Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D 2024 Rules Oddities (Kibbles’ Collected Complaints)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9438792" data-attributes="member: 7045806"><p>The theory here is one of game design. Mathematical impossibilities are an anomaly in game design. If something is impossible, why put it to the player? The answer is, with very few exceptions, you don't.</p><p></p><p>Here, in your example, you have a 20 strength grappler and an 8 strength target. Simple math, assuming equal levels, says the 20 strength has an advantage of roughly +6 assuming no proficiency. This means that the 20 strength grappler is a massive favorite. If they are proficient, and the target is not, this advantage grows into very high percentages - depending on the level.</p><p></p><p>The alternative is one such as PF2's math, where bonuses outweigh the d20, and can create mathematical impossibility. We see this in the encounter design in PF2, where certain CR differences become deterministic. In this situation, we have strangeness. We have a dilemma.</p><p></p><p>To illustrate this, a hypothetical system makes the grapple check automatic due to it's large bonuses. There the question becomes, where do you use this grapple match-up? Simply, you never do. You error to lower strength opponents to prevent the enormous feel bad of "welp sorry, you're helpless LOL." It would be akin to me putting in a saving throw players mathematically can't make. Or a creature with an AC players can't hit. Both belong on /r/dndhorrorstories and would, rightfully, get pushback from the vast majority of players.</p><p></p><p>The awkwardness of impossibility in this game, seems contrary to the entire premise. It seems, on it's face, to be nothing more than realism for realism's sake, regardless of how bad the game play loop ends up being.</p><p></p><p>Maybe I'm wrong and it's controversial to believe that any choice that is a huge middle finger to a player is not actually a choice. Or maybe, we could use rules that don't reduce choice and actively promote antagonism. And while we are at it, we could leave the extreme corner cases where impossibility is desired to the DM, and not codified in the rules.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DinoInDisguise, post: 9438792, member: 7045806"] The theory here is one of game design. Mathematical impossibilities are an anomaly in game design. If something is impossible, why put it to the player? The answer is, with very few exceptions, you don't. Here, in your example, you have a 20 strength grappler and an 8 strength target. Simple math, assuming equal levels, says the 20 strength has an advantage of roughly +6 assuming no proficiency. This means that the 20 strength grappler is a massive favorite. If they are proficient, and the target is not, this advantage grows into very high percentages - depending on the level. The alternative is one such as PF2's math, where bonuses outweigh the d20, and can create mathematical impossibility. We see this in the encounter design in PF2, where certain CR differences become deterministic. In this situation, we have strangeness. We have a dilemma. To illustrate this, a hypothetical system makes the grapple check automatic due to it's large bonuses. There the question becomes, where do you use this grapple match-up? Simply, you never do. You error to lower strength opponents to prevent the enormous feel bad of "welp sorry, you're helpless LOL." It would be akin to me putting in a saving throw players mathematically can't make. Or a creature with an AC players can't hit. Both belong on /r/dndhorrorstories and would, rightfully, get pushback from the vast majority of players. The awkwardness of impossibility in this game, seems contrary to the entire premise. It seems, on it's face, to be nothing more than realism for realism's sake, regardless of how bad the game play loop ends up being. Maybe I'm wrong and it's controversial to believe that any choice that is a huge middle finger to a player is not actually a choice. Or maybe, we could use rules that don't reduce choice and actively promote antagonism. And while we are at it, we could leave the extreme corner cases where impossibility is desired to the DM, and not codified in the rules. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D 2024 Rules Oddities (Kibbles’ Collected Complaints)
Top