Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="vivsavage" data-source="post: 7448154" data-attributes="member: 6673703">Because of the 3d6 bell curve, the results are more consistently gathered around the 9-12 range, so even with the same modifiers the results are going to be gathered around a more predictable result than d20. It could be argued that 3d6 would tend to favor "skilled" characters over non-skilled more than the d20 even with bonuses. For example, a character with a +0 bonus versus a target of 15 will succeed 9.26% of the time on 3d6 and 20% of the time on 1d20... while a character with a +5 bonus versus a target number of 15 will succeed 62.50% of the time with 3d6 and 55% of the time with 1d20. It is, of course, all a matter or preference. I don't want to suggest that the idea is inherently better than exclusively using 3d6 or 1d20.Devil's advocate question: is that really harder to remember 3d6 for skill checks and 1d20 for combat than having different damage dice for different weapons? In other words, in D&D I know my sword does 1d8 and dagger does 1d4. So having 3d6 skill checks and 1d20 combat rolls would seem just as easy to remember(?)</blockquote>