The d30 system

[Crothian]

Works just like the d20, except instead of rolling d20 for Attack, Saving Throws, skills, etc. you roll a d30.

This is an exercise in hypothosis. I have not attempted to play using this. Just looking towards the local gamers for thoughts on some d30 maddness.

What will have to be changed: Everything that was 10 + (AC, Spell DC, special powers DC, etc) will be 15+. Adding five to everything is pretty simple.

Critical on weapons will either be kept the same amount of numbers or improved by one. So a rapier would crit on a 27-30, pick on 29-30.

The main reason for this is it keep the bonuses meaniful. Before +10 was fifty percent of the roll on a d20. Now its only 33%.

So far, this is pretty simple and seems doible. Any thoughts?

 

[Malin Genie]

Umm ... what do you mean 'keeps the bonus meaningful'?

Having a +2 bonus (for example, through the Skill Focus Feat) is already (on a d20 roll) worth not that much (10%), and on an opposed roll the chance of a character with a +2 bonus winning is slightly less than 60%.

Even a +4 or +5 bonus doesn't give the relative superiority that it should. Imagine a computer geek (ST 8) in a pushing match vs a WWF superstar (ST 18, for argument's sake.) The geek will win under the d20 system over 25% of the time. In fact, an average human (ST 10, +0 bonus) can stand in the path of a charging horse (+4 size, +3 ST, +2 charge) and stop the horse dead in its tracks about 13% of the time. Take 100 people and charge 100 (trained war-)horses into them and I guarantee you 13 of them wont be standing after the collision...

Undre a d30 system, these differences become even *less* meaningful.

Heck, I've been looking toward using a 3d6 system to make the differences *more* important...

 

[Crothian]

At higher levels, the d20 loses value. Notice the problems in D&Dg. That's what I mean by meaningful. THis allows for higher levelplay, as the same bonuses mean less.

 

[Malin Genie]

Haven't read D&Dg, so I can't comment there.

But *why* should a +10 bonus mean less?

It's like a toad (Int 1, -5 mod) competing with Einstein (Int 20, +5 mod) at puzzle-solving. Or the same toad (Str 1, -5 mod) taking Hulk Hogan (Str 20, +5 mod) down in a tug-of-war.

I think only a 50% bonus *under*represents the difference, so why make the situation worse?

 

[Crothian]

the d30 adds more randomness to the game. It handles greater pluses and higher level of play better then the d20. It does weaken everything evenly, so there is balance there.

Why should a +10 mean less? It only means less when compared to the d20 system. as everything would be based on the d30, +10 means the exact same thing.

The biggest thing this would do is reduce the power of everything. That makes higher level play easier for some people.

Like I said, this is just an idea. I'd actually have to convince some people to try it. Maybe I can convince someone at a con to give it a try.

 

[Romotre]

for the sake of reality, we don't need for randomness (as Malin Genie pointed out), we need less. for the sake of gameplay...i don't own enough d30's.

 

[Victim]

The biggest thing this would do is reduce the power of everything. That makes higher level play easier for some people.

Why should high level play be the same as low level play? It degrades the value of experience and adds randomness. Randomness has a pretty good chance of eventually screwing over the PCS.

 

[Crothian]

Well, I guess we shall throw this idea in the bust pile then

 

[hong]

Why should high level play be the same as low level play? It degrades the value of experience and adds randomness. Randomness has a pretty good chance of eventually screwing over the PCS.

An attack roll is randomness; a saving throw is randomness. If you don't want encounters that are completely trivial from a gameplay point of view, you must have an element of randomness.

The problem with high-level play (and D&Dg exacerbates this) is that encounters often _aren't_ random enough. It's easy to create a character with attacks that are impossible to resist by other characters. This occurs for a number of reasons, but ultimately, when your modifiers get up to +50 or +60 for attacks, AC and save DCs, the relative contribution of the d20 roll becomes insignificant. Thus either you win without taking a scratch, or you lose without standing a chance.

The topic of high-level campaigns being very hard to manage has been brought up multiple times. Everything has to be tailored to the party's abilities, if you don't want things to be a complete walkover (for either side). So far, I haven't seen anything that makes me think that Epic-level play will be any different -- in fact, it's probably going to be worse.

As to whether replacing a d20 with a d30 roll is the right solution, I'm not sure. It postpones the point where the die roll is superfluous, but brings with it its own problems, especially at low levels.

The problem really is the binary nature of most task/conflict resolution rolls -- either you succeed, or you fail. Some sort of gradated system might work better for high-level play. For example, instead of having the result of a disintegrate spell be either death or 6d6 damage, maybe you could have a range of possible results, depending on how well you made your save:
- death, if you fail by more than 20
- loss of half your hit points, if you fail by 11-20
- 6d6 damage (but not more than half you hp) if you fail by 1-10
- 3d6 damage (but not more than 1/4 your hp) if you succeed by 1-10
- no damage, if you succeed by 11+.

Something similar could be done for combat rolls and skill checks. This would be a major system redesign, obviously.

 

[hong]

Well, I guess we shall throw this idea in the bust pile then

Wimp.