D&D General Fantasy Heartbreaker: 2d6vs d20

[Zardnaar]

One criticism of 5E bounded accuracy is the ability modifiers are so small the d20 roll is often more important.

My rough thought was for a D&D heartbreaker is to expand the reaction table from BECMI Rules Cyclopedia to a skill system replacing the d20 roll for almost everything. Attack rolls and saves are still d20.

Ability scores would probably go back to B/X as well (13-15 +1, 16-17+2, 18+3).

Bounded accuracy carried a bit burger. A +2 modifier on 2d6 is awesome comparative to a d20 roll.

One could retain the 5E skill system although the numbers might need to be tweaked.

Overhauling saves would be another thing perhaps scaling hit points and damage down as well but that's a different subject.

 

[Aldarc]

One criticism of 5E bounded accuracy is the ability modifiers are so small the d20 roll is often more important.

My rough thought was for a D&D heartbreaker is to expand the reaction table from BECMI Rules Cyclopedia to a skill system replacing the d20 roll for almost everything. Attack rolls and saves are still d20.

Ability scores would probably go back to B/X as well (13-15 +1, 16-17+2, 18+3).

Bounded accuracy carried a bit burger. A +2 modifier on 2d6 is awesome comparative to a d20 roll.

One could retain the 5E skill system although the numbers might need to be tweaked.

Have you checked out either Stars Without Number or Worlds Without Number from Kevin Crawford? There are free editions of both on DriveThruRPG.

 

[Zardnaar]

Have you checked out either Stars Without Number or Worlds Without Number from Kevin Crawford? There are free editions of both on DriveThruRPG.

Stars Without Numbers quick look, the other one no.

I'm not opposed to more modern influences it's just a few things I miss from old D&D not "everything was better pre 3.0 blah blah blah).

Very quick look at the free SWN a few years back.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The question of either d20 or 2d6 has mostly to do with the kind of genre you want to play.
In D&D (as it is now) the goal seems to be that everyone can try to contribute to everything and have reasonable success. If you are trained, you fail less often.
Using DCs between 10 and 20 and modifiers between -1 and 11 for most characters with advantage here and there will work towards that goal. If you use some kind of auto success (take 10/passive checks or one of the DMG methods) you will get more reliability if you are trained.
Contrary in a 2d6 system. It works for games where you want to have dedicated specialists, where even a little bit of training will give you a big edge over someone untrained. If you even have just a +2 bonus, against DC 8 or 9, you will have an 11/36 =~ 30% better chance to succeed instead of just +10%. With slightly higher modifiers you soon reach the point where just it is just not worth using a skill at all.
A middle ground would be using a d12, where it is still linear but on a compressed scale. 3d6 is not better than 2d6, because of the shape of the distribution (most rolls are 9 to 12)

So it is a question of what you want. We tried 3d6 for a while, or 2d10 exactly for the reasons you stated. But we soon felt, that randomness helps keeping everyone relevant in many situation and difficult situations difficult for everyone.

In some regards I would have the system slightly modified, but using a different die would not be my choice.

 

[Aldarc]

Stars Without Numbers quick look, the other one no.

I'm not opposed to more modern influences it's just a few things I miss from old D&D not "everything was better pre 3.0 blah blah blah).

Very quick look at the free SWN a few years back.

SWN and WWN are based partially influenced by B/X, but with some Traveller and more modern influences (e.g., IMHO, True 20). It uses 2d6 for skills and a fairly basic skill resolution system. It even reduces the associated modifier value of Attributes.

Worlds Without Number: Free Edition

 

[John R Davis]

Doing exactly the same thing in a current game, using the reaction table as the skill table with a PBTA twist.

 

[Zardnaar]

SWN and WWN are based partially influenced by B/X, but with some Traveller and more modern influences (e.g., IMHO, True 20). It uses 2d6 for skills and a fairly basic skill resolution system. It even reduces the associated modifier value of Attributes.

Worlds Without Number: Free Edition

I didn't look at it's skill system. Had a quick look at the classes and monsters. Reaction was "B/X in space cool".

 

[Zardnaar]

The question of either d20 or 2d6 has mostly to do with the kind of genre you want to play.
In D&D (as it is now) the goal seems to be that everyone can try to contribute to everything and have reasonable success. If you are trained, you fail less often.
Using DCs between 10 and 20 and modifiers between -1 and 11 for most characters with advantage here and there will work towards that goal. If you use some kind of auto success (take 10/passive checks or one of the DMG methods) you will get more reliability if you are trained.
Contrary in a 2d6 system. It works for games where you want to have dedicated specialists, where even a little bit of training will give you a big edge over someone untrained. If you even have just a +2 bonus, against DC 8 or 9, you will have an 11/36 =~ 30% better chance to succeed instead of just +10%. With slightly higher modifiers you soon reach the point where just it is just not worth using a skill at all.
A middle ground would be using a d12, where it is still linear but on a compressed scale. 3d6 is not better than 2d6, because of the shape of the distribution (most rolls are 9 to 12)

So it is a question of what you want. We tried 3d6 for a while, or 2d10 exactly for the reasons you stated. But we soon felt, that randomness helps keeping everyone relevant in many situation and difficult situations difficult for everyone.

In some regards I would have the system slightly modified, but using a different die would not be my choice.

3d6 to many dice, 2d10is more of a d109 system.

D6 or d10 not enough variance.

 

[Blue Orange]

In general, the larger the number of dice, the more the resulting distribution hugs the center. (This is actually a statistical theorem called the law of large numbers.) 1d20 and 3d6 have the same average value (10.5), but 3d6 hugs the mean a lot more.

If I'm getting this right, you want the variability of 2 dice, but a 1-20 range? Standard deviation of a d20 is 5.77, of 3d6 is 2.96, of 2d10 is 4.06.

It's tricky because 2 dice give you an even range, but if you are doing computer stuff you could do 1d11+1d10-1. Standard deviation of 4.27, pretty close. 19 (=20-1) is a prime number, so no larger number of dice is going to get you a 1-20 range.

If you want a little more variability and don't mind rolling 3 dice, you could try d12+d4+d2, gets your standard deviation up to 3.67. Still has a 3-18 range though. (In general unequal dice will be more variable than equal dice.) d14+d2+d2 gets it all the way up to 4.01.

 

[Shiroiken]

Using DCs between 10 and 20 and modifiers between -1 and 11 for most characters with advantage here and there will work towards that goal. If you use some kind of auto success (take 10/passive checks or one of the DMG methods) you will get more reliability if you are trained.

After the skill disaster of 3E, this was the desired result. The 4E training worked fairly well, except for the treadmill of doom (and skill challenges), which is why they brought it over to 5E. Moving to another dice system for skill throws off the math, putting things back into the 3E skills disaster.

As for auto successes, too many DMs forget the basic rules in the beginning of the PHB. You only need to roll if the outcome is in question. A high Str character should be able to smash a bottle on a table without a check, for example. A high Int character should be able to recall basic lore, while a high Cha character should be able to get the local gossip with ease. The DMG has a suggestion on it, but the simple concept of auto success (or failure) is much easier.

A great example of using rolls instead of logic can be found The Gamers 2. The bard goes to grab a book off an altar during combat. The DM says he succeeds, but the player demands to roll for it. When he unsurprisingly rolls a 1, the DM declares he dies (again).