NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6801249" data-attributes="member: 27160">Um, did you miss the reason I was using a d10 for both rolls? That is why the conversion to a percentile system is trivial.Suppose that the "chance the mace is there" is 50% (as you appear to have assumed) - so roll 2 is a 6+ for the mace to be present. Further suppose that the roll to search successfully is 8+ on a d10 roll with your skill (graded 0-6) added.For a skill 0 character this breaks down as a 15% chance to find the mace and 85% to not find the mace. If you don't find the mace, there is a roughly 59% chance (50/85) that the mace is actually not there, but since this is not germane to immediate play there is really no compelling reason to check this at the time. Each level of character skill increases the chance of finding the mace by 5%, so that a skill 6 character has a 45% chance to find the mace (and, if this character fails to find the mace, there is about a 91% chance (50/55) that it is not there to be found, but there is similarly no real reason why anyone needs to know whether it actually is there or not at the time the roll is made).So, two systems:1) Roll a d10 + character skill for 8+ and roll a separate d10 for 6+ to see if the mace is there to be found; success on both rolls mean the mace is found, otherwise it is not found2) Roll d% plus 5 times character skill; 85+ means the mace is found, otherwise it isn't.These are mathematically exactly equivalent. The only difference would seem to be that in (1) the GM will always end up knowing whether the mace is there or not. I actively do not want this to be a feature of the system; I am further a bit baffled why any style of play would require it or even be advantaged by it.</blockquote>

Verification