Cautious and Reckless Rolls [Archive] - Wizards Community

Cautious and Reckless Rolls [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Demonwolf
04-29-05, 11:54 AM I'm thinking of implementing an idea for my next game, but I wanna get some opinions. I'm thinking of letting the PCs (or NPCs) make cautious rolls or reckless rolls whenever the situation suits them.

The cautious roll would be the basic bell-curve 3d6 roll. The reckless roll would be a normal d20, plus 2d4-5 (which basically randomly adds either a penalty upto -3 or a bonus upto +3).

All three rolls average to the same 10.5, but I'm wondering if there's any severe balance issues that I'd need to address that I'm overlooking. Is there any way a player can take unfair advantage of this? (note: NPCs can use this too).
Ricky
04-29-05, 02:11 PM This is a really cool idea. Would you allow NPCs to use this as well?
Demonwolf
04-29-05, 02:53 PM Please tell me you're being sarcastic. But in case you're not, yes, NPCs can use it.
Andrelvis
04-29-05, 08:02 PM Wow, this is well-thought idea... I liked it! About NPCs, let's even go a step further! What about making Chaotic NPCs be much more likely to make 'reckless' rolls and the Lawful NPCs be much more likely to make 'cautious' rolls? Great idea, man! :) I'll try it out at my next session as a DM! :cool:
Loren Pechtel
04-30-05, 12:52 AM I'm thinking of implementing an idea for my next game, but I wanna get some opinions. I'm thinking of letting the PCs (or NPCs) make cautious rolls or reckless rolls whenever the situation suits them.

The cautious roll would be the basic bell-curve 3d6 roll. The reckless roll would be a normal d20, plus 2d4-5 (which basically randomly adds either a penalty upto -3 or a bonus upto +3).

All three rolls average to the same 10.5, but I'm wondering if there's any severe balance issues that I'd need to address that I'm overlooking. Is there any way a player can take unfair advantage of this? (note: NPCs can use this too).

I like the idea, although I'm not sure about the +2d4-5 bit.

If I had d30's I would even be tempted to also permit d30-5.
J Milburn
04-30-05, 08:46 AM This is actually a great idea. Dosnt suit my personal player choices, i would never do it myself. (i mean using the reckless roll) My campaign is actually using a modified elite array, but from now on i think i will use this instead (im dm).

Thanks alot! Great thinking!
Kintaran
05-03-05, 08:44 PM For reckless, I would use a modifier of +/-1d12. Mostly because that leaves a lot of room open, and the d12 needs to see more use. Also, I would note that unless you also apply the modifications to critical threats, people wielding rapiers with improved criticals get far more benefit from fighting cautiously. However, if you do, then you will see a lot of use of cautious, because average results for a wizard's spell penetration or a fighter's first attack of the round, or even their best save, will usually give the result they want. I would probably restrict it to particularly important situations, otherwise it will see that kind of abuse. Although, one might make the case that someone armed with a rapier is far better off being cautious in a fight than someone armed with a greataxe.
Masterful_Norg
05-04-05, 01:29 AM Way to bring in the d4s. Its clear enough why you're not using a d6.

I like the whole concept because its better than either kneeling at the alter of the chronologically wasteful 3d6 or the whimsically defiant d20.

However, I think you should really consider allowing NPCs to use this system... What?
James Wildspell
05-04-05, 02:00 AM I'm thinking of implementing an idea for my next game, but I wanna get some opinions. I'm thinking of letting the PCs (or NPCs) make cautious rolls or reckless rolls whenever the situation suits them.

The cautious roll would be the basic bell-curve 3d6 roll. The reckless roll would be a normal d20, plus 2d4-5 (which basically randomly adds either a penalty upto -3 or a bonus upto +3).

All three rolls average to the same 10.5, but I'm wondering if there's any severe balance issues that I'd need to address that I'm overlooking. Is there any way a player can take unfair advantage of this? (note: NPCs can use this too).

