D&D 5E Finally read playtest 2 - 2d10 time!

heptat · Sep 26, 2012

Finally read (but not yet played) the playtest 2 materials...and I very much like it. As soon as I am able I'll be starting a campaign with it - there's definitely enough of a core system here to get underway with (my games always involve a lot of rules improvisation anyway, and my players enjoy this style).

It reminds me a lot of BECMI. A *lot*. And I suspect I may be one of these "old" fellas they are trying to entice back – I completely skipped 4e, 3.5e and almost but not quite 3.0e.

I'll be swapping out d20 for 2d10 - I just much prefer the bell curve. For advantage - 3d10 take highest 2. For disadvantage - 3d10 take lowest 2. Probably critical hits on 19 or 20, critical misses on 2 or 3. I've had a good look at the probabilities (thanks anydice.com) for these and they seem quite reasonable (to my mind - that is, they make things harder, but not too hard).

Yeah, I'm excited by this...and hopefully playtest 3 isn't too far away either!

Rhenny · Sep 26, 2012

Using 2d10 instead of d20 is an interesting idea. Then, most of the time, the results of rolls will fall between 8 and 12, making more predictable results.

Does that diminish the excitment level for players? Does it make the game move more fluidly? Does it make the crit success or crit failure more exciting?

I'd like to investigate.

Cheers.

The Shadow · Sep 27, 2012

Another possibility is one pioneered, so far as I know, by M&M 2e: Roll 3d20, and take the middle value. Then advantage would have you take the highest, and disadvantage the lowest. (If two dice are tied, that counts as the middle value.)

Crits then are two or more 20's - about one chance in 138.

BobTheNob · Sep 27, 2012

Ironically, you mention 2d10 having a bell curve.

There has been ALOT of threads which have discussed 1d20, and that when you start thinking of it in terms of improvement and what a +X represents at the high and low ends of the probability spectrum, it turns out that d20 actually has a hideous bell curve.

when you take that into account and integrate that way 2d10 models its actually a counter curve to the 1d20 model. Utimately, 2d10 would actually have a reduced curve.

But that just splitting hairs. Roll on 2d10, I think you are on to a winner of an idea.

heptat · Sep 27, 2012

BobTheNob said:
Ironically, you mention 2d10 having a bell curve.

There has been ALOT of threads which have discussed 1d20, and that when you start thinking of it in terms of improvement and what a +X represents at the high and low ends of the probability spectrum, it turns out that d20 actually has a hideous bell curve.

This is intriguing...can you please explain what you mean by a "hideous" bell curve? Curious!

BobTheNob said:
when you take that into account and integrate that way 2d10 models its actually a counter curve to the 1d20 model. Utimately, 2d10 would actually have a reduced curve.

But that just splitting hairs. Roll on 2d10, I think you are on to a winner of an idea.

I wouldn't call it a "winner" and I'm not necessarily advocating it for others, but I know it will work with my group - they won't bat an eyelid if I swap out d20 for 2d10. Only one person in my group has actually played much D&D in recent, and he's all for it. We've agreed to wait for playtest 3...definitely looking forward to playing some D&D again!

BobTheNob · Sep 27, 2012

heptat said:
This is intriguing...can you please explain what you mean by a "hideous" bell curve? Curious!

You have to think in terms of how a bonus IMRPOVES you odds instead of how it changes them.

Imagine this, You need an 11 to hit. Thats a 50% chance he misses

Now, you attack get s bless spell granting him a +1 to hit. But think of it in terms of the chance you miss reducing from 50% to 45%, whilst the change is 5%, the IMPROVEMENT in probability is actually 11% (((50/45)-1)*100).

Take the same +1 Bonus where you need a 3 to hit (10% chance of missing). Your chance to miss is changed from 10% to 5%, which is a change of 5. However, the IMPROVEMENT in odds is 100%!!! Your chance of hitting has doubled.

If you graph improvement from flat gain in a flat range probability model, it curves to infinity at either end.

Rhenny · Sep 27, 2012

The Shadow said:
Another possibility is one pioneered, so far as I know, by M&M 2e: Roll 3d20, and take the middle value. Then advantage would have you take the highest, and disadvantage the lowest. (If two dice are tied, that counts as the middle value.)

Crits then are two or more 20's - about one chance in 138.

Another interesting idea. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the official D&DNext will give us either the 2d10 option or the 3d20 option since roll d20 is iconic D&D.

These are interesting variants that I'd like to try out anyway.

heptat · Sep 27, 2012

The Shadow said:
Another possibility is one pioneered, so far as I know, by M&M 2e: Roll 3d20, and take the middle value. Then advantage would have you take the highest, and disadvantage the lowest. (If two dice are tied, that counts as the middle value.)

Crits then are two or more 20's - about one chance in 138.

Yeah, I had a look at the probabilities of 3d20 as well and they match close enough with 2d10.

The problem comes when you have advantage/disadvantage. If you use, as you say, 3d20 and take the *highest* (for advantage) then that's much better than the RaW 2d20 and take the highest.

I toyed with 4d20 take the second highest for advantage, and second lowest for disadvantage...but it seems a bit too unwieldy.

slobster · Sep 27, 2012

One of those simple things that I somehow never thought of. I'll have to try it out some day, sounds cool!

Makes it really important to get your attack stat up high enough to hit that sweet spot. I wonder how it it will mesh with bounded accuracy. It seems like monster defenses and PC attack bonuses will stay in that sweet spot for a long time, but monsters that have just a little higher defenses (maybe 6 levels higher?) will rapidly become very hard to hit, making them truly powerful foes to be feared . . . until you become legendary yourself!

When you run the playtest, though, the monsters aren't going to hit your PCs at all. People have been complaining that they miss a lot when rolling d20s, I imagine your PCs will be able to stroll through a kobold warren with their eyes closed and come out without a scratch!

heptat · Sep 27, 2012

slobster said:
When you run the playtest, though, the monsters aren't going to hit your PCs at all. People have been complaining that they miss a lot when rolling d20s, I imagine your PCs will be able to stroll through a kobold warren with their eyes closed and come out without a scratch!

Very good point - we'll see how it goes. I'll start off running it as written, and then see if tweaking is required...thanks