We made one d10 the "sub-crit" and one the "sub-confirm". You know how a threat range is 17,18,19, or 20? (Let's keep a natural 20 in our minds for the following thought) Well, keeping the crit range unchanged changes the odds between a d20 and 2d10 from 1:20 (5%) to 1:100 (1%) for a natural 20. For 3d6, a natural 18 is less than half a percent odds (1:216). For 2d10, to maintain the crit odds, we turned one d10 into a sub-crit and one into a sub-confirm. If the sub-crit rolled a 10, and the sub-confirm rolled better than 50% (6-10) then it was a natural 20. For crit range 19, sub-confirm had to roll a 9 or 10, and sub-crit had to roll better than 50%, etc. That got boring, as it was a lot of extra math and micromanagement. Another thing you may try that I still find kind of neat and would love to revive (but d20 works perfectly adequate for me, so meh)... is to adopt the old Star Wars RPG d6 system, where you accumulated die rolls and bonus pips, and simply had to out roll the DC with them. Went like this: if you're skill were 4d6 + 2, and the DC were 20, you'd roll your 4d6 and add 2 to track success. There was a caveat, though. One of your d6s was an off color... it was the wild die. If it came up 1, you subtracted it, and the highest die in your roll. If it came up 6, you added it and rolled it again, re-adding it and re-rolling it each time it came up 6. That was a fun system, except for having to have a rediculous horde of d6s lying around. When increasing skills, 3 pips equals one d6... so the progression goes like this: 1d6, 1d6+1, 1d6+2, 2d6, 2d6+1, 2d6+2, 3d6, etc etc!
Verelor 06-14-06, 12:29 AM	Oh and Verelor, if rolling a 1 equals -10 then there is a very real possibility of failing menial skill checks. Nope, still only applies to whatever a natural 1 and 20 applies to. Which doesn't include skill checks. But indeed they can be. If you are attacking, for example, an immobile object or a creature that is much weaker than you, such as a level 20 fighter attacking a house cat. Most immovable objects have an AC of around, 4? If you fumble and are a mid-level fighter attacking with a total +14 attack bonus, with the -10/+30 method, you still won't fail. Characters lower than with melee still have a very smal chance of screwing up even when attacking an immobile object; their training still has not become geared to perfection yet. And a 20th-level figther attacking a housecat. Let's see, your average cat is AC 14. A 20th-level fighter. Him and his extravagent +30 total attack bonus. Rolls a fumble...with the -10 method that still ends up as a +20. Housecats don't have AC 20. They have AC 14. Still an extremely direct hit. That poor, innocent cat. :weep: Booya :D
Archangel62 06-14-06, 01:04 AM	What I find amusing is that my players demanded that I and I alone switch over to bell curve. Then again this might have had something to do with the 15 20s in a row when they were fighting redcaps....
ninjeff 06-14-06, 03:19 PM	But indeed they can be. If you are attacking, for example, an immobile object or a creature that is much weaker than you, such as a level 20 fighter attacking a house cat. Oh and Verelor, if rolling a 1 equals -10 then there is a very real possibility of failing menial skill checks.A house cat is an intelligent, living opponent no matter what your fighter level is. There's always the possibility (reasonably high compared to failing to tie your shoelaces, for example, which would be a Dex or Int check that doesn't auto-fail on a 1) that the cat will change direction at the last moment or somesuch. As for immobile objects, I would like to direct you to page 165 of the Player's Handbook: Furthermore, if you take a full-round action to line up a shot [on an immobile object], you get an automatic hit with a melee weapon and a +5 bonus on attack rolls with a ranged weapon.
Verelor 06-14-06, 04:57 PM	Good assessments, ninjeff. And with the -10/+30 rule, even better.
