Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8038696" data-attributes="member: 6987520">The "it" I am fully prepared to drop is the system, house-rule, etc.), not the game or campaign. We will play short story-line adventures, but use variant rules for a while when testing things, and then review how they operated and if we want to keep them. I would never force players to play something (especially long-term) they don't want--as that is hardly any fun, is it?Ok, it is faster. I posted my results earlier, and yesterday had two players who arrived earlier "warm-up" using pip dice, do ten 10 rolls, and warm-up with number-dice, do ten rolls, and finally 10 rolls using 2d20 with disadvantage. Now, I asked these two because they are also some of the non-math-oriented players. Here are the results (in seconds):1: pips = 39.8 seconds, number = 35.3, 2d20 dis = 28.02: pips = 45.6 seconds, number = 44.7, 2d20 dis = 25.4Sure, these are only two players, but this is meant to also help them be quicker while still accomplishing my goal. As you can clearly see, 2d20 dis is much faster, even for myself who has been rolling pip-dice for nearly 40 years.So, no, there is not "helping it" because I've shown my method is faster. It is also more accurate since a few times both players made mistakes (which took a second or two to correct) on the pip dice and the numbers dice when doing 3d6, but neither identified the lower d20 at all.No, they aren't pip-dice, but numbered:[ATTACH=full]123836[/ATTACH]I've thought about buying some, but either way with numbers or pips is irrelevant. 2d20 with "disadvantage" is faster for most people.While I did say that, I have ALSO run 3d6 and 2d10 before I did the 4d6-4 concept, which 3d6-3 and 2d6-2 were subsets of that 4d6-4 system.And as I've shown (within my limited ability to test) 3d6 is not more efficient. While not identical, both give me the results I am looking for, so I am sticking to the easier and faster system.I don't want to roll 3d6 for one thing, and d20 for others. I would have to figure out how I want to do advantage/disadvantage with 3d6 and mess with other things as well.5E already uses the concept of advantage/disadvantage, so I am not introducing anything new there. All the rolls are still d20s, just a matter of how many you roll and if you take the lowest, highest, or flat roll. I also don't want to recalibrate ACs, DC, etc. when all I have to do right now is half HP, which is much faster and easier. So, I am not recalibrating anything except HP.If you are also including our house-rules to mod proficiency bonus and ability scores capping at +4, we've already been doing that for over a year now, so really nothing new there.You're suggesting this stuff, including recalibrating numbers (AC and DC) which I don't need to do otherwise. I have no incentive to use 3d6 over 2d20 dis.Wow, first I wrote I swore I saw something about taking 10. It was a question, get it? I wasn't sure. There is nothing wrong with that. What I was mistakenly recalling was the Automatic Success variant in the DMG (pg. 239). People forget things or recall them mistakenly all the time.Now, your tone about knowing rules back and forth pisses me off to be honest. It is rude, conceited, and pretty annoying. Your overall tone in most of this has been very condescending. "You know this to be true" and such similar statements. You aren't helping at this point and if you continue to pursue these points, I am simply not going to reply further. Thank you for your insight, but I simply do NOT agree with you.</blockquote>

Verification