Players rolling all the dice variant from UA - Anyone used it?

[Ant]

Using this option from UA was a pivotal factor in combat becoming a lot more interesting for my players. I highly recommend it for large groups. Although overall combat may take slightly longer in real-time to resolve the players are a lot more involved. If perception equals reality then combats are actually quicker.

I read on another thread that the +11 was incorrect ... my simple, alcohol-damaged brain always had problems with probability calculations so I'll believe the enlighted Enwordlers who say it should be +12.

 

[reveal]

I read on another thread that the +11 was incorrect ... my simple, alcohol-damaged brain always had problems with probability calculations so I'll believe the enlighted Enwordlers who say it should be +12.

One of my players is getting his Masters degree in Physics. He's the one who suggested this since another player complained of having nothing to do during combat. I mentioned to him the "number should be 12" posts and he did the math and agreed. I trust him too.

 

[Mark CMG]

There /is/ that trade-off, (. . .)

Yeah, I think I prefer the players not knowing, for example, which of three ogres has the +2 great club, which NPCs might be buffed (or why!), and who is wearing the AC/protection rings/devices. That really changes the strategy and tactics of combat in ways that I feel should be handled in-game by gathering information about opponents in advance through skills and magic, etc. Besides, the fastest part of combat has always been the part I, as DM, am running, so it would only slow combat down to have the players rolling (taking the time to ask a player to roll as opposed to simply having already made the roll by the time the player locates the correct die). The only advantage I see is that some players (those who blame DMs when their character dies) might have less hurt feelings when the dice go against them in battle.

 

[LeapingShark]

Uh, your players have a hard time locating and rolling a d20?

For me, I've found it faster because while the players are rolling and calling out numbers, I can be doing other multitasking tasks like prepping the damage dice or skimming over the next enemies' attack options.

As far as revealing buff info, that's impossible aside from the same vauge AC hints that all players already get through rolling their own attack dice and discovering which numbers hit the enemy. If you want to keep all hints away, then you would have to roll the players' attack dice too. Maybe even roll initiatives and saves for everybody too. That would make the game significantly less fun for the players I think.

Under the normal rules; if my dwarf rolls a 30 on my Fort save vs a poison, but still fails, then my dwarf realizes that it's a really tough poison. Likewise if my dwarf rolls a 30 on his attack roll against a kobold, and misses, then my dwarf realizes that he's up against no ordinary kobold. When players roll defense, it's the same stuff; if my dwarf rolls a 25 on his dodge against a kobold, but the kobold still hits, then my dwarf realizes that he's up against no ordinary kobold. And we only see that with the extremes. If the dwarf had rolled a 10 on his dodge against that very same kobold, and the kobold hit, the dwarf would not have realized anything out of the ordinary. Everything seems appropriate to what my character should notice during his first-hand experiences in the gameworld.

 

[Mark CMG]

Uh, your players have a hard time locating and rolling a d20?

As amazing as it sounds, some do. Some have such extensive collections of dice that it's like a needle/haystack or forest/trees thing every time it's their turn. I know guys who regularly put their dice back in the bag after rolling like they think they will never need them again for the rest of the game, perhaps because they worry they will lose them somehow. Some players are newer and simply can't look at a pile of polyhedrons and easily recognize which one to pick up when needed. For some, quickly adding and subtracting is a chore and can't seem to remember the totals from initiative to initiative, so the entire formula must be reworked each time it comes around to them. And all it takes is one for this variant to no longer be a time-saver.

In any event, it is always less time to just do something than to ask someone else to do it and then for them to then do it, period. Combat takes long enough in 3.x without lengthening it unnecessarily which, IMO, this variant would do. YMMV, of course, in that you might not care if things take longer, or your players might be faster than you at handling your NPCs combat rolls, or other factors might be at play. I can only speak for myself and my experiences on this matter.

As far as revealing buff info, that's impossible aside from the same vauge AC hints that all players already get through rolling their own attack dice and discovering which numbers hit the enemy. If you want to keep all hints away, then you would have to roll the players' attack dice too. Maybe even roll initiatives and saves for everybody too. That would make the game significantly less fun for the players I think.

I find nothing wrong with players gaining that information through combat, trial and error, in game. There's a big difference between not wanting to add a variant rule and stripping away parts of the game that are already there, but I suspect you know that and are just setting up this straw man to strengthen what you think is a debate rather than a friendly discussion. You'd be mistaken.

 

[LeapingShark]

I find nothing wrong with players gaining that information through combat, trial and error, in game

That's essentally what I intended to point out with my posts. By adding this variant rule, players might glean some information through trial and error during combat, reflecting their characters' in-game experiences. I haven't ever seen any revealing of stats, which your initial post seemed to suggest.

 

[Mark CMG]

That's essentally what I intended to point out with my posts. By adding this variant rule, players might glean some information through trial and error during combat, reflecting their characters' in-game experiences. I haven't ever seen any revealing of stats, which your initial post seemed to suggest.

They find things out through regular combat by trial and error, and that's what I am saying is where I don't see a problem. Where I do see a problem, and maybe I am misunderstading this, is where simply by being the one rolling the dice you are given certain information that you wouldn't have otherwise. For example, if three ogres are attacking the party and one has a magic waepon, don't the players making the rolls for the ogres wind up being given that information right away, through the difference between the bonus number of one ogre versus the other two?

 

[Kelleris]

They find things out through regular combat by trial and error, and that's what I am saying is where I don't see a problem. Where I do see a problem, and maybe I am misunderstading this, is where simply by being the one rolling the dice you are given certain information that you wouldn't have otherwise. For example, if three ogres are attacking the party and one has a magic waepon, don't the players making the rolls for the ogres wind up being given that information right away, through the difference between the bonus number of one ogre versus the other two?

That's not how it works. Basically, the system involves converting monster bonuses to monster numbers, and taking the players' corresponding numbers and making them bonuses. So an ogre with a +12 attack bonus would have a 24 Defense DC under this system, and a player with an AC of 22 would be rolling against that DC with a +12 bonus (not sure if my math is right or not). So the players have no more information than they would normally have.

 

[Mark CMG]

That's not how it works. Basically, the system involves converting monster bonuses to monster numbers, and taking the players' corresponding numbers and making them bonuses. So an ogre with a +12 attack bonus would have a 24 Defense DC under this system, and a player with an AC of 22 would be rolling against that DC with a +12 bonus (not sure if my math is right or not). So the players have no more information than they would normally have.

Upon rereading, it appears I was assuming that the players are told in advance what the Attack Score of the opponents are, and this seems not to be the case. My apologies for allowing that to be a sticking point in this discussion. Nevertheless, with that objection to this variant aside, it still appears that it would take more time (and even says so in the description of the variant) and that's my primary objection anyway, so I'll still not be adding that one into my own games. No offense, of course, to anyone who determines it would be a good addition to their own game.

 

[LeapingShark]

Oh I see, yes it is probably just a perception of how the method works. The players don't get any information. They simply roll a d20, add their AC mod to it, then tell the DM a grand total. After hearing this number, the DM can inform them if the monster has successfully hit or not. The DM keeps everything secret, including the DC. Repeat for each attack. No other information is passed. See post #20 for a slightly longer description.