Mufflon 06-14-06, 07:08 PM	Ninjeff and Verelor: Firstly I was under the impression that we were discussing the Bell Curve Rolling method, not irrelevant trifles. Secondly: I always though punching a wall with the real life equalivient of a Standard Action was a really simple task. And, with a ranged weapon, even with a full round action there is a 5% chance of actually missing the barn you are standing in. Verelor said: Most immovable objects have an AC of around, 4? If you fumble and are a mid-level fighter attacking with a total +14 attack bonus, with the -10/+30 method, you still won't fail. Characters lower than with melee still have a very smal chance of screwing up even when attacking an immobile object; their training still has not become geared to perfection yet. And a 20th-level figther attacking a housecat. Let's see, your average cat is AC 14. A 20th-level fighter. Him and his extravagent +30 total attack bonus. Rolls a fumble...with the -10 method that still ends up as a +20. Housecats don't have AC 20. They have AC 14. Still an extremely direct hit. That poor, innocent cat. This is with your house rules, it is neither RAW nor what most people use (or so I am led to believe). As much as you might wish that all my posts are directed at you personally, that is not the case. Oh, and it's spelt "Bouya" not "Booya". Bourtaga! :D Sinaz said: Especially since we didn't see any crits... You don't have to litmit critcal hits to natural 18:s, as Arcade states in his post rolling 16+ is roughly the statistical eaqualivient.
ninjeff 06-15-06, 07:24 AM	Secondly: I always though punching a wall with the real life equalivient of a Standard Action was a really simple task.Hitting it in such a way as to allow damage (as that is what AC represents, not just the hit/miss chance) takes some concentration - either a full-round action or the 95% chance granted by the standard action attack. And, with a ranged weapon, even with a full round action there is a 5% chance of actually missing the barn you are standing in.This, I acknowledge, is a gap in the rules.
calvinNhobbes 06-16-06, 11:29 AM	I use a different method to handle natural 1 and 20 on attack rolls and saving throws (but not on skill rolls). You have to roll a d20 again and add or substract from your previous roll plus/minus 1. This basically creates a d20 bell curve. Example: Natural 20 becomes 19+1d20 or 20 to 39. If you roll a second natural 20 in a row it becomes 38+1d20 or 39 to 58. Repeat until no more natural 20. Example: Natural 1 becomes 2-1d20 or 1 to -19. If you roll a natural 20 then it becomes -18-1d20 or -19 to -28. Repeat until no more natural 20. Very rarely to you get more than 3 natural 20's in a roll. It reduces the randomness some, but still allows skill to play a roll, and makes players think about how many negative modifiers are actually being added to their roll since they don't have an auto 5% chance to hit.
the_saracen 06-16-06, 08:23 PM	And, with a ranged weapon, even with a full round action there is a 5% chance of actually missing the barn you are standing in. That equates to standing there, lining up your shot at some point in the wall, saying "Check this shot out!" and having the arrow de-nock just as you release the string. :D This is with your house rules, it is neither RAW nor what most people use It's a variant rule printed on page 25 of Dungeon Master's Guide 1 (3.5 Edition). I would class that as VRAW myself, which ranks slightly above house rules ;)
Mufflon 06-17-06, 08:33 AM	That equates to standing there, lining up your shot at some point in the wall, saying "Check this shot out!" and having the arrow de-nock just as you release the string. And this is something that happens to the worlds greatest archer roughly every 20th shot? I might not be a master archer myself, but I have fired several hundred arrows, and that has never happend to me...
Mufflon 06-17-06, 08:34 AM	Hitting it in such a way as to allow damage (as that is what AC represents, not just the hit/miss chance) takes some concentration - either a full-round action or the 95% chance granted by the standard action attack. Unless, of course, it's a touch attack.
the_saracen 06-18-06, 07:00 AM	Unless, of course, it's a touch attack. Such as initiating a grapple? Takes a bit of concentration to get that kind of grab on someone if you ask me... Shocking Grasp might fumble in the heat of the moment and hit a non-conductive piece of cloth or leather. Ranged touch attacks...well, you can see where that one's going.
ninjeff 06-18-06, 06:07 PM	Such as initiating a grapple? Takes a bit of concentration to get that kind of grab on someone if you ask me...If you care to scroll up a bit, you'll see that Mufflon and I were talking about attacking an inanimate object; and I must concede that he's completely right about touch attacks - touching inanimate objects shouldn't have a chance to automatically fail on a roll of 1, even with only an attack action.
