Pre-3e mechanics vs d20 system mechanics

[vivsavage]

What are your thoughts on unified mechanics versus varied mechanics? For example, pre-3rd edition D&D had a mix of methods for determining dice results: roll over, roll under, d20 for combat & saves, d100 for thief skills, d6 or d10 for surprise, etc... while 3rd edition and onward all use the d20 roll-over mechanic for everything. Do you have a preference? Or does it matter at all? Perhaps your preference is determined by the style of game you're looking for?

 

[ccs]

Given that my favorite edition is 1e, I'll give you one guess as to my preferences....

Mostly I dislike setting DC #s for things. So roll under systems suite me just fine. And I continue to use them here in PF/5e.

 

[vivsavage]

Given that my favorite edition is 1e, I'll give you one guess as to my preferences....

Mostly I dislike setting DC #s for things. So roll under systems suite me just fine. And I continue to use them here in PF/5e.

Do you roll under ability scores?

 

[Tony Vargas]

What are your thoughts on unified mechanics versus varied mechanics?

An obvious, 'low-hanging-fruit,' sort of improvement.

For example, pre-3rd edition D&D had a mix of methods for determining dice results: roll over, roll under, d20 for combat & saves, d100 for thief skills, d6 or d10 for surprise, etc... while 3rd edition and onward all use the d20 roll-over mechanic for everything. Do you have a preference? Or does it matter at all? Perhaps your preference is determined by the style of game you're looking for?

Yes, if each dice mechanic delivers a flat uniform distribution with some % chance of success, there's no reason not to consolidate on just one such mechanic. Yes, needless complexity is needlessly complex! Meh, 'style' has been overblown in the community for years now: dice mechanics are just mechanics, they do what they do in a way that's entirely subject to mathematical analysis - whether you're rolling 10 or less on d20, trying to hit a DC of 11 on an unmodified d20, trying to roll even on a d6, 6+ on a d10, or flipping a coin, it's all 50/50. Now if you roll d20 vs a DC for some stuff, and 2d10 or 3d6 for others, there's a difference...

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I feel that there should be a reason for using different mechanics, or else you're just adding complexity for the sake of complexity.

Much has been said in the past, of the value in rolling under a stat for making stat checks rather than rolling d20 and adding the stat bonus, but even that is unnecessary complexity. If you already have the concept of DCs in place for things like attack rolls and saving throws, then you could use a mechanic of d20 + stat score against a constant DC 21, and it would give the exact same distribution.

The old thief skill percentages seemed unnecessarily granular, given how infrequently they came up. You're not going to pick a hundred pockets between level 7 and level 8, so it's fine if we go with 5% as the smallest resolution available, and in that case we might as well roll it on a d20.

 

[Greenfield]

One reason for the mixed mechanics was to deter people from using "lucky" dice.

If rolling high is always good, unbalanced dice that tend to roll high are an obvious temptation.

If rolling low is always good, dice unbalanced to roll the other way are equally tempting.

I played in a Blood Bowl league at a local game shop, and one of the players had two pairs of D6 he used. One set rolled high a lot, and one set always seemed to roll low. Should have been called on it, since he was blatantly cheating. And yeah, I've heard the old saw, "He's only cheating himself". It's a bunch of Bandini. He's cheating everyone he plays against.

While I enjoy the uniformity of the D20 mechanics, the mixed mechanics had their virtues.

 

[Imaculata]

What are your thoughts on unified mechanics versus varied mechanics?

In my opinion unified mechanics are superior by far to varied mechanics in both D&D and any other game for that matter. Nothing gets under my skin more than inconsistent rules. I posted a review a while ago of a boardgame called Lobotomy, which had different rules for everything! Every ability-check had a different rule! It was a mess. It was impossible to play the game without constantly looking things up. Even worse are exceptions to rules, which Lobotomy also has a ton of.

Sure, it sounds nice on paper to have unique rules for every given situation, but the players also need to be able to remember it all. That's why I love the D20 system: Just roll a D20 for everything, and add a bonus.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

That is definitely one of the charms of 1e and 2e. The last time I played 1e, it was with a player that claimed he “rolled high.” Except, when we did ability checks, he suddenly would always “roll” low. Cheating didn’t stop his character from getting shredded by a Slaad.

As much as I have a soft-spot for OSR mechanics, when 3e came out, I really dug the unified mechanics. But I also switched to Castles & Crusades, which married OSR ideas to 3e’s unified mechanics, getting the best of both worlds by my book.

One reason for the mixed mechanics was to deter people from using "lucky" dice.

If rolling high is always good, unbalanced dice that tend to roll high are an obvious temptation.

If rolling low is always good, dice unbalanced to roll the other way are equally tempting.

 

[Imaculata]

One reason for the mixed mechanics was to deter people from using "lucky" dice.

If rolling high is always good, unbalanced dice that tend to roll high are an obvious temptation.

If rolling low is always good, dice unbalanced to roll the other way are equally tempting.

I think there are better ways to deal with cheating players. Like, any other way would be better.

 

[Greenfield]

I agree, but the mixed mechanic is actually pretty common. GURPS uses it in all their settings, for example, and if I recall Runequest did as well.

This might inspire another topic on how to deal with dice cheats. Thoughts of the moment involve taking lucky dice and applying a sledgehammer.

Repeat occurrences still involve a sledgehammer, but it isn't the dice that get flattened.