NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8078308" data-attributes="member: 6701124">Is it a problem in your argument that the extreme values you are comparing aren't the same ones. The 4, 5, 6, and 22, 23 for the d20+3 are now split up among the 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 in the d20+d6. So yes, the two most extreme values in the d20+d6 are now less likely than the two most extreme values in the d20+3... but the d20+d6 has more different extreme values. In particular, with the d20+3 you can't even get far enough out to get the 2, 3, or 24, 25, 26 that you can with the d20+d6.Here are four arguments I'd give as to why the d20+d6 would be considered more "swingy" than the d20+3.1) It has a greater variance: 36 1/6 vs. 33 1/4.2) If you imagined a system with a take 10 or take 20, and you rolled the d6 instead of just adding 3, it would change some previously guaranteed successes to depending on a die roll.3) It gives you a chance of failure at 3 and 4 that you wouldn't have had otherwise.4) It gives you a chance of success at 24, 25, 26 that you wouldn't have had otherwise.On the other hand, in D&D you're trying to roll at or above a (generally not really small) target number. The d20+d6 has a lower chance of success if a 3 or 4 is needed, an equal chance if a 5 is needed, and a higher chance for any given target of 6 or higher. It feels like the added 2.5% chance of success over most of the range is a lot more noticeable than a small bit of swing.</blockquote>

Verification