Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Game effects of d666
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Thia Halmades" data-source="post: 2626658" data-attributes="member: 35863"><p>Aye, the 3d6 for dice rolls flat changes the mechanics of the game, to the point where nailing a high number becomes nigh impossible. I'll use a smaller example to illustrate this.</p><p></p><p>We know from craps (yeah, craps) that the most common solution on 2d6 is 7. There are a total of 7 combinations of the dice which give it to you: 1/6, 2/5, 3/4, 4/3, 5/2, and 6/1. The total number of combinations of 2d6 are 36 (6x6, I ain't typing it out). In the middle of the pack are, de facto, 17 solutions which yield results 6, 7 or 8, or, a 47.2% chance of nailing the middle of the pack. </p><p></p><p>I'm using a limited example here to prove a point. Your odds of rolling 12? 2.7%. Similarly, your odds of rolling 2 (a pair of ones, or our critical failure), are the same. We know on a d20 that those odds are immutable, so in that sense, the mechanics don't change. You have an equal chance of failing (2.7) or succeeding (2.7). Except on a d20, the odds are 5% each time, not 2.7%. On a 3d6 system, a critical would be three sixes vs. three ones; 1/216, or a 0.46% chance. This completely breaks the math that runs critical chances, and forces all rolls into the center of the pack.</p><p></p><p>So yes, not only does it reduce the random chance of getting a critical solution, it would require restrucuring the entire die system. The odds I've given are for 2d6; as you add more dice, you swell the curve exponentially; it becomes more and more unlikely to get a result outside of the norm, because each die has a random independent chance, each one is being rolled and counted as a unit (i.e., 7). </p><p></p><p>The middle of the pack on a 3d6 set is, alternatively, 9, 10 and 11. The middle roll, 10, has the following possible solutions (hold your drink cup): 1/3/6, 1/4/5, 1/5/4, 1/6/3, 2/2/6, 2/3/5, 2/4/4, 2/5/3, 2/6/2, 3/1/6, 3/2/5, 3/3/4, 3/4/3, 3/5/2, 3/6/1, 4/1/5, 4/2/4, 4/3/3, 4/4/2, 4/5/1, 5/1/4, 5/2/3, 5/3/2, 5/4/1, 6/1/3, 6/2/2, 6/3/1. And I may have missed a few. That's 27 solutions, each listed just running up the FIRST NUMBER. I won't go into holding middle numbers static and final numbers static and generating their solutions as well.</p><p></p><p>That should clear up why I would never go from a d20. That 5% is something my players COUNT on; they're willing to take risks because it's random and because the math is reliable. Changing the system would outright break your mechanics and render the game flat.</p><p></p><p>LCpt. Thia Halmades</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Thia Halmades, post: 2626658, member: 35863"] Aye, the 3d6 for dice rolls flat changes the mechanics of the game, to the point where nailing a high number becomes nigh impossible. I'll use a smaller example to illustrate this. We know from craps (yeah, craps) that the most common solution on 2d6 is 7. There are a total of 7 combinations of the dice which give it to you: 1/6, 2/5, 3/4, 4/3, 5/2, and 6/1. The total number of combinations of 2d6 are 36 (6x6, I ain't typing it out). In the middle of the pack are, de facto, 17 solutions which yield results 6, 7 or 8, or, a 47.2% chance of nailing the middle of the pack. I'm using a limited example here to prove a point. Your odds of rolling 12? 2.7%. Similarly, your odds of rolling 2 (a pair of ones, or our critical failure), are the same. We know on a d20 that those odds are immutable, so in that sense, the mechanics don't change. You have an equal chance of failing (2.7) or succeeding (2.7). Except on a d20, the odds are 5% each time, not 2.7%. On a 3d6 system, a critical would be three sixes vs. three ones; 1/216, or a 0.46% chance. This completely breaks the math that runs critical chances, and forces all rolls into the center of the pack. So yes, not only does it reduce the random chance of getting a critical solution, it would require restrucuring the entire die system. The odds I've given are for 2d6; as you add more dice, you swell the curve exponentially; it becomes more and more unlikely to get a result outside of the norm, because each die has a random independent chance, each one is being rolled and counted as a unit (i.e., 7). The middle of the pack on a 3d6 set is, alternatively, 9, 10 and 11. The middle roll, 10, has the following possible solutions (hold your drink cup): 1/3/6, 1/4/5, 1/5/4, 1/6/3, 2/2/6, 2/3/5, 2/4/4, 2/5/3, 2/6/2, 3/1/6, 3/2/5, 3/3/4, 3/4/3, 3/5/2, 3/6/1, 4/1/5, 4/2/4, 4/3/3, 4/4/2, 4/5/1, 5/1/4, 5/2/3, 5/3/2, 5/4/1, 6/1/3, 6/2/2, 6/3/1. And I may have missed a few. That's 27 solutions, each listed just running up the FIRST NUMBER. I won't go into holding middle numbers static and final numbers static and generating their solutions as well. That should clear up why I would never go from a d20. That 5% is something my players COUNT on; they're willing to take risks because it's random and because the math is reliable. Changing the system would outright break your mechanics and render the game flat. LCpt. Thia Halmades [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Game effects of d666
Top