D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Faolyn]

Yes, absolutely. So, now we KNOW why you failed.

If you roll higher than 9, you straight up failed because you were not skilled enough. If you roll 4-9, you failed because it was dark. If you roll 3 or less, you succeeded because of your skill despite the dark.

That's what a sim system looks like.

Compare D&D. You impose disadvantage because you are working in the dark. Your skill is +7 and the DC is 15. You roll a 7 and a 9. So, you failed. But, why did you fail? Because of the darkness? Maybe. After all, it's disadvantage, not a reroll, so, both dice are rolled at the same time, so we cannot know if you would have succeeded if you didn't have disadvantage because you might have rolled that 7. Did the 7 fail because you weren't skilled enough? Well, again, we don't know because you also rolled a 9, meaning you were skilled enough, but, failed. But, you might have failed anyway if there was no darkness because you did actually roll that 7. IOW, there's no actual information. It's all just "make something up".

There's plenty of information. Yes, you failed because of the darkness, since you wouldn't be rolling with disad if it weren't for that. It's not a reroll or even roll one die than a second die. It's rolling two different dice, yes, but only reading one of them. The other die is ignored. So you failed because of the darkness. You can't even say that you would have succeeded if it weren't dark because you the game doesn't have you roll one "real" die and one "disadvantage" die. They were both your "real" dice. Even if you always roll the red d20, and have a yellow d20 to roll when you have disad and a blue d20 to roll when you have advantage, the red die isn't your "real" die. They both are.

 

[Hussar]

Edit: I missed the last question. As I said earlier, there is no rule to only roll when it's narratively interesting. The DMG suggestion is to only roll if there is meaning to failure(narratively interesting). The actual PHB rule is to only roll when the outcome is in doubt.

Nope. Reread you 2024 PHB again. On page 10 it clearly states only roll when narratively interesting.

 

[Hussar]

They're just different ways of expressing it. Both approaches give you the same four pieces of information and do not change the probability of success.

No, they do not.

Your "DC" in GURPS is 100% based on YOUR SKILL. It is not based on the task. The task might modify things, but, it does not set the DC.

IOW, in D20, the DC for a task is 15 (say) regardless of who is attempting that task. No matter what, that lock is a DC 15 lock.

In GURPS, your DC for opening a lock is based on your skill. It might be modified for the lock, if the lock is particularly difficult, but, then, that modifier tells you how you succeeded or failed because your base for success is your skill, not the lock. If the lock is an average lock (no modifier), your chance of opening the lock is entirely based on your skill. If you succeed or fail, it's 100% due to your skill. The die roll does not determine your skill.

According to @Maxperson, your skill is always variable. Incredibly variable. So variable that your base skill is actually secondary to the die roll.

So, no, they do not give the same probabilities, like, at all, and no, they do not give you the same information.

 

[AlViking]

Agreed. Not every one does.

But at least one does. It has to provide any amount of explanation. Even the tiniest sliver is fine. Again, you keep insisting that this is all or nothing. That a simulation in my definition must explain everything. It most certainly doesn't. But it does have to give ANY information. If it provides NO information then it is not a simulation.

It doesn't say what you claim it does. Not sure what else to say that hasn't already been said a dozen times.

 

[Hussar]

There's plenty of information. Yes, you failed because of the darkness, since you wouldn't be rolling with disad if it weren't for that. It's not a reroll or even roll one die than a second die. It's rolling two different dice, yes, but only reading one of them. The other die is ignored. So you failed because of the darkness. You can't even say that you would have succeeded if it weren't dark because you the game doesn't have you roll one "real" die and one "disadvantage" die. They were both your "real" dice. Even if you always roll the red d20, and have a yellow d20 to roll when you have disad and a blue d20 to roll when you have advantage, the red die isn't your "real" die. They both are.

Ok. I already accepted that advantage/disadvantage satisfies my definition of sim.

What happens when you don't have either though? When you are rolling only one die?

 

[Maxperson]

According to @Maxperson, your skill is always variable. Incredibly variable. So variable that your base skill is actually secondary to the die roll.

Only in isolation. In actuality this is false since DC is involved. The DC is generally 15 for most checks, so most of the d20 is irrelevant. If you have +7, a roll of 8 is the same as 20 as far as variance goes.