Stev Beren 06-18-06, 10:24 PM	And this is something that happens to the worlds greatest archer roughly every 20th shot? I might not be a master archer myself, but I have fired several hundred arrows, and that has never happend to me... How many times have you fired arrows in a stressful combat situation? YOur arrow shooting is more likely the equivalent of taking ten,m or taking twenty than actual combat shooting.
Mufflon 06-23-06, 05:30 PM	How many times have you fired arrows in a stressful combat situation? Your arrow shooting is more likely the equivalent of taking ten or taking twenty than actual combat shooting. If you had botherd to properly read the pervious posts you would probably have realized that this discussion never assumed the archer to be in a combat situation, or even a stressful one for that matter. He was assumed to take aim at a target (such as a barn he was standing in) for rougly 6 seconds (one full round action) and then take his shot. And you can only take ten or 20 on a skill check, and even then taking 20 consumes a large amount of time. Note that I have taken time to correct your spelling, even though you didn't.
Stev Beren 06-24-06, 09:14 PM	ANd in a non - stress situation, he can probably be assumed to be doing the equivalent of taking ten or twenty, and therefore has no chance of missing. Perhaps YOU were not reading. Frankly, in a situation like that, he shouldn't even have to roll. THe wall is at his mercy. He can administer a coup de grace. BUt oh well. I wasn't trying to be snide with you, but apparently you are incapable of replying in kind. And you generally only need to resort to poking at typos when you have little better arguments to make.
Mufflon 06-25-06, 02:59 AM	And in a non-stress situation, he can probably be assumed to be doing the equivalent of taking ten or twenty, and therefore has no chance of missing. Perhaps YOU were not reading. Frankly, in a situation like that, he shouldn't even have to roll. The wall is at his mercy. He can administer a coup de grace. To follow en suite: Perhaps you have not read the Player's Handbook properly. You cannot take 10 or 20 on an attack roll under ANY circumstances, you need a melee weapon to perform a Coup de Grace and you cannot perform a Coup de Gras against an inanimate object (and even if you could it would be pointless as they are immune to critical hits). I suggest that you, in the future, make sure that you know what ever rules are relevant to the discussion before you post. And I am curios as to which part of the thread you are implying that I have not read.
Stev Beren 06-25-06, 08:23 PM	And you are getting smart by trying to be a rules lawyer. Trying to hit a wall is not an "Attack action" and you are not in combat in any real or meaningful sense of the word. That is not a situation designed to be covered by the combat rules. That is part of the reason GM's have _Discretion_ so they can use their brains to say "This is not a proper pace to require an attack roll" Second, apparently you are also unaware of what it means to make a tounge - in - cheek comment. You know, not everything you ever do as a player requires a die roll, sometimes you just DO things. If you decided to slice an apple with a knife, I wouldn't make you roll an attack roll against the apple. You don't have to roll a d20 to see if you slice a loaf of bread. Third, I would suggest you take your superiority complex and condescencion and check them at the door when in conversation and stop treating everyone who doesn't fall into agreement with you as an enemy rather than someone just talking to you. Also. .. Ahem: "As a full round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de Grace to a helpless foe. You can also use a bow or a crossbow provided you are adjacent to the target.. " SO even though your little rules lawyering sidetrack is irrelevant, YOU were STILL wrong when you said that only melee weapons could be used for a Coup de grace. Last I checked, neither a bow nor a crossbow were a melee weapon. I suggest that you, in the future, make sure that you know the actual text of a rule before you try to be condescending to someone in attempting to correct them, so you can avoid your own errors. As for my personal houseroles, I cacillate between makign a natural one just be a large penalty and a natural twenty a large bonus - or between having a natural one :AUto miss" have to be confirmed before its actually an auto miss if it woudl have actually hit anyway. In other words, if there is no way you can miss, there is pretty close to no way you coudl fumble.
