Puggins
Explorer
the difference that dedekind alluded to is that the two-roll method is non-linear. The 6% difference is at 15+ is not the largest difference- the largest is at 10.
Only 25% of all results of the two-roll method are 10 or less, whereas 35% of d20+3 are 10 or less. Either method makes a "below average" roll (10 or less on a plain-jane d20 roll) less likely, but the two-roll method produces such a result almost 30% less often. If you as a player prefer to roll as few "poor" rolls as possible, the two-roll wins by a reasonable margin. It's the same reason why the Avenger's class feature is worth more than a +3, especially against anything except soldiers.
Honestly, though, I think either one works perfectly well so longer as you have no critical failure or success house rule effects.
Only 25% of all results of the two-roll method are 10 or less, whereas 35% of d20+3 are 10 or less. Either method makes a "below average" roll (10 or less on a plain-jane d20 roll) less likely, but the two-roll method produces such a result almost 30% less often. If you as a player prefer to roll as few "poor" rolls as possible, the two-roll wins by a reasonable margin. It's the same reason why the Avenger's class feature is worth more than a +3, especially against anything except soldiers.
Honestly, though, I think either one works perfectly well so longer as you have no critical failure or success house rule effects.
Last edited:
