How did you come up with that percentage chance, when tasks can roll 2d20 or 3d20 or 4d20?
Complications would increase with the number of dice thrown. If, on average, you throw 3d20 rather than 2d20, then your chance at complications will be lower than for someone who routinely rolls 4d20.
Second, assuming the number is correct, 7.5% is actually pretty often. For easy figuring, round it up to 10%. That's an average of a complication every 10 task rolls.
How many task rolls happen in a game session? My impression is that this game is dice roll heavy.
I think Aramis may be understanding more than what you give him credit to understand.
Oneshot is vehemently pro-2d20. It has a huge major flaw, and he seems totally blind to it, despite having been shown (repeatedly) the math in support and the actual play experience where I've had it become an issue multiple times. Plus, his numbers are bogus - he's not done the math, and it's BLOODY F*ING OBVIOUS to anyone who has taken a stats class and remembered the interaction of 2 dice...
I've had sessions where the rolls were bad. Very bad. The complications opening the threat range being story appropriate, resulting in 2-3 more complications generated per roll. I had a session, with 2p, end with 20 threat, the players both with threat ranges of 16-20, and 3 complications each as trait penalties... there was, at that point, not much more to do to them other than kill them outright. I've had multiple sessions end with 10+ threat, and a mission failure, and no shortage of complications imposed.
Most rolls I've seen are NOT on 2d20; typical is about 3. Yes, even if it means spending threat, my experience is players are going to roll at least as many d20's as the difficulty most of the time. Also, the adjustment for increasing threat range for extra help is retained... which prevents "Dogpile on the task" but also puts hard tasks more likely to generate massive piles of threat.
Also "7.5%" is wrong. It's 9.5% for base 2d20 rolls of 1 complication and 0.25% for 2 complications.
Running the numbers...
Code:
Base Complication range
2d 3d 4d 5d
0 c 361 = 90.25% 6859 = 85.74% 130321 = 81.45% 2476099 = 77.38%
1 c 38 = 9.50% 1083 = 13.54% 27436 = 17.15% 651605 = 20.36%
2 c 1 = 0.25% 57 = 0.71% 2166 = 1.35% 68590 = 2.14%
3 c 0 = 0.00% 1 = 0.01% 76 = 0.05% 3610 = 0.11%
4 c 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 1 = 0.00% 95 = 0.00%
5 c 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 1 = 0.00%
+1 Complication range
____2d___ _____3d_____ _______4d______ _______5d_______
0 c 324 = 81% 5832 = 72.9% 104976 = 65.61% 1889568 = 59.05
1 c 72 = 18% 1944 = 24.3% 46656 = 29.16% 1049760 = 32.81
2 c 4 = 1% 216 = 2.7% 7776 = 4.86% 233280 = 7.29
3 c 0 = 0% 8 = 0.1% 576 = 0.36% 25920 = 0.81
4 c 0 = 0% 0 = 0.00% 16 = 0.01% 1440 = 0.05
5 c 0 = 0% 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 32 = 0.00
+2 Complication range
____2d______ _____3d_____ _______4d______ _______5d_______
0 c 289 = 72.25% 4913 = 61.41% 83521 = 52.20% 1419857 = 44.37%
1 c 102 = 25.50% 2601 = 32.51% 58956 = 36.85% 1252815 = 39.15%
2 c 9 = 2.25% 459 = 5.74% 15606 = 9.75% 442170 = 13.82%
3 c 0 = 0.00% 27 = 0.34% 1836 = 1.15% 78030 = 2.44%
4 c 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 81 = 0.05% 6885 = 0.22%
5 c 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 243 = 0.01%
+3 Complication range
____2d______ _____3d______ ______4d______ _______5d_______
0 c 256 = 64.00% 4096 = 51.20% 65536 = 40.96% 1048576 = 32.77%
1 c 128 = 32.00% 3072 = 38.40% 65536 = 40.96% 1310720 = 40.96%
2 c 16 = 4.00% 768 = 9.60% 24576 = 15.36% 655360 = 20.48%
3 c 0 = 0.00% 64 = 0.80% 4096 = 2.56% 163840 = 5.12%
4 c 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 256 = 0.16% 20480 = 0.64%
5 c 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 0 = 0.00% 1024 = 0.03%
Numbers worked out with a python script, percentages found by spreadsheet.
Code:
__author__ = 'wfh'
Die = [0,0,0,0,0, 0,0,0,0,0, 0,0,0,0,0, 0,1,1,1,1]
nDie = [0]
res = [0,0,0,0,0,0]
t = 0
print "a"
for a in Die:
for b in Die:
for c in nDie:
for d in nDie:
for e in nDie:
t = a+b+c+d+e
res[t] += 1
count = 0
for x in res:
print x
(Yes, a brute force approach. But simple to code, and doesn't require one to understand the multi-dimensional formulae for figuring it out abstractly. The version up is set for 2d at +3 complication range.)
I've carefully reread the rules - the changes do not eliminate the issue at all; they don't address it at all. It's a stock issue with 2d20 as a system.
It's part of the issue WaterBob has with the 2d20 mechanics as well. It was self-evident to him (and me) from the Conan preview on.
Expanding the threat range to +3 gives more than 1/3 of rolls an additional complication.
From an "Angry DM" mode, it's a great way to discourage players quickly.
It's obvious to me that those who don't see it as an issue are not terribly perceptive - because the way the adding hazards works, it only takes 5 threat to kill off a PC in fairly short order... if you have more than that left, you have OBVIOUSLY not used the threat to it's maximum, and have thus given any success straight over the table... and for the perceptive and mathematically competent, that's clearly "I didn't actually accomplish it." It makes it ring hollow.
Might be accurate to the show that way, but it's not good gaming.