Verelor 06-25-06, 10:40 PM	Last I checked, neither a bow nor a crossbow were a melee weapon. :confused: Uhh..yeah. Meaning they can't be used in a coup-de-grace.
Stev Beren 06-26-06, 12:15 AM	:confused: Uhh..yeah. Meaning they can't be used in a coup-de-grace. From THE PLAYERS HANDBOOK: "As a full round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de Grace to a helpless foe. You can also use a bow or a crossbow provided you are adjacent to the target.. " Wow, talk about not reading. . also. use. a. bow. or. a. crossbow. I think that meaning is fairly clear. Also: In addition; besides. Use: To put into service or apply for a purpose; employ. A: - Used before nouns and noun phrases that denote a single but unspecified person or thing: Bow: . A weapon consisting of a curved, flexible strip of material, especially wood, strung taut from end to end and used to launch arrows. or: - Used to indicate an alternative, usually only before the last term of a series A, again. .. Crossbow: a bow fixed transversely on a wooden stock grooved to direct the arrow (quarrel) Also a note: You don't need to try the "Well, it can't be critted and is inanimite" line, because really it - and even this - side point is utterly irrelevant to the point that was being made which is this: SOme things are so absurdly obvious that the DM shoudl not make them be rolled for, thus never brining the "Fumble" mechanic into play.
Verelor 06-26-06, 12:25 AM	:embarrass Touche, sir.
Stev Beren 06-26-06, 07:48 AM	DAnke. :D ANd sorry if I seemed to get a bit heated there.
Mufflon 06-26-06, 09:45 AM	Trying to hit a wall is not an "Attack action" and you are not in combat in any real or meaningful sense of the word. That is not a situation designed to be covered by the combat rules. That is part of the reason GM's have _Discretion_ so they can use their brains to say "This is not a proper pace to require an attack roll" Second, apparently you are also unaware of what it means to make a tongue - in - cheek comment. You know, not everything you ever do as a player requires a die roll, sometimes you just DO things. If you decided to slice an apple with a knife, I wouldn't make you roll an attack roll against the apple. You don't have to roll a d20 to see if you slice a loaf of bread. Trying to hit a wall is actually an "Attack Action". Imagine, for example: The archer trying to use his fire arrows to break the wall of ice erected by a hostile wizard, and his friend are on the other side fighting that same wizard. I'd even go so far as to venture that it might be a great deal more difficult than "Slicing a loaf of bread". And of course you don't have to roll to slice common fruit or bakery products. Indeed that is covered by the rules. There is a small paragraph on page 165 of the Player's Handbook that says that you can take a full round action to hit with a melee weapon. "As a full round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de Grace to a helpless foe. You can also use a bow or a crossbow provided you are adjacent to the target.. " SO even though your little rules lawyering sidetrack is irrelevant, YOU were STILL wrong when you said that only melee weapons could be used for a Coup de grace. Last I checked, neither a bow nor a crossbow were a melee weapon. I suggest that you, in the future, make sure that you know the actual text of a rule before you try to be condescending to someone in attempting to correct them, so you can avoid your own errors. If you are adjacent to, yes. In none of my above examples was the archer standing with in 5ft of the object he was targeting. Besides you still cannot use a Coup de Grace against an inanimate object, as it isn't a helpless foe. As I have stated earlier in this post and as Ninjeff stated earlier in this thread there is another kind of full round action you can take to attack an object. In case you missed both the other page references here it goes again: Page 165 of the Player's Handbook (if it's 3.5) or page 135 (if it's 3.0).
