What's all this re-roll stuff?

[hong]

Squalie I know where you're coming from, the Storyteller system creating a lasting hatred of re-rolls in me. There's nothing that slows play down more than a re-roll, especially in the WW system where you might get multiple re-rolls on a single character's actions. If you intend to switch to 4e it shouldn't be that hard to look at the math and turn the re-rolls into static modifiers.

It is impossible to turn a reroll into a static modifier and keep the probabilities the same.

This is especially important in 3E in the presence of instakills. Without rerolls, the best you can do is if you fail only on a 1, in which case you have a 1/20 = 5% chance of failing any save. If you can reroll a failed save, this chance goes down to 1/400 = 0.25%. By contrast, any static modifier, no matter how big, cannot reduce your chance of failing below 5%.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It is impossible to turn a reroll into a static modifier and keep the probabilities the same.

This is especially important in 3E in the presence of instakills. Without rerolls, the best you can do is if you fail only on a 1, in which case you have a 1/20 = 5% chance of failing any save. If you can reroll a failed save, this chance goes down to 1/400 = 0.25%. By contrast, any static modifier, no matter how big, cannot reduce your chance of failing below 5%.

Trust hong, he is a statistician.


Action Points or Rerolls are mostly "narrative control" handed to the player. It's saying "Okay, the rules tell me something nasty happens. But I don't want that to happen. I am willing to pay for it not to happen. What can I do?" "Spend an action point/reroll. But take care, your action points/rerolls are limited, nasty things might still happen and you can't avoid them any longer."

Though theoretically, Rerolls can also be something else. They could be an alternate way to express your "skill" in a certain ability.
You could divide skill into something like "training" and "experience". Training grants you a modifier to a check, while experience allows you to reroll bad rolls. (Or vice versa. It's an abstract concept, and how you map the terms is up to you). Look at Jump, for example:
The modifier of your Jump skill would determine how far you can jump in theory. Your reroll ability might say how likely it is for you to actually jump that far. But it doesn't change your distance.

4E isn't really going so far as to define these two. Still, it might make sense seeing reroll abilities as representing experience (or just plain luck).

 

[Jhulae]

I'll take a different take from Fallen Seraph. Game play elements like action points do not exist in the game world. Instead, they are a device that a player uses to assert their narrative authority over the game world as a reflection of their character's heroic luck and general metalness. When a player whose character has the First Reaction feat uses an action point to not be surprised despite failing his Perception check, the character is not surprised. It's not that the character was surprised and drew on some inner reserve to alter reality. Reroll mechanics work in the same way.

Exactly.

It's not anything the character is doing to 'alter reality', but it's the player who's changing the story before it's 'happened'.

And, just because you use a reroll, it doesn't necessarily mean your character is going to get away in better shape. If I read the rule right, the second roll is the one that counts, so you could end up turning a normal hit into a crit.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

So far I'm taking action points and rerolls on a per explanation basis.

Action points make sense to me as ripostes, feints, or just any ole multi-part slightly more complex maneuver or spell than you could pull off regularly.

Rerolls, well...

So far, the Halfling reroll makes perfect sense to me thematically.

The elf reroll? Only if I literally think about as Legolas throwing down a second shot in as fast a time as his animator can draw.

 

[Li Shenron]

It is impossible to turn a reroll into a static modifier and keep the probabilities the same.

This is especially important in 3E in the presence of instakills. Without rerolls, the best you can do is if you fail only on a 1, in which case you have a 1/20 = 5% chance of failing any save. If you can reroll a failed save, this chance goes down to 1/400 = 0.25%. By contrast, any static modifier, no matter how big, cannot reduce your chance of failing below 5%.

Looks like the problem is in the insta-kill tho.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I join you in your dislike for AP.

Since this is the 4e forum, and in 4e Action Points are not used for re-rolls but for additional actions...

Could you clarify whether it is AP you dislike or re-rolls (as given by some feats and class abilities in 4e)?

Cheers

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

It is impossible to turn a reroll into a static modifier and keep the probabilities the same. By contrast, any static modifier, no matter how big, cannot reduce your chance of failing below 5%.

Should have explained better, it can't recreate the same probability of failure as a re-roll. It can give a boost to the chance of success and looking at the math surrounding the re-roll itself (DC, modifiers, etc) should allow you to tailor how much of an alteration is being made fairly easily.

Action Points or Rerolls are mostly "narrative control" handed to the player. It's saying "Okay, the rules tell me something nasty happens. But I don't want that to happen. I am willing to pay for it not to happen. What can I do?" "Spend an action point/reroll. But take care, your action points/rerolls are limited, nasty things might still happen and you can't avoid them any longer."

I understand this, my problem is that in my experience re-rolls are a clunky mechanism that slows down play more than any other single factor. As such I don't much like them or systems where they're a central mechanism of the unifying mechanic.

 

[Pinotage]

re-rolls are granted by the halfling racial feature: "Second Chance: When an attack hits you, force the enemy to roll again. The enemy uses the second roll, even if it is lower" Immediate Interrupt per encounter

This is one of the big reason why I'm thinking of not switching, because it absolutely kills Play-by-post type gaming. For a DM to adjudicate this is an absolute pain, and for players to write conditional responses for when they will or won't use half a dozen immeidate Interrupts is stupid. No Play-by-post, no 4e. #

Pinotage

 

[Fifth Element]

I understand the concern with rerolls. If you're not careful a DM can describe a hit on the halfling, who then calls out "Second Chance!", forcing a reroll and a revision of what the DM just described.

I think I'm going to house rule that you need to announce the possibility of using a reroll mechanic before the roll is actually made. You don't have to use it, but it gives the DM (me) a reminder that the first roll result may not reflect what happens in the game world. It can avoid awkward "it's a crit"..."Second Chance!"..."oh, (roll) I mean he misses you completely" situations.

 

[Li