:bow:
Yes, there is a way for anyone to take unfair advantage of this. The player rolls 3d6, 2d4, 1d20 at the same time while Dm is distracted. Player points towards whichever set of dice serve her purpose. DM sees 2 weeks work go down the tubes because of a "lucky" roll.
Demonwolf
05-04-05, 02:23 AM forgot to mention that the roll needs to be announced as cautious or reckless before it's rolled as such.

And as far as critical threat ranges for cautious rolls- I'm not sure whether to modify it to fit the 3d6 or not. I'm leaning toward modding it so that the threat range of a rapier is 16-18, etc, since a) that's how it's outlined in UA and b) the odds of rolling 5+5+6, 6+6+6, 6+6+5 or 6+6+4 out of (I think) 111 different combinations is substantially lower than the odds of rolling 18-20 out of 20.

Finally, I'm actually considering the use of the d8, d10 or d12. +3/-3 seems a bit conservative for a 'reckless' roll, especially considering the 2d4 is not exactly an unreliable roll. 2d6-7 might work, since that makes it a -5/+5 range, but it seems a bit excessive.
James Wildspell
05-04-05, 02:38 AM forgot to mention that the roll needs to be announced as cautious or reckless before it's rolled as such.

And as far as critical threat ranges for cautious rolls- I'm not sure whether to modify it to fit the 3d6 or not. I'm leaning toward modding it so that the threat range of a rapier is 16-18, etc, since a) that's how it's outlined in UA and b) the odds of rolling 5+5+6, 6+6+6, 6+6+5 or 6+6+4 out of (I think) 111 different combinations is substantially lower than the odds of rolling 18-20 out of 20.

Finally, I'm actually considering the use of the d8, d10 or d12. +3/-3 seems a bit conservative for a 'reckless' roll, especially considering the 2d4 is not exactly an unreliable roll. 2d6-7 might work, since that makes it a -5/+5 range, but it seems a bit excessive.

OK, I will pretend, for the nonce, that none of the players will cheat.

The question that remains is easily stated: Why do you want the headache ? Action Points add enough of a variable. Why go further?
According to the RAW, anything less than 1 on any roll is a 1. Are you going to codify all of the negative aspects of every skill/feat/whatever roll into worse results than simply failure to suceed? Is that where you are going?
Demonwolf
05-04-05, 02:48 AM According to the RAW, anything less than 1 on any roll is a 1. Are you going to codify all of the negative aspects of every skill/feat/whatever roll into worse results than simply failure to suceed? Is that where you are going?

No, I'd probably still make it a 1 if it came out to be a negative result. If a roll is so low that it's going to fail anyway or a DC is so low that a 1+mod would succeed, I don't think it would matter much whether the final result is 1 or -3.
JadeSpider9643
05-04-05, 02:52 AM looks good as is, don't modify the threat ranges, just take what they roll on the 3d6. It works perfectly, being cautions means the worst you do is a 3, so no critical failures, but your also gonna be denied the critical hit and threat on all but the largest threat ranges.
HailSpork
05-04-05, 11:48 AM Even with a weapon that crits on an 18, that only happens 1/216 times, assuming a good confirm. While that is an advantage over the weapons that crit 0/216 times, it's more or less negilgible.

If somebody rolls recklessly and gets a 21, does that crit?

One thing to keep in mind is that if you use an even number of dice, your expected roll either increases or decreases half a point. I suggest 1d20+1d12-7. Expected gain of 10. Besides, the fact that it's (nearly) impossible to crit with 3d6 puts enough motivation to use the reckless roll.

Personally, I would suggest utilizing the d30's. People make them, nobody uses them. It keeps the reckless roll simple without changing the expected gain.