Mufflon 06-26-06, 09:53 AM	From THE PLAYERS HANDBOOK: "As a full round action, you can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de Grace to a helpless foe. You can also use a bow or a crossbow provided you are adjacent to the target.. " Wow, talk about not reading. . Also. Use. A. Bow. Or. A. Crossbow. I think that meaning is fairly clear. Also: In addition; besides. Use: To put into service or apply for a purpose; employ. A: - Used before nouns and noun phrases that denote a single but unspecified person or thing: Bow: . A weapon consisting of a curved, flexible strip of material, especially wood, strung taut from end to end and used to launch arrows. or: - Used to indicate an alternative, usually only before the last term of a series A, again. .. Crossbow: a bow fixed transversely on a wooden stock grooved to direct the arrow (quarrel) Also a note: You don't need to try the "Well, it can't be critted and is inanimate" line, because really it - and even this - side point is utterly irrelevant to the point that was being made which is this: Some things are so absurdly obvious that the DM should not make them be rolled for, thus never brining the "Fumble" mechanic into play. ANd sorry if I seemed to get a bit heated there. I'd even venture that you were condescending. Indeed you seem to posses all the negative qualities that you ascribed to me, to posts earlier. It is actually quite amusing to see you attempt to take the moral high-ground against me, and the fall right down the “Ye olde abyss of insulting condescension”. I might be a condescending bastard, but you, sir, are a hypocrite.
herceg 06-26-06, 10:51 AM	Be nice people :D By the way, I hate automatic hit/miss, we usually use -20+1d20 at natural 1 and +20+1d20 on natural 20. Note the brightest, but easy and sufficient.
Stev Beren 06-26-06, 05:49 PM	Trying to hit a wall is actually an "Attack Action". Imagine, for example: The archer trying to use his fire arrows to break the wall of ice erected by a hostile wizard, and his friend are on the other side fighting that same wizard. I'd even go so far as to venture that it might be a great deal more difficult than "Slicing a loaf of bread". And of course you don't have to roll to slice common fruit or bakery products. Indeed that is covered by the rules. There is a small paragraph on page 165 of the Player's Handbook that says that you can take a full round action to hit with a melee weapon. If you are adjacent to, yes. In none of my above examples was the archer standing with in 5ft of the object he was targeting. Besides you still cannot use a Coup de Grace against an inanimate object, as it isn't a helpless foe. As I have stated earlier in this post and as Ninjeff stated earlier in this thread there is another kind of full round action you can take to attack an object. In case you missed both the other page references here it goes again: Page 165 of the Player's Handbook (if it's 3.5) or page 135 (if it's 3.0). Also a note: You don't need to try the "Well, it can't be critted and is inanimite" line, because really it - and even this - side point is utterly irrelevant to the point that was being made which is this: SOme things are so absurdly obvious that the DM shoudl not make them be rolled for, thus never brining the "Fumble" mechanic into play. To repeat And the case you mention is a specific attack to hit a wall in a specific way, not just "Trying to hit it" in general. ANd THIRD that last reply wasn't even to you anyway. It was to Verelon. WHo seemed to take it with the good humor that you seem to be incapable of.
