Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 6869366" data-attributes="member: 1465">I completely agree with your premise. Swinginess doesn't matter for attack rolls because most of them aren't individually crucial for success/failure on the whole combat, and instead it's rather the combination of many attack rolls that determine if you win or lose. But it does matter for skills because a lot more often one check determines a significant outcome rather than attrition.As a matter of fact, I like swinginess and randomness, but what I don't like is that because of swinginess, the 'expert' at a task is too often surclassed by someone else.I haven't house ruled skill checks yet, but if I do, I'd use d8 + d12: less dramatic change in probability distribution than 3d6, you can still get a result up to 20, and more uses for the neglected d8 and d12 dice <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Not good, I think this means the more training you have, the higher your chances of success if the DC is lower than you average, but at the same time the lower your chances of success if the DC is higher than your average. So for example if you need a result of 18+, an untrained has 15% chance of success, a trained has 6% chance, an expert has 1/216 = less than 0.5% chance!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 6869366, member: 1465"] I completely agree with your premise. Swinginess doesn't matter for attack rolls because most of them aren't individually crucial for success/failure on the whole combat, and instead it's rather the combination of many attack rolls that determine if you win or lose. But it does matter for skills because a lot more often one check determines a significant outcome rather than attrition. As a matter of fact, I like swinginess and randomness, but what I don't like is that because of swinginess, the 'expert' at a task is too often surclassed by someone else. I haven't house ruled skill checks yet, but if I do, I'd use [B]d8 + d12[/B]: less dramatic change in probability distribution than 3d6, you can still get a result up to 20, and more uses for the neglected d8 and d12 dice :) Not good, I think this means the more training you have, the higher your chances of success if the DC is lower than you average, but at the same time the [I]lower[/I] your chances of success if the DC is higher than your average. So for example if you need a result of 18+, an untrained has 15% chance of success, a trained has 6% chance, an expert has 1/216 = less than 0.5% chance! [/QUOTE]

Verification