Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ezo" data-source="post: 9285380" data-attributes="member: 7037866">I don't think it is really surprising at all. I've read many posters (as fans) complain about the swinginess of the d20 mechanic, especially now that your &quot;typical&quot; (across levels) bonus is about +8, and the &quot;typical&quot; maximum difference between 1 and 20 is just +6 (from +5 to +11).What I always found interesting is that success in most situations for a competent PC is about 65% (8 or higher on the d20), which means 35% of the time they &quot;do not make progress&quot; (not necessarily &quot;failure&quot;). So, while not experts, it seems like failing roughly 40% of the time is acceptable, perhaps even preferred.Now, I've read about people suggesting 2d10, 3d6, 3d20 take middle, and probably others. And if you look at these the probably of 8 or better is 0.790, 0.838, and 0.718, respectively, decreasing the chance of &quot;not making progress&quot; to about 20-30%. To many people, that seems better.Ok, but let's bump up the AC/DC for the PC. Instead of 8 needed on the d20, how about 13 and 18 even?At 13, d20 is 40% success. 2d10, 3d6, and 3d20tM are about 36%, 26%, and 35%, respectively.At 18, d20 is 15%, while the others are 6%, 0.5%, 6%.So, while the other methods remove the swinginess for the d20 and cluster most results around the centers, they also make the truly difficult tasks so hard that it almost becomes an exercise in futility. IMO I don't think many people really want that, either.As I see it, you either live with the swinginess, or accept that common tasks will be fairly easy, but those really high AC/DCs will be almost impossible. Personally, I find the latter of the two more acceptable, but I can understand why others prefer the d20.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ezo, post: 9285380, member: 7037866"] I don't think it is really surprising at all. I've read many posters (as fans) complain about the swinginess of the d20 mechanic, especially now that your "typical" (across levels) bonus is about +8, and the "typical" maximum difference between 1 and 20 is just +6 (from +5 to +11). What I always found interesting is that success in most situations for a competent PC is about 65% (8 or higher on the d20), which means 35% of the time they "do not make progress" (not necessarily "failure"). So, while not [I]experts[/I], it seems like [I]failing [/I]roughly 40% of the time is acceptable, perhaps even preferred. Now, I've read about people suggesting 2d10, 3d6, 3d20 take middle, and probably others. And if you look at these the probably of 8 or better is 0.790, 0.838, and 0.718, respectively, decreasing the chance of "not making progress" to about 20-30%. To many people, that seems better. Ok, but let's bump up the AC/DC for the PC. Instead of 8 needed on the d20, how about 13 and 18 even? At 13, d20 is 40% success. 2d10, 3d6, and 3d20tM are about 36%, 26%, and 35%, respectively. At 18, d20 is 15%, while the others are 6%, 0.5%, 6%. So, while the other methods remove the swinginess for the d20 and cluster most results around the centers, they also make the truly difficult tasks so hard that it almost becomes an exercise in futility. IMO I don't think many people really want that, either. As I see it, you either live with the swinginess, or accept that common tasks will be fairly easy, but those really high AC/DCs will be almost impossible. Personally, I find the latter of the two more acceptable, but I can understand why others prefer the d20. [/QUOTE]

Verification