Mufflon 06-27-06, 08:20 AM	To repeat And the case you mention is a specific attack to hit a wall in a specific way, not just "Trying to hit it" in general. If you are refering to my case as in an Archer trying to the barn he was standing in that was simply an example of the gap in the rules created by a linear rolling system, like the d20 system. I feel that I must ask you why you are even in this thread. This is a thread created to discuss the pros and cons of bell curve rolling. Yet I note that none of your posts seem to deal with that subject. It would seem that you, upon entering this thread, decided to, instead of posting something remotly creative, launch a complaint upon some small trifle of my post, that had already been discussed to no end, followed by a series of insults upon my person. At a glance it would seem that you are posting in this thread for the sole purpose of stasifying your self-assertion, which you are seemingly incapable of doing in any other way. I suggest that you either post something actually relating to the subject (Bell Curve rolling, in case you forgot) or leave this thread, because quite frankly this tirade is getting old. But we both know you won't do that, you will instead return with yet another angry and pointless respons. A respons which I won't be hear to read, by the way, because as I stated earlier this tirade is getting old, and it has been pointless for quite some time. And with that post I take my leave of this thread. Kindly, The Mufflon
highbulp 06-27-06, 07:34 PM	And, with a ranged weapon, even with a full round action there is a 5% chance of actually missing the barn you are standing in. The attack roll system is not about "hitting" something. It's about doing damage to something. Just because you didn't get above the guy's AC doesn't mean you didn't hit him, it means you didn't damage him. Thus with the standard system you are probably hitting the barn, there's just a chance that you aren't putting a nick in it. As for the 3d6 method, one other point is simply the amount of dice in use. I have 4 sets of dice, which means I have 4 d20s. This is enough to give the rest of my group a d20 to roll with, so that everyone can roll their own attacks without having to switch dice. With the 3d6 method, I'd need 12d6 to allow everyone to roll all their own checks (unless you wanted to roll one over and over, which slows down stuff a lot). Actually in general things will probably slow down because you have to add 3 numbers together where you didn't before. Of course, you may not care about the speed loss (your players may be better at math than mine) and you may have many more dice than me. I think the system sounds reasonable and interesting, though I don't think I'd be interested in it. Why don't you try it out for a session and see what people think?
Sinaz 06-27-06, 07:53 PM	Next session... all checks, flip ten coins! Add up heads. If you flip heads on the first four flips, it's a critical threat. There's a mother-f'in bell curve for ya!
Gilean 06-29-06, 02:35 PM	Next session... all checks, flip ten coins! Add up heads. If you flip heads on the first four flips, it's a critical threat. There's a mother-f'in bell curve for ya!Alternatively, roll 10d[anything], count evens as +1, odds as +0. Different curve: roll 3d20, take median. The extremes are unlikely, the averageish results do come up fairly variedly.
Quoth_theRaven 07-02-06, 11:12 PM	Adding some variance in bell-curve rolling. For every 1 rolled on the original 3d6, roll another d6 and subtract the result. For every 6 rolled, roll another d6 and add the result. That'll throw the curve outta whack a bit. Not to mention rolling a LOT of dice potentially. :eek:
Sinaz 07-02-06, 11:41 PM	Adding some variance in bell-curve rolling. For every 1 rolled on the original 3d6, roll another d6 and subtract the result. For every 6 rolled, roll another d6 and add the result. That'll throw the curve outta whack a bit. Not to mention rolling a LOT of dice potentially. :eek: That's actually how the D6 system from West End Games (is that right?) worked. You rolled a pool of D6, and one of them was the wild die. If it rolled up a 1, then you subtract it and the highest die from the rolled pool from the result. If it rolled 6, then you add it, and roll it again and add the result. In the D6 system, if a re-rolled wild die came up a six again, you re-rolled again on and on until you rolled something other than a 6. It was thier answer to a critical hit. With only three dice and a lot of luck you could roll higher than 30.
Gilean 07-03-06, 07:02 AM	Exploding dice are, well, common. Especially in dice pool systems. Than there is BASH!, where you roll 2d6, and get to add another die as long as all the previous ones show the same result (this is multiplied by the relevant attribute, usually). In ORE (one roll engine), you roll a bunch of d10s and try to get matches.
Quoth_theRaven 07-03-06, 10:48 PM	Getting a little complex for us mortal players. ;) Since one of the contentions not to use this system is that the success rate will go down as things like DC will be more difficult to attain, a little alteration may go a long way. Say, for example, dropping things like AC, DC, and SR by 1 point per whole 5. Base AC would become 8 + [whatever] rather than 10 + [whatever]; the rogue's DC to find magic traps would be 20 + [spell level] rather than 25 + [spell level]; and so forth. All in all, the idea of 3d6 rolling has some merit in keeping mundane successes mundane, and special successes or failures more rare, but obviously there's more to it than simply changing the die. What happens to 'taking 10 or 20' for example. Taking 10 would almost be useless (or at least take a back seat), as there would likely be successes more often under bell-curve, and taking 20 becomes more extraordinary.