How to Make D&D Accessible to the Non-Mathematically Inclined?

[RFisher]

All we can do is the best we can do and it's a better use of our time to watch out for the beams in our own eyes than seeking out the motes in others. That's in language, math, morals, or gaming!

Entirely off-topic anecdote: One of the funniest things I ever saw online was a post in a Sega Genesis newsgroup taking people to task because "Aladin only has one L". (^_^)

(...'cause the poster forgot that it also has two Ds.)

I find that people are more afraid of math than they are of the fun stuff.

Or, perhaps they don't enjoy math &--even though they may do it for their job--they don't want to do it as recreation.

I also think it's much more than just the arithematic of adding up lots of modifiers or even multiplication. It's also analyzing your many options to figure out which you should take. That may not be math, per se, but it can multiply the amount of arithematic you end up doing each round.

 

[Piratecat]

Don, a moderator asked you not to post in this thread. When that happens, you don't post in the thread.

I have removed your posts. Please don't do this again, and as always feel free to contact us by email if you wish to discuss the issue.

 

[pawsplay]

Scratch paper.

Notecards reminding someone "How to make an attack roll."

Done.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I think the issue is not the addition itself, but the number of bonuses and situational modifiers that can easily come into play. A typical 10th level fighter around +17 to hit (10 BAB, 4 Str, 1 Weapon Focus, 2 Magic weapon) most of the time. Sure, that's easy. And if someone really has trouble adding 14 and 17 in a pinch, a $5 solar-powered calculator will solve that problem.

It's all the conditional bonuses and penalties one could easily wrack up during the course of a 10th level encounter. Buffs, enemy spellcasters, tripping fighters, rogues, terrain... that's just a short list of things that can impose a ridiculous number of modifiers to that fighter's "simple" +17 to hit. Not everyone can keep track of that sort of thing easily.

I think planning for common contingencies is the best advice that's been given. So I don't think I can add anything that hasn't already been said. It's not the calculations that are the problem, it's just the sheer number (ok, +17 plus 1 for higher ground, -4 for being prone, +2 for flanking, and so on and so forth).

 

[Joshua Randall]

One reason that mathematics exists is to represent complex systems in (relatively) simple forms. Another is to quantify things in a more precise manner than would be possible without the use of numbers and math.

In D&D, the core game mechanic is: roll a die, add a modifier, compare to a DC to determine success. (Armor Class is just a special type of Difficulty Class, after all.)

Now, the core mechanic is simply a way to determine success or failure.

We could use a bucket full of colored balls, and place the appropriate number of balls in the bucket such that when you pull one randomly, you have the correct percent chance to succeed. But that would be cumbersome, so we instead use dice and arithmetic to abstract this process.

Some people have advised that the player could simply state what she wants to do, and the DM (or other players) could translate it into a die roll. That's a fine idea, but at some point the player may want more precision in terms of her chance of success.

In the previously given example, the player says, "My character is scared. She wants to run far away."

The DM replies, "If you do that, you'll run past three orcs, each of whom will get a chance to attack you. Do you want to risk it?"

To which the player might respond, "How likely are the orcs to hit me?" or more abstractly, "How dangerous will that be?" or even, "Am I going to die?"

How do you answer those questions without using math? You can attempt an answer along the lines of "the orcs are sort of likely to hit you", but what does that mean?

Does it mean they hit you half the time? Less than half the time? How much less than half the time? Would you say it would be one-quarter of the time? Or maybe between a quarter of the time and half the time?

Note that even to ask these follow up questions, I had to use some mathematical terms.

So, I applaud the idea of bringing a non-math-loving player into the game. But I wonder if the game is even playable without using some mathematical concepts.

 

[Merkuri]

In the previously given example, the player says, "My character is scared. She wants to run far away."

The DM replies, "If you do that, you'll run past three orcs, each of whom will get a chance to attack you. Do you want to risk it?"

To which the player might respond, "How likely are the orcs to hit me?" or more abstractly, "How dangerous will that be?" or even, "Am I going to die?"

How do you answer those questions without using math?

I don't think it's too hard to abstract questions and answers like these into things your character could know. The average adventurer won't know the exact statistics on how likely it is to be hurt or killed by their actions, they just know how dangerous it looks. I could see the conversation going like this:

Player: My character wants to run away.

DM: If you run that way you'll run past three orcs, each of whom will get a swing at you. Do you want to risk it?

Player: Do they look like they can hit me?

DM: If all you do is run, then you can probably slip past most of them. If you stop to attack any of them, or do anything else, then they'll likely all hit you. Their axes certainly look scary, though. You think if one of them gets in a good hit on you it'll knock you unconsious or even kill you right out.

It might take time and a little thought for the DM to explain all of your options like this, but it's possible. You don't NEED to know the exact attack bonus of the orcs or the AC of your character. You need to know common-sense things, like if you're just wearing robes an axe will probably hurt a lot. For people who are just in it for the story (as I suspect the person the OP mentioned will be), this will be plenty. For people who want to min/max and treat it as a game that needs to be won, rather than a story to be told, then they'll obviously have to deal with the numbers.

 

[Umbran]

Some people have advised that the player could simply state what she wants to do, and the DM (or other players) could translate it into a die roll. That's a fine idea, but at some point the player may want more precision in terms of her chance of success.

Setting aside the question of whether the character should know the answer to the question...

Aren't "chance" and "precision" already mathematical concepts? The ability to ask the question then implies some understanding. And not having the rules-mastery to compute the probability yourself does not mean that you can't understand, "you've got about a one in three chance" (which lies comfortably between a quarter and a half).

 

[molonel]

If you have folks who are not mathematically inclined, never play above 7th level or so, IMO. Don't even THINK about going into epic levels.

Or try Castles & Crusades, from what I hear.

 

[Joshua Randall]

DM: If all you do is run, then you can probably slip past most of them. If you stop to attack any of them, or do anything else, then they'll likely all hit you. Their axes certainly look scary, though. You think if one of them gets in a good hit on you it'll knock you unconsious or even kill you right out.

In this example the DM has taken an entire paragraph to state what in D&D-ese would take a few numbers and symbols:

Orc: Melee +4 falchion (2d4+4/18-20) or if you prefer +4 greataxe (1d12+4/x3)

If the DM doesn't mind the translation from D&D-ese into English (or whatever), that's great. But for many DMs and players, this sort of discussion might grind the game to a halt.

For people who want to min/max and treat it as a game that needs to be won, rather than a story to be told, then they'll obviously have to deal with the numbers.

This is a straw-man argument. There is no necessary connection between the use of math and min/max'ing. A "real roleplayer" could be very concerned with keeping her character alive, and in order to do that effectively, she might need to know some things about how the game works.

A "real roleplayer" might also be crucially interested in suavely convincing the guard captain to look the other way while the party infiltrates the corrupt nobleman's manor. In game, we have skill checks for this (Diplomacy or Bluff or maybe just a Cha check). How can the player weigh her chance of success vs. the penalty for failure without understanding some of the underlying math?

Aren't "chance" and "precision" already mathematical concepts?

Yes, they are.

They are mathematical concepts that are ingrained into everyday life. You don't need to be some kind of rocket scientist to use or understand math and numbers. Even the artsy-fartsy people have to pay bills or take their temparature when they're sick.

And not having the rules-mastery to compute the probability yourself does not mean that you can't understand, "you've got about a one in three chance" (which lies comfortably between a quarter and a half).

And when you want a level of precision beyond that, you're going to have to use percentages (or in D&D terms, d20 rolls).

 

[Merkuri]

In this example the DM has taken an entire paragraph to state what in D&D-ese would take a few numbers and symbols:

Orc: Melee +4 falchion (2d4+4/18-20) or if you prefer +4 greataxe (1d12+4/x3)

I don't know about you, but my DM doesn't often come straight out and tell me what properties the weapons of my enemies have. If your character doesn't know, then your player doesn't need to know, either. Sure, for a lot of things it'll make it easier to explain it in game terms with numbers, but it's not strictly necessary.

A "real roleplayer" could be very concerned with keeping her character alive, and in order to do that effectively, she might need to know some things about how the game works.

This also depends on the DM and the game being played. If it's very lethal and combat heavy, then likely all of the players will need to have a good understanding of the rules details. If it's very story oriented and character death is rare then you can get away with more "fluffy" explanations of game effects.

A "real roleplayer" might also be crucially interested in suavely convincing the guard captain to look the other way while the party infiltrates the corrupt nobleman's manor. In game, we have skill checks for this (Diplomacy or Bluff or maybe just a Cha check). How can the player weigh her chance of success vs. the penalty for failure without understanding some of the underlying math?

Same as above. The DM can give the player an estimate of how suave their character is ("you have a silver tongue, so you can probably talk him into it," or "you couldn't convince a barmaid to get you beer, let someone else do the talking"). Their character probably has no idea of the NPC's sense motive or other applicable skills, so that's not an issue.