2d10 rather than d20?

[Wanderlust]

Just wondering if anyone may have tried this, and to what degree of success. I was just thinking that 2d10 would give much more balanced results when rolling, forming a bell curve with the peak at 11. It would make sense that most actions would be completed at some kind of average level, and a single d20 is always going to be very erratic. The other thing is that there would be a lot less crits and fumbles...

Anyway, so, what do you guys think of it?

 

[Xeriar]

Aside from the slight addition to complexity, the only thing that needs to be added is that weapon threat ranges need rebalancing.

 

[Jens]

I guess you should also make attack rolls and saves always fail on 2s.

Alternatively, you could replace the straight d20 with 2d8+d6-2 or the middle result of 3 d20s.

 

[Coredump]

ARGH!

You not only have to 'rebalance' crit ranges, but just about everything in the game. The game was designed for using a D20 (hence the liscence name). Changing to 2D10 totally changes the results.

The problem is that people look at the results from rolling a D20 and say "not a bell curve--not realistic". But that totally ignores that no one *cares* what the roll is, only what the result is.

If the game system says you hit 15% of the time, it doesn't matter if you roll percentile dice (85 or above) roll D20 ( 18 or above) or roll 2D10 (16 or above) So why make the change??

To keep things balanced, you will have to revamp all the to-hits and such to still match. Yes, with a Single D20 it is just as likely to roll a 20 as an 11. But that is *NOT* what is important. Because it is *much* less likely to roll a 20 or above as opposed to rolling an 11 or above. and it you need an 11, it doesn't really matter if you roll an 11 or 17.

 

[Johnny Angel]

On the one hand, I like it. One thing I've always liked about GURPS was how the skills basically represented a shift in the bell curve.

The difference it makes in a system designed on a linear probability curve is probably too radical, though. Let's meditate on this a bit.

1d20 2d10 Armor
----------------------------
1 100% 100%
2 95% 100%
3 90% 99%
4 85% 97%
5 80% 94%
6 75% 90%
7 70% 86%
8 65% 79%
9 60% 72%
10 55% 64% Nude
11 50% 55% Padded
12 45% 45% Leather
13 40% 36% Studded Leather
14 35% 28% Chain Shirt
15 30% 21% Chainmail
16 25% 15% Banded Mail
17 20% 10% Half Plate
18 15% 6% Full Plate
19 10% 3%
20 5% 1%

Under the d20 system, Joe Schmoe with +0 BAB can hit Joe Blow with AC 10 55% of the time. Under the 2d10 system this changes to 64% -- a nine percent difference, which to put it into perspective amounts to almost a +2 BAB in terms of percent chance to hit.

Suppose Joe Blow decides to protect his assets with some padded armor. He throws a quilt over his head, say. In d20, this makes it 5% less likely that Joe Schmoe can damage him. In 2d10, it's 9%. At the very least, this suggests that the default AC of a nude palooka is going to have to be adjusted.

In d20, Joe Blow in a chain shirt is 20% harder to damage than he is in his birthday suit. In 2d10, he's 36% harder to hit. How long were you planning for combat to take?

Still, it's not a bad fit. A +1 still averages to about a 5% difference. It favors light armor, which will change the nature of the game. Difficulty checks and skills with be thrown all out of wack because skill points will be less effective at low and high levels.

I'm sure I'm forgetting to mention something.

 

[the Jester]

Once you're facing tough-to-hit enemies, they become nearly impossible to hit using 2d10. The odds of rolling a 20, for instance, are only 1%.

I don't think the d20 system would convert well to a 2d10 system. However, a 2d10 system could be fine on its own merits....

 

[Starman]

I believe the take 10 rule is there to give average results. Granted, it isn't usuable all of the time, but ...

Starman

 

[Xeriar]

Once you're facing tough-to-hit enemies, they become nearly impossible to hit using 2d10. The odds of rolling a 20, for instance, are only 1%.

I don't think the d20 system would convert well to a 2d10 system. However, a 2d10 system could be fine on its own merits....

Well, myself (and others) see this as a problem with the d20 system and not the other way around.

The same issue comes up in skill checks, saving throws and caster level checks.

I would actually prefer a 3d10 system but that may be too much for many people.

 

[Tonguez]

I tried it and its okay except that Criticals are very rare and thats a bummer.
Also 2d10 isn't really a Bell curve (require 3 dice for that)

Overall straight d20 is easy and easy keeps thing s fun imho...