What are your thoughts on roll-under/roll-high mechanics?

[vivsavage]

I'm interested in your opinion of roll-under/roll-high mechanics. The way they work is like this: you roll your die or dice (in the White Hack's case, for example, a d20). You want to roll equal to or under your Attribute or skill. But, within that metric, you want to roll as high as possible. So, if your Dexterity is 13, you want to roll equal to or under 13, with a 13 being the best-case scenario. It has been referred to as a Blackjack-adjacent mechanic. What I like about it is that roll-under is very easy to understand, and the roll-high aspect of it gives characters of higher skill the potential to reach levels of success that other characters can't. And there is no pesky math, for those who don't like adding modifiers. I've been playing around with it for my own game, using 2d10 instead of 1d20. One of the dice is the Alpha Die. That die determines your base damage if your attack is successful in combat...meaning that a character with higher skill can do more damage than someone with lower skill. What are your thoughts on the mechanic in general?

 

[payn]

Playing Fading Suns at the moment. Its just as the OP describes. The game, so far, has been 4 sessions with a single combat. All of us new to it. So far, its pretty interesting as its better to get as close to, if not on, the target number. I really enjoy it for exploration and social play. Im not sold on characters that do more damage in combat. I dont have an issue with some characters having a better target range than others, but variable damage has a tendency to have folks focus on it over other interesting skills and attributes. First impressions is that its a fun mechanic and ill see how it goes as the campaign rolls on.

 

[aco175]

It sounds easier for those who cannot handle 1d20 and then add 5. Might make things faster. I think people have been conditioned to roll high (at least coming from D&D) and to roll low might take some time.

 

[Staffan]

I like it for games that are... I guess you could call it "fundamentally human-sized", and which use opposed rolls a lot. For example, the Troubleshooters is a game where you play competent-but-normal people (like Tintin or Spirou), and uses the mechanic (with a d100 base), and additionally handles difficulty levels by focusing on the ones die (something being at +N pips means that a ones die of 1 to N is automatically successful regardless of the tens die; something at -N pips means a ones die of 1 to N is an automatic failure).

I don't think it works well for games that veer into the mythic/superheroic, e.g. a game where a "high-level" warrior could be expected to fight off an entire platoon of normal soldiers by themselves, or to suplex a bear. For games like that, I think open-ended die+modifiers above TN work better.

 

[Theory of Games]

I'm interested in your opinion of roll-under/roll-high mechanics. The way they work is like this: you roll your die or dice (in the White Hack's case, for example, a d20). You want to roll equal to or under your Attribute or skill. But, within that metric, you want to roll as high as possible. So, if your Dexterity is 13, you want to roll equal to or under 13, with a 13 being the best-case scenario. It has been referred to as a Blackjack-adjacent mechanic. What I like about it is that roll-under is very easy to understand, and the roll-high aspect of it gives characters of higher skill the potential to reach levels of success that other characters can't. And there is no pesky math, for those who don't like adding modifiers. I've been playing around with it for my own game, using 2d10 instead of 1d20. One of the dice is the Alpha Die. That die determines your base damage if your attack is successful in combat...meaning that a character with higher skill can do more damage than someone with lower skill. What are your thoughts on the mechanic in general?

This reminds me of why I hate rolling for initiative. say a PC has a +8 Initiative bonus and their opponent has no bonus. The player & GM roll initiative & the GM rolls better simply because the dice say so. It nullifies the fact that the PC has a much better bonus and should go first normally.

The 'Speedster' superhero should always get the drop on everyone else. The 'legendary gunslinger' PC should always outdraw his opponent. I'm not knocking dice rolls, but they should never negate a character's special abilities.

If the purpose is to BOTH roll under a stat and roll as close to the stat as possible, that's putting the great majority of task resolution on dice rolls, rather than the capabilities of the characters. This is why trad d20 is so popular: it helps characters shine, especially when they gain bigger bonuses from advancement and equipment.

 

[overgeeked]

I absolutely love them. Makes things so, so much easier at the table. I hack Blackjack opposed rolls into most roll-under systems because it makes more sense than any other method I've come across yet.

 

[vivsavage]

This reminds me of why I hate rolling for initiative. say a PC has a +8 Initiative bonus and their opponent has no bonus. The player & GM roll initiative & the GM rolls better simply because the dice say so. It nullifies the fact that the PC has a much better bonus and should go first normally.

The 'Speedster' superhero should always get the drop on everyone else. The 'legendary gunslinger' PC should always outdraw his opponent. I'm not knocking dice rolls, but they should never negate a character's special abilities.

If the purpose is to BOTH roll under a stat and roll as close to the stat as possible, that's putting the great majority of task resolution on dice rolls, rather than the capabilities of the characters. This is why trad d20 is so popular: it helps characters shine, especially when they gain bigger bonuses from advancement and equipment.

I’m not sure I entirely agree with your last point, especially in a system with a bell curve.

 

[the Jester]

I'm interested in your opinion of roll-under/roll-high mechanics. The way they work is like this: you roll your die or dice (in the White Hack's case, for example, a d20). You want to roll equal to or under your Attribute or skill. But, within that metric, you want to roll as high as possible. So, if your Dexterity is 13, you want to roll equal to or under 13, with a 13 being the best-case scenario.

I love it so much that it's an integral part of my custom version of DnD- saves are 1d20, roll under, higher is better; and checks are the same except on xd6, where x is determined by the difficulty of the check. Some saves and checks also have DCs, so you might need to roll under your Wisdom but at least a 5 to succeed.

 

[Stormonu]

Choose a direction, and be consistent with it. I've played several games where you want to roll under (usually to get as close to the target number as you can, like playing blackjack). I've played other where you want to roll as high as you can.

Old D&D uses a mix, and while I never had an issue remembering which way to go back in the day (attacks = high, ability checks = blackjack method, and it's been so long I've forgotten which direction saves go - though I'm thinking higher), A lot of people didn't like the flip-flopping and were too casual to remember.

 

[sevenbastard]

I hate roll low system. I also don't like Golf. Im always shooting for high numbers.