Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 9884406" data-attributes="member: 1465">As already said, the more dice are used, the more the results tend to cluster around average, very quickly with the first added dice and then the effect is less pronounced with any additional die. So the highest and lowest scores become less probable, and outcomes are more predictable: more chances for the stronger to beat the weaker, and any fixed bonus/penalty becomes more important. Personally I don't think it matters that much in combat. On the long term the PC are going to have a lot of combat encounters in their campaign, and combat swingyness somewhat evens out anyway, but it does encourage the DM not to use monsters significantly stronger than the PC when it requires a lot of luck to beat them.I would be more interested in using 2d10 for ability checks, because in that case I would prefer skilled PCs to be more reliable, even at the cost of unskilled PCs to be cut off from beating challenges by luck.For critical hits in combat using 2d10 rolls, there are other options to consider. The core rule establishes that criticals are entirely a matter of luck: 5% in any case (unless you have a special ability or item). But it doesn't have to be: in 3e a critical requires a confirmation roll which does depend on stats. So another option with 2d10 could be not to look at the "natural" dice result but e.g. say that if you score 5+ more than the AC then it's a critical.</blockquote>

Verification