 

[Maxperson]

Nope. Reread you 2024 PHB again. On page 10 it clearly states only roll when narratively interesting.

I don't have the 5.5e PHB. The 5e PHB rules are just as applicable thanks to backwards compatibility and the option to choose which rules you want to use.

 

[Thomas Shey]

No, they do not.

Your "DC" in GURPS is 100% based on YOUR SKILL. It is not based on the task. The task might modify things, but, it does not set the DC.

I showed exactly how the probabilities and contributions can be the same in my example. The fact you do not want to accept this is, honestly, a personal problem. Mathematically and in terms of contributors and the like they are exactly the same.

GURPS varies in the amount attribute and skill contributes, and the 3D6 roll changes the probability slope, but if that was not every apparently your argument and the one you're making above this literally makes no sense.

If you want to argue the specific numbers you may have an argument, but until you do that your statement here is, again nonsensical.

So, no, they do not give the same probabilities, like, at all, and no, they do not give you the same information.

The two examples I gave absolutely do, and its not my responsibility to deal with whatever it might be Max is presenting. I'm not even seeing it (of my own choice). If you don't think my examples did, you ought to be able to spell out how they don't.

 

[Hussar]

I showed exactly how the probabilities and contributions can be the same in my example. The fact you do not want to accept this is, honestly, a personal problem. Mathematically and in terms of contributors and the like they are exactly the same.

GURPS varies in the amount attribute and skill contributes, and the 3D6 roll changes the probability slope, but if that was not every apparently your argument and the one you're making above this literally makes no sense.

If you want to argue the specific numbers you may have an argument, but until you do that your statement here is, again nonsensical.



The two examples I gave absolutely do, and its not my responsibility to deal with whatever it might be Max is presenting. I'm not even seeing it (of my own choice). If you don't think my examples did, you ought to be able to spell out how they don't.

The probabilities might be the same. Heck, I'll take your word for it. But what those things represent is not. A DC 15 represents the difficulty of doing THAT SPECIFIC task. It is completely in isolation. It does not matter who is attempting that task. The task has a difficulty for that task and that task alone.

In GURPS, that is never, ever true. The difficulty of attempting a task is determined by the person attempting the task. And every time that person attempts to use that skill, the difficulty is not based on the task - it might be modified by the task, it might not, but, it will always be based on the person attempting the task. If you have Skill X, then EVERY TIME you use skill X, the baseline for success of using that skill with be your ability. It is completely independent of the task. Which means when a task is attempted, failure is based on the skill of the character. There might be situational modifiers, true, but, your chance of opening every single lock is identical. And, because the modifiers are added afterward, we know if you failed due to modifiers.

In D&D we can never know. You have a Strength of +5, a proficiency bonus of +4. You roll a 5 on a DC 15 climb check. Why did you fail? Were you not strong enough? Not skilled enough? Did something distract you? Were you hungry? Who knows? We can never, ever know, because the modifiers are not added in any particular order. And the addition of the d20 makes any narration possible since the d20 roll is undefined.

So, sure, in some situations, you might wind up with the same chances of success or failure depending on the task - but, that doesn't really tell you anything. Because in D&D, the d20 roll is undefined. If I have zero skill and a 10 strength, was it skill and strength that let me climb that DC 15 climb? How? I have no positive modifiers and no actual skill. Yet, I succeeded. I succeeded exactly the same way that a skilled, strong character would. So, what is the system telling me?

 

[Maxperson]

In D&D we can never know. You have a Strength of +5, a proficiency bonus of +4. You roll a 5 on a DC 15 climb check. Why did you fail? Were you not strong enough? Not skilled enough? Did something distract you? Were you hungry? Who knows? We can never, ever know, because the modifiers are not added in any particular order. And the addition of the d20 makes any narration possible since the d20 roll is undefined.

In D&D strength = skill at climbing. It's literally the natural talent(skill) of the person climbing. The success and failure will always be because of skill. Failures are all because you are not skilled enough. Successes are always because you were skilled enough. Unless the DM goes rogue and steps away from RAW.

"An ability score is not just a measure of innate capabilities, but also encompasses a creature's training and competence in activities related to that ability."