D&D 4E D&D 4E and psychology: Hit chance too low?

[BarkingDeathSquirrel]

Here's a question. What if you take the ability score out of the attack bonus, and instead add a flat +4 (+5 at 8th level, +6 at 14th, +7 at 21st, +8 at 28th)? That way you aren't gimped if you don't have an 18 in your key stat.

(You'd still use the ability score to calculate damage, just not attack rolls.)

Lately, I've been seriously considering doing basically just that. The only modification I made was that if your ability modifier was higher than +4, you used that, and if it was negative, you took a penalty to attacks using that stat.

So... a 8 Str, 20 Int Wizard at 1st level has a +5 to hit/damage with his Int attacks, but any Str-based attacks he uses are at +3 to hit (and -1 to damage).

I haven't gotten a chance to really test this house rule, but it seems like it would allow characters to focus on secondary and off-stats more without affecting their characters ability to actually hit with his attacks. A character that maxes out his primary stat is still rewarded and a character that neglects a stat is still penalized, should he ever need to make attacks of that nature... *shrugs* It seems like it should work out fairly nicely, but I'm sure there is some way to abuse the system (multiclassing comes to mind as a possiblity)

 

[Nail]

How many times have we all heard the phrase "I'm just unlucky with dice"?

We started playing 4e about two weeks ago and one of the players had a miserable night with the dice for some reason. Lots of misses. His comment? "4E sucks!"

<chuckle>

Yep.

Probability is a wondrous and troublesome thing. Somehow most people think they are immune to it: they either are "lucky" or "unlucky", and that's the end of the self-reflection. Who do you know who says "I have average luck"?

 

[Lizard]

When a die rolls badly 3 or more times in a row, it is with great ceremony that I toss it back in the bag and pluck another dice. Given time to rest, it may eventually be able to generate good numbers again. It's like sending in a relief pitcher.

 

[Nail]

Complete thread derail...sorry!

When a die rolls badly 3 or more times in a row, it is with great ceremony that I toss it back in the bag and pluck another dice.

This is exactly what I'm talkin' 'bout. Most other gamers I know will do this sort of thing.

I wonder: do they know this has no (zero!) effect on their results? (barring "rounded" dice, of course)

 

[James McMurray]

It only has 0 effect in a world where dice are perfectly shaped and weighted. Whether due to production errors or being rolled and banged around in a dice bag for a while, it is possible for some dice to lean towards a set of numbers because of irregularities. Changing at that point would definitely have an effect on your rolls. It certainly won't be the case all of the time (or even much of the time), but it doesn't take a belief in luck to want to change out dice if you're having a string of bad rolls.

 

[Nail]

I wonder: do they know this has no (zero!) effect on their results? (barring "rounded" dice, of course)

It only has 0 effect in a world where dice are perfectly shaped and weighted.

Yep. As I said.

To be more specific: Occasionally some dice will have a production error. The chance of that - too - is a probability...and isn't all that high. If your die is "rounded", then you should never (or always!!!) use it. Either way, switching it in-and-out-and-in of play doesn't do any good, other than to mollify your ego.

It's a simple procedure to test your die to see if it's rounded. Step #1) roll said die many times......

 

[James McMurray]

Weight is also a factor, but yes, you can test. If you have the time and inclination. Most of us don't, and prefer the psychological boost of simply changing out the die. Whether it has a real world effect or not is meaningless, since it has a mental one. Either it a) has no effect but to make the person feel better; b) has a good effect because your die actually was irregular; or c) has a worse effect because the new die is irregular.

A and B are both positive outcomes. C is almost always a nonissue because you won't be changing dice unless your "luck" is increibly bad, you won't be changing dice. Going from missing all your attacks by 5 to missing them all by 8 doesn't change the game. Thus, in all but the rarest of occassions, changing your dice has a positive effect.

 

[Imban]

See, I think a lot of people think they're lucky or unlucky when they're not. Like one of my friends always complains about his low rolls during actual games, but really, they aren't so bad.

Then there are people who consistently roll better or worse than what should be statistically reasonable, and I know two of them. One, needing something like an 8 to hit, missed 7 out of 8 attacks (and 4 more attacks at 13s or 18s needed, to boot) during two rounds. The other rolls as many, if not more successes than dice in Exalted with terrifying frequency.

(I've rolled 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 in Weapons of the Gods before with 99 in my river, which is just about the worst luck imaginable, but I don't roll like that *regularly*, so I don't complain that I'm unlucky.)

 

[Nail]

Going from missing all your attacks by 5 to missing them all by 8 doesn't change the game. Thus, in all but the rarest of occassions, changing your dice has a positive effect.

I don't understand your "Thus...".

If you mean "positive effect" = "I feel better", then I agree (as I've been saying all along). If you mean "positive effect" = "I roll better numbers", then you'll have to prove it.

 

[Noumenon]

One, needing something like an 8 to hit, missed 7 out of 8 attacks (and 4 more attacks at 13s or 18s needed, to boot) during two rounds.

Note that if you flip a coin 100 times in a row, your chance of missing 7 in a row are one out of six (you also have a one out of six chance of hitting 7 times in row). Your chances if you allow a miss somewhere in the sequence are probably quite a bit higher. Here's why:

Since the probability of heads in a single coin toss is 1/2, the probability of a run of five heads equals (1/2)^5, or 1/32. But a series of 100 coin tosses contains 96 sequences of length five. So there is a strong likelihood that at least one run of five heads (or tails) will occur; in fact, an 81% chance. Analogously, runs of 6 occur with a probability of 55%, runs of 7 with 32% and runs of 8 with 16%.