Expanding Players Roll All the Dice: A Question

[ruleslawyer]

Hi all!

I've been using the Players Roll All the Dice variant from Unearthed Arcana in our current game. I like it so far, but I haven't quite figured out something: Namely, whether to try to expand it to opposed rolls.

n essence, PRAtD works fine when rolling defense checks (instead of attacks for NPCs/monsters) or attempts to overcome Fort/Ref/Will defenses (instead of saves for NPCs/monsters), but I'm wondering if it's worth applying it to OPPOSED rolls, and how this would change the game.

Clearly, the variance on results with opposed rolls is much greater: A bull rush check, for instance, can lead to a spread on the dice of -19 (PC 1 vs. NPC 20) to +19 (PC 20 vs. NPC 1) as opposed to -10 (PC 1 vs. NPC 11) to +9 (PC 1 vs. NPC 11), before modifiers are added.

So, to ask you gearheads out there: What might you recommend for opposed rolls (grapple checks, skill checks, bull rush/trip/overrun checks, etc.)? Is eliminating the increased chance from the opposed roll likely to influence the course of the game in a positive or a negative way? Is there an advantage to keep the existing opposed rolls, or is there a benefit to making PRAtD a consistent method across the board? Any thoughts?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Hi all!

I've been using the Players Roll All the Dice variant from Unearthed Arcana in our current game. I like it so far, but I haven't quite figured out something: Namely, whether to try to expand it to opposed rolls.

n essence, PRAtD works fine when rolling defense checks (instead of attacks for NPCs/monsters) or attempts to overcome Fort/Ref/Will defenses (instead of saves for NPCs/monsters), but I'm wondering if it's worth applying it to OPPOSED rolls, and how this would change the game.

Clearly, the variance on results with opposed rolls is much greater: A bull rush check, for instance, can lead to a spread on the dice of -19 (PC 1 vs. NPC 20) to +19 (PC 20 vs. NPC 1) as opposed to -10 (PC 1 vs. NPC 11) to +9 (PC 1 vs. NPC 11), before modifiers are added.

So, to ask you gearheads out there: What might you recommend for opposed rolls (grapple checks, skill checks, bull rush/trip/overrun checks, etc.)? Is eliminating the increased chance from the opposed roll likely to influence the course of the game in a positive or a negative way? Is there an advantage to keep the existing opposed rolls, or is there a benefit to making PRAtD a consistent method across the board? Any thoughts?

The spread in opposed rolls is higher. This means it is a lot less predictable. Low predictability means that people that could use such opposed rolls are less likely to use them, since there skill/modifier would have to cover a range of -19 to +19. Effectively, this halves the benefit of your own abilities.
The advantage is that those that do have small modifiers can still hope that they're at least lucky and don't run into the automatic failures so often.

I think if you go with the "Players Roll All The Dice"-mechanic, you should look at some checks that affect these extremes.
Grapple Checks for instance become basically impossible to succeed for creatures that are two or more size categories larger than you. You can't even hope for a bad roll of the larger creature and a low roll for the smaller one. In such a scenario, I would avoid stacking that many modifiers and change the rule (the larger creature just gets a +4 bonus on its Grapple DC, or the larger PC gets a +4 bonus, not further dependend on size).
Similar things might be applied to Sunder or Disarm, maybe even Trip.

Skills like Hide and Move Silently or Listen and Spot become a lot more predictable, and I think there is no need for further refinement.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Skills like Hide and Move Silently or Listen and Spot become a lot more predictable, and I think there is no need for further refinement.

Sorry, I didn't quite understand. Did you mean that this would be a good thing or a bad one?