Personally, I use the d30 as a reward die. If a player does something I like, I give them the d30 to use for a while. They can choose to use it in place of any d20 roll. I do keep it so 21-30 does not crit, and a "nat 20" no longer auto-hits, so it can become impossible to crit something with a high ac. However, you have a much better chance of hitting something with a high ac.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Demonwolf 04-29-05, 11:54 AM	I'm thinking of implementing an idea for my next game, but I wanna get some opinions. I'm thinking of letting the PCs (or NPCs) make cautious rolls or reckless rolls whenever the situation suits them. The cautious roll would be the basic bell-curve 3d6 roll. The reckless roll would be a normal d20, plus 2d4-5 (which basically randomly adds either a penalty upto -3 or a bonus upto +3). All three rolls average to the same 10.5, but I'm wondering if there's any severe balance issues that I'd need to address that I'm overlooking. Is there any way a player can take unfair advantage of this? (note: NPCs can use this too).
Ricky 04-29-05, 02:11 PM	This is a really cool idea. Would you allow NPCs to use this as well?
Demonwolf 04-29-05, 02:53 PM	Please tell me you're being sarcastic. But in case you're not, yes, NPCs can use it.
Andrelvis 04-29-05, 08:02 PM	Wow, this is well-thought idea... I liked it! About NPCs, let's even go a step further! What about making Chaotic NPCs be much more likely to make 'reckless' rolls and the Lawful NPCs be much more likely to make 'cautious' rolls? Great idea, man! :) I'll try it out at my next session as a DM! :cool:
Loren Pechtel 04-30-05, 12:52 AM	I'm thinking of implementing an idea for my next game, but I wanna get some opinions. I'm thinking of letting the PCs (or NPCs) make cautious rolls or reckless rolls whenever the situation suits them. The cautious roll would be the basic bell-curve 3d6 roll. The reckless roll would be a normal d20, plus 2d4-5 (which basically randomly adds either a penalty upto -3 or a bonus upto +3). All three rolls average to the same 10.5, but I'm wondering if there's any severe balance issues that I'd need to address that I'm overlooking. Is there any way a player can take unfair advantage of this? (note: NPCs can use this too). I like the idea, although I'm not sure about the +2d4-5 bit. If I had d30's I would even be tempted to also permit d30-5.
J Milburn 04-30-05, 08:46 AM	This is actually a great idea. Dosnt suit my personal player choices, i would never do it myself. (i mean using the reckless roll) My campaign is actually using a modified elite array, but from now on i think i will use this instead (im dm). Thanks alot! Great thinking!
Kintaran 05-03-05, 08:44 PM	For reckless, I would use a modifier of +/-1d12. Mostly because that leaves a lot of room open, and the d12 needs to see more use. Also, I would note that unless you also apply the modifications to critical threats, people wielding rapiers with improved criticals get far more benefit from fighting cautiously. However, if you do, then you will see a lot of use of cautious, because average results for a wizard's spell penetration or a fighter's first attack of the round, or even their best save, will usually give the result they want. I would probably restrict it to particularly important situations, otherwise it will see that kind of abuse. Although, one might make the case that someone armed with a rapier is far better off being cautious in a fight than someone armed with a greataxe.
Masterful_Norg 05-04-05, 01:29 AM	Way to bring in the d4s. Its clear enough why you're not using a d6. I like the whole concept because its better than either kneeling at the alter of the chronologically wasteful 3d6 or the whimsically defiant d20. However, I think you should really consider allowing NPCs to use this system... What?
James Wildspell 05-04-05, 02:00 AM	I'm thinking of implementing an idea for my next game, but I wanna get some opinions. I'm thinking of letting the PCs (or NPCs) make cautious rolls or reckless rolls whenever the situation suits them. The cautious roll would be the basic bell-curve 3d6 roll. The reckless roll would be a normal d20, plus 2d4-5 (which basically randomly adds either a penalty upto -3 or a bonus upto +3). All three rolls average to the same 10.5, but I'm wondering if there's any severe balance issues that I'd need to address that I'm overlooking. Is there any way a player can take unfair advantage of this? (note: NPCs can use this too). :bow: Yes, there is a way for anyone to take unfair advantage of this. The player rolls 3d6, 2d4, 1d20 at the same time while Dm is distracted. Player points towards whichever set of dice serve her purpose. DM sees 2 weeks work go down the tubes because of a "lucky" roll.
Demonwolf 05-04-05, 02:23 AM	forgot to mention that the roll needs to be announced as cautious or reckless before it's rolled as such. And as far as critical threat ranges for cautious rolls- I'm not sure whether to modify it to fit the 3d6 or not. I'm leaning toward modding it so that the threat range of a rapier is 16-18, etc, since a) that's how it's outlined in UA and b) the odds of rolling 5+5+6, 6+6+6, 6+6+5 or 6+6+4 out of (I think) 111 different combinations is substantially lower than the odds of rolling 18-20 out of 20. Finally, I'm actually considering the use of the d8, d10 or d12. +3/-3 seems a bit conservative for a 'reckless' roll, especially considering the 2d4 is not exactly an unreliable roll. 2d6-7 might work, since that makes it a -5/+5 range, but it seems a bit excessive.
James Wildspell 05-04-05, 02:38 AM	forgot to mention that the roll needs to be announced as cautious or reckless before it's rolled as such. And as far as critical threat ranges for cautious rolls- I'm not sure whether to modify it to fit the 3d6 or not. I'm leaning toward modding it so that the threat range of a rapier is 16-18, etc, since a) that's how it's outlined in UA and b) the odds of rolling 5+5+6, 6+6+6, 6+6+5 or 6+6+4 out of (I think) 111 different combinations is substantially lower than the odds of rolling 18-20 out of 20. Finally, I'm actually considering the use of the d8, d10 or d12. +3/-3 seems a bit conservative for a 'reckless' roll, especially considering the 2d4 is not exactly an unreliable roll. 2d6-7 might work, since that makes it a -5/+5 range, but it seems a bit excessive. OK, I will pretend, for the nonce, that none of the players will cheat. The question that remains is easily stated: Why do you want the headache ? Action Points add enough of a variable. Why go further? According to the RAW, anything less than 1 on any roll is a 1. Are you going to codify all of the negative aspects of every skill/feat/whatever roll into worse results than simply failure to suceed? Is that where you are going?
Demonwolf 05-04-05, 02:48 AM	According to the RAW, anything less than 1 on any roll is a 1. Are you going to codify all of the negative aspects of every skill/feat/whatever roll into worse results than simply failure to suceed? Is that where you are going? No, I'd probably still make it a 1 if it came out to be a negative result. If a roll is so low that it's going to fail anyway or a DC is so low that a 1+mod would succeed, I don't think it would matter much whether the final result is 1 or -3.
JadeSpider9643 05-04-05, 02:52 AM	looks good as is, don't modify the threat ranges, just take what they roll on the 3d6. It works perfectly, being cautions means the worst you do is a 3, so no critical failures, but your also gonna be denied the critical hit and threat on all but the largest threat ranges.
HailSpork 05-04-05, 11:48 AM	Even with a weapon that crits on an 18, that only happens 1/216 times, assuming a good confirm. While that is an advantage over the weapons that crit 0/216 times, it's more or less negilgible. If somebody rolls recklessly and gets a 21, does that crit? One thing to keep in mind is that if you use an even number of dice, your expected roll either increases or decreases half a point. I suggest 1d20+1d12-7. Expected gain of 10. Besides, the fact that it's (nearly) impossible to crit with 3d6 puts enough motivation to use the reckless roll. Personally, I would suggest utilizing the d30's. People make them, nobody uses them. It keeps the reckless roll simple without changing the expected gain. Personally, I use the d30 as a reward die. If a player does something I like, I give them the d30 to use for a while. They can choose to use it in place of any d20 roll. I do keep it so 21-30 does not crit, and a "nat 20" no longer auto-hits, so it can become impossible to crit something with a high ac. However, you have a much better chance of hitting something with a high ac.