D&D 5E D&D Next Blog - Wizards Like to Roll Dice Too

[BobTheNob]

I agree with Monte. An important goal of 5th Edition should be to safeguard nongamers' ability to make apropos roleplaying references.

Hehehe. Amongst my friends, if someone pisses you off, the automatic response is "Dont make me roll for initiative!"

As to my position. I dont want to see attacks and magic use a singular mechanic. I liked that magic was different, that it sorta had a more chaotic effect and stood in defiance of conventional probability. It allowed not only that the fluff suggested something fantastic, but the mechanic did as well.

The one I really like is DCC spell system. Basically
1) Caster Rolls d20+Level+Stat Bonus
2) Each spell has a chart. This has a minimum for effect, and if you are above, look up on the chart as to what effect you produce, with higher results getting more potent. This also superceeds the "You do X per caster level" convention (i.e. you are higher level, therefore you will be further up the chart)This also made spells chaotic and unpredictable...I like that
3) The effect from result 2 MAY allow the target a saving throw, in which case they roll a save against the result from step 1

If you havent looked at it, go grab the DCC beta. Love of hate most parts, the spell system is just inspired.

 

[Tymophil]

Torn.

I like being able to roll a save, it gives me a feeling of my fate in my hands...

...BUT...

...I see the point of static defenses.

I don't want opposed rolls though. Pick one or the other.

What about something like : most rolls are made by the players.

If the player is on the offense, then he rolls to attack against a static defense. If he's on the recieving end, he rolls to defend agains a static attack.

The Character is defined in terms of bonus, the NPC/monster in terms of static numbers. So there is always one, and only one, roll, and it is for the player to do it 100% of the time.

There is always room for a little rolling by the GM when it comes to effects... Damage most likely, so he can even fudge a little, if he wants to.

 

[Remathilis]

What about something like : most rolls are made by the players.

If the player is on the offense, then he rolls to attack against a static defense. If he's on the recieving end, he rolls to defend agains a static attack.

The Character is defined in terms of bonus, the NPC/monster in terms of static numbers. So there is always one, and only one, roll, and it is for the player to do it 100% of the time.

There is always room for a little rolling by the GM when it comes to effects... Damage most likely, so he can even fudge a little, if he wants to.

I wouldn't mind that as an option, but the DM likes to roll dice too!

 

[Sunseeker]

I wouldn't mind that as an option, but the DM likes to roll dice too!

True, but the downside to saves is that the DM is often running several NPCs, if I've got to have my baddies save against some AOE thing that means I'm rolling multiple dice, while my players are each only rolling their one respective save.

I'd like to see a compromise system where we can craft our monsters with static NADs or saves, and the same for players. That way if a player prefers to not roll their saves, they get NADs, same for the DM, if I prefer not to roll saves for a dozen different enemies, I can use NADs.

Rolling dice is fun, but saves can result in a lot of bookkeeping, at least compared to the simplicity of y/n NADs.

 

[Hautamaki]

I think the DM should be able to roll dice if he wants. It adds to the dramatic tension at the table too when the players know that the DM is about to make a roll that will impact their fate. Don't get the hate for opposed rolls either.

 

[Hassassin]

True, but the downside to saves is that the DM is often running several NPCs, if I've got to have my baddies save against some AOE thing that means I'm rolling multiple dice, while my players are each only rolling their one respective save.

Area effects are the situation where it is significantly easier for the DM to roll. Otherwise the player needs to indicate which opponent he is rolling for - easy on a grid, but no so easy without one. For extra problems, suppose there's an invisible opponent somewhere that the player may or may not know about.

 

[Anselyn]

This is incorrect. The standard deviation of 1d20 is 5.916 and the standard deviation of 2d20 (or 1d20 - 1d20) is 8.165. Opposed rolls have a higher standard deviation, so I would call them more swingy. They also eat up more time at the table.

You are right, well mostly. Apologies for my delayed response.

The standard deviation of 1d20 is 5.76
The standard deviation of 2d20 is 8.15

[In response to other posters - you can define standard deviation for any probability distribution - see ]Standard deviation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can also check the result above as for M(dN) dice the variance (standard deviation squared) in M times the variance of 1dN.

You are quite right this is swingier when compared to a fixed scale of wanting to roll 20+, 25+ etc.

As other have said, when you roll many dice the results become more grouped around the average if you look at this compared to the full range of results.

So, if you roll 18 d6 to generate some characteristics (6 lots of 3d6), the average total roll will be 63 with a standard deviation of sqrt(18)*(Stan Dev d6) = 3*sqrt(2)*(Stan dev d6) =3* sqrt(2)*1.71 = 7.25.

So: avg total: 63 +/- 7

 

[Gargoyle]

I admit that I miss saving throws sometimes. Not save or die (I don't miss those) but taking half damage from dragon's breath, or save vs wands when dodging a trap, that type of thing. Incidentally, when Monte said 4e doesn't have saving throws, I agree. The saving throws you make when dying are different from the saving throws from past editions. 4E saving throws don't have the same feel.

I know that having the arrow trap "attack" the player character's Reflex defense is the same mechanic as having the player roll a d20 to do a Reflex save (or Save Vs Wands), or it least it can be if you design it as such. But the feel is different. When a player rolls that saving throw to avoid an effect, they have a sense that their fate is in their hands.

I've noticed, and the difference is subtle, that players who fail a saving throw in 3E or earlier editions seem to take the bad news with more grace, even if it's a save or die effect. I've also noticed there is more jubilation when they make an important saving throw. When the DM misses to hit their Reflex DC, that feeling of relief just isn't there (and in some cases they may not even know it happened). Opposed rolls are a middle ground, I suppose.

Saving throws in 3E and earlier were more fun and should return in some form, but certainly in a way that doesn't slow down the game too much. Opposed rolls and set defense values simply aren't as much fun IMO.

 

[ren1999]

Now I'm learning to play Pathfinder. I find it completely boring that when a sorcerer casts burning hands that it is up to the DM/Monster to roll a reflex save 1d20+reflex bonus.

The Difficulty Class is 1/2 the sorcerer level + intelligence modifier + 10, right? I'm still not sure.

It's all confusing.

What factors should go into casting a spell at someone? I don't think automatic half damage is fair. Would Conan take half damage from Thulsa Doom? No.

Burning Hands should be like this.

1d20 + 1/2 the sorcerer's level + intelligence modifier
+/- situation mods
versus 10 or 1d20 + 1/2 the target's HD or level + intelligence modifier