Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 8808681" data-attributes="member: 4937">I condensed that first order house rules for &quot;The Simplest RPG in the World&quot; out of the discussion, but sure that's not anywhere I haven't gone before.And I answer, &quot;Yes.&quot;&nbsp; And one obvious reason is what D&amp;D 5e calls advantage.&nbsp; If a Hero has a 50% chance of doing something, then a Hero that has that as a Shtick can't exist unless the Hero with that Shtick has a better than 50% chance of doing the same thing - say a 75% chance.&nbsp; &nbsp; Likewise, there are going to be plenty of times when you don't want to round that 75% chance up to 100% because it's interesting if the Hero can fail some of the time.&nbsp;&nbsp; And then, what if a normal Hero has some fictional positioning that gives them an advantage?&nbsp; Well, that probably also gives them a 75% chance of success.&nbsp; And, well, if that's true then the Hero with the Shtick that also gets the advantage maybe has an 87.5% chance of success - still not enough that we are happy to round to 100% most of the time - but more granular than the regular Hero in the same situation.&nbsp; And we can continue on like that, noting that in many settings we may have several different levels of Hero.&nbsp; Hulk is stronger than Spiderman who is stronger than Captain America who is stronger than an athletic human who is stronger than an ordinary human.&nbsp;&nbsp; As we get the need to simulate these different sorts of Hero, perhaps having a 'Strong' attribute from 1-5, we get different sorts of needed granularity that is broken in verisimilitude to setting if we don't in some way model it.This has nothing to do really with needing to know the results of the dice.&nbsp; This is just enough levels of granularity to simulate the sort of minimum complexity that is going to come up in any system that is trying to model a narrative. While a system doesn't need to track fictional positioning that strongly, maybe all that translates to is adding or subtracting coins from our pile we get where we need a single success.The real question for me becomes, if all these piles of coins are doing is turning out 50/50 or 75/25 chances of success, why don't we just throw one d20 or one d100 and that way we really know what the odds are with more clarity and a lot less process?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 8808681, member: 4937"] I condensed that first order house rules for "The Simplest RPG in the World" out of the discussion, but sure that's not anywhere I haven't gone before. And I answer, "Yes." And one obvious reason is what D&D 5e calls advantage. If a Hero has a 50% chance of doing something, then a Hero that has that as a Shtick can't exist unless the Hero with that Shtick has a better than 50% chance of doing the same thing - say a 75% chance. Likewise, there are going to be plenty of times when you don't want to round that 75% chance up to 100% because it's interesting if the Hero can fail some of the time. And then, what if a normal Hero has some fictional positioning that gives them an advantage? Well, that probably also gives them a 75% chance of success. And, well, if that's true then the Hero with the Shtick that also gets the advantage maybe has an 87.5% chance of success - still not enough that we are happy to round to 100% most of the time - but more granular than the regular Hero in the same situation. And we can continue on like that, noting that in many settings we may have several different levels of Hero. Hulk is stronger than Spiderman who is stronger than Captain America who is stronger than an athletic human who is stronger than an ordinary human. As we get the need to simulate these different sorts of Hero, perhaps having a 'Strong' attribute from 1-5, we get different sorts of needed granularity that is broken in verisimilitude to setting if we don't in some way model it. This has nothing to do really with needing to know the results of the dice. This is just enough levels of granularity to simulate the sort of minimum complexity that is going to come up in any system that is trying to model a narrative. While a system doesn't need to track fictional positioning that strongly, maybe all that translates to is adding or subtracting coins from our pile we get where we need a single success. The real question for me becomes, if all these piles of coins are doing is turning out 50/50 or 75/25 chances of success, why don't we just throw one d20 or one d100 and that way we really know what the odds are with more clarity and a lot less process? [/QUOTE]

Verification