Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Legends and Lore October 22nd
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="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 6037045" data-attributes="member: 6688937"><p>No problem with any of that. I'll only note that what counts as "predictably" and "reliably" is a matter of taste. Otherwise, there'd be no reason for dice.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> I'll respond to your other points individually.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not necessarily (depending on what you consider "reliably"<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />). For example, let's assume that we design a system where we expect a PC to output 3 units of "effect" and fights to take about 4 rounds. So we want a typical PC to output about 0.75 units/round on average. We can achieve that through either: (dice probabilities <em><u>like this</u></em>)</p><p></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">3*<em><u>0.25</u></em> (he can do it all in one round, but only has a 25% chance of pulling it off.)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">1 * <em><u>0.75</u></em></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">1.5 * <u><em>0.5</em></u></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">0.5 + 0.5*<u><em>0.5</em></u> (a 50/50 shot of doing either 0.5 or 1.0)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">0.7 + 0.1*<em><u>0.5</u></em></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">0.75</li> </ol><p>In all those cases, you can reliably set up encounters with similar levels of difficulty, etc. Method 1, though, produces a much more variable i.e. swingy result (probably more swingy than any version of D&D, but some old-school SoD probably looks this way). By the time you get to Method 5, the dice hardly matter at all (probably much less than any version of D&D).</p><p></p><p></p><p>So which of those is fun? People (lots more than play D&D) enjoy slot-machines with odds that would be something like -400 on my scale.) Most strategy board games (chess, etc.) are like 6 or 7. Things work or not based on tactics, not dice. Simply put, its a matter of taste. Taste which is certainly affected dramatically by other concerns in an RPG, but taste nonetheless. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For my money, D&D has usually lived between 2 and 3 (sometimes depending on class). 4e took a leap towards 4 (in a lot of ways.) Which is fine, unless you liked it around 2. Personally, I <em>did</em> find 4e very easy to DM, and I liked some parts of it. However, I can certainly say that in my limited experience of it, the fights did have a sort of "samey" quality that my current group (playing a BECMI-ized CnC) doesn't experience. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure. Although, I would argue that there is no hard limit for what counts has "high capacity for latent entropy." Some prefer a lot more tension/unpredictability in their games.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I would consider that Strategic Play, rather than Swingy play. There's still nothing that would prevent the post-shenanigan fights from being very 4e-like. Additionally, I would expect 4e GMs to allow out of combat skill challenges to affect the outcomes/difficulty of subsequent combat encounters. I mean, isn't the traditional skill challenge example "lobbying the Duke for help against the badguys?" Of what use is that if the Duke's help is irrelevant? Should a 4e GM <em>not</em> allow his players to setup a sophisticated ambush (or some other strategic shenanigans) using a skill challenge? If he does, should he then ensure that they experience no perceivable strategic advantage when the actual fight occurs, just to maintain the numbers? That's a much more limited 4e than most proponents extoll isn't it?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ratskinner, post: 6037045, member: 6688937"] No problem with any of that. I'll only note that what counts as "predictably" and "reliably" is a matter of taste. Otherwise, there'd be no reason for dice.:) I'll respond to your other points individually. Not necessarily (depending on what you consider "reliably":)). For example, let's assume that we design a system where we expect a PC to output 3 units of "effect" and fights to take about 4 rounds. So we want a typical PC to output about 0.75 units/round on average. We can achieve that through either: (dice probabilities [I][U]like this[/U][/I]) [LIST=1] [*]3*[I][U]0.25[/U][/I] (he can do it all in one round, but only has a 25% chance of pulling it off.) [*]1 * [I][U]0.75[/U][/I] [*]1.5 * [U][I]0.5[/I][/U] [*]0.5 + 0.5*[U][I]0.5[/I][/U] (a 50/50 shot of doing either 0.5 or 1.0) [*]0.7 + 0.1*[I][U]0.5[/U][/I] [*]0.75 [/LIST] In all those cases, you can reliably set up encounters with similar levels of difficulty, etc. Method 1, though, produces a much more variable i.e. swingy result (probably more swingy than any version of D&D, but some old-school SoD probably looks this way). By the time you get to Method 5, the dice hardly matter at all (probably much less than any version of D&D). So which of those is fun? People (lots more than play D&D) enjoy slot-machines with odds that would be something like -400 on my scale.) Most strategy board games (chess, etc.) are like 6 or 7. Things work or not based on tactics, not dice. Simply put, its a matter of taste. Taste which is certainly affected dramatically by other concerns in an RPG, but taste nonetheless. For my money, D&D has usually lived between 2 and 3 (sometimes depending on class). 4e took a leap towards 4 (in a lot of ways.) Which is fine, unless you liked it around 2. Personally, I [I]did[/I] find 4e very easy to DM, and I liked some parts of it. However, I can certainly say that in my limited experience of it, the fights did have a sort of "samey" quality that my current group (playing a BECMI-ized CnC) doesn't experience. Sure. Although, I would argue that there is no hard limit for what counts has "high capacity for latent entropy." Some prefer a lot more tension/unpredictability in their games. I would consider that Strategic Play, rather than Swingy play. There's still nothing that would prevent the post-shenanigan fights from being very 4e-like. Additionally, I would expect 4e GMs to allow out of combat skill challenges to affect the outcomes/difficulty of subsequent combat encounters. I mean, isn't the traditional skill challenge example "lobbying the Duke for help against the badguys?" Of what use is that if the Duke's help is irrelevant? Should a 4e GM [I]not[/I] allow his players to setup a sophisticated ambush (or some other strategic shenanigans) using a skill challenge? If he does, should he then ensure that they experience no perceivable strategic advantage when the actual fight occurs, just to maintain the numbers? That's a much more limited 4e than most proponents extoll isn't it? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Legends and Lore October 22nd
Top