3d6 instead of d20

[pawsplay]

Oh god I hate that. The wizard with 10 ranks in knowledge arcana and +3 Intelligence rolls a 2, but doesn't make the DC 17 knowledge check. The barbarian, who for some god unknown reason put a cross-class rank in knowledge arcana and has a -1 Intelligence rolls an 19. I have to tell the party that Ladius, the eccentric genius who refers to himself in the third person because he's a narcissist, is completely stumped, but Thuk, the moronic oaf who refers to himself in third person because he's never learned pronouns, has immediately determined that a random scroll contains the spell dimensional anchor. Seriously?

I know it bugs people, but it's probably realistic. I mean, Thuk, has studied arcana, so it's not outside the realm of possibility. In real life, fumbles are common, even charismatic politicians misspeak, and every so often, somebody comes out of nowhere to win some or another sporting event. The best stories imitate this, whether it's stealthy hobbits alerting orcs, legendary swordsmen falling down on their butts, or silver-tongued scoundrels being at a loss for words.

 

[slwoyach]

I much prefer 3d6, amazing successes and fumbles are way too common with 1d20. I can't tell you how many times I've had an argument with a GM playing Star Wars. Seriously, my blaster has 200 shots. Could you please explain to me how there's a random 1 in 20 chance I run out of ammo every shot?

 

[Jhaelen]

I actually remember one of the (former?) D&D designers posting about his 3d6 variant in his blog. I cannot remember where I'd seen it but it was discussed quite a bit in an EN-World thread.

So, yeah, it definitely works. It's not my cup of tea, though.

 

[Magesmiley]

Kind of interesting that you're considering this variant - I recall reading somewhere that one of the reasons we ended up with the d20 was that Gygax wanted a random roll that didn't have the bell curve results that multiple dice yielded.

That aside, I'll concur with the armor class comment - a high AC is going to be much more valuable than it was before, and a low AC much worse. Saving throws will have this problem as well, which could cause some encounters using saves heavily to be much more lethal (or easy) than they are normally. Skill checks won't be as bad, but they may still have some issues as well.

 

[HoboGod]

I know it bugs people, but it's probably realistic. I mean, Thuk, has studied arcana, so it's not outside the realm of possibility. In real life, fumbles are common, even charismatic politicians misspeak, and every so often, somebody comes out of nowhere to win some or another sporting event. The best stories imitate this, whether it's stealthy hobbits alerting orcs, legendary swordsmen falling down on their butts, or silver-tongued scoundrels being at a loss for words.

I get it that fumbles are common, but a 10% chance to get less than 3? Way too common! The example I gave will happen once every hundred times (see math below). That's WAY too common. History's tales of such incredible upsets are not 1 in 100 and if I played basketball with Micheal Jordan, it's gunna take a hellofalot more than 100 tries to score a point on him.

MATH WARNING!!! If the probability of rolling less than 3 is 10% is denoted P1 and the probability of rolling more than 18 is also 10% is denoted P2, then P1 = P2 and therefor the probability of rolling less than 3 on the first roll and greater than 18 on the second roll is equal to the probability of rolling less than 3 twice in a row or rolling more than 18 twice in a row. This probability can be quickly calculated using a binomial distribution where n=2, k=2, and p=0.10. Which, unless I've done my math wrong, should be 0.01.

 

[Slife]

And I think that's actually a pretty realistic ratio, given that you should be taking 10 on your knowledge checks for the easy stuff. If someone randomly walks up to a mathematician on the street and shouts in their face "What's six times nine?!", there's a chance that they won't be able to immediately recall it.

 

[slwoyach]

And I think that's actually a pretty realistic ratio, given that you should be taking 10 on your knowledge checks for the easy stuff. If someone randomly walks up to a mathematician on the street and shouts in their face "What's six times nine?!", there's a chance that they won't be able to immediately recall it.

I don't think there's any chance at all.

 

[Persiflage]

Accidental double-post. Sorry about that.

 

[Persiflage]

I don't think there's any chance at all.

I agree, although I think perhaps it's a case of the example being a poor one, rather than the point itself. Speaking only for myself and those I was in school with in the dim and distant past, I learned times-tables by rote and could probably shout out the answer to any multiplication problem up to 12x12 even if you'd just shoved a grenade in my pants.

Years of further study in disciplines involving lots of calculations - and hobbies such as, well, "roleplaying" - have only reinforced the childhood brainwashing.

Perhaps a better example might be walking up to a mathematician and sticking a gun in his face whilst bellowing "My right-angled triangle has one side 9cm long and a hypotenuse 15cm long, HOW LONG IS THE OTHER SIDE?"

It'd probably continue like this...

Mathematician: What?!...

You: WHAT AIN'T NO NUMBER I EVER HEARD OF! IS "WHAT" AN INTEGER?

Mathematician: What?!...

You: NUMBERS, M********R, CAN YOU COUNT THEM?!?

That might put him off a little

 

[Sorry_Charry]

...I learned times-tables by rote and could probably shout out the answer to any multiplication problem up to 12x12 even if you'd just shoved a grenade in my pants...

Nice.

On another note, a lot of people have mentioned 'fumbling' skill checks as part of the pro's and con's of supplanting the 1d20 with multiple dice.

I'd like to point out: there is no automatic failure/success for skill checks. If a roll of 1 beats the DC (after all appropriate modifiers, that is)... then the check passes.

Automatic success/failure only apply to saving throws and attack rolls.

There. Now that my OCD has been sated... I've seen the 2d10 method in action and I tend to like the 'bell curved' results. What I don't like is the reduced level of critical hits and fumbles... (1% chance of occurrence of each one if you require two 10's or two 1's respectively). So we used 19-20 & 2-3 respectively for those (upping the chance of a crit/fumble to 3% each... still less than the traditional 5% with 1d20).

That way, the character's skill level and competence still had an increased role in the less random system, but there was still the outside chance that criticals would occur. Giving guys a 1% chance throughout the session just seemed, I don't know... to take the wind out of the sails of the game, and having fun is the #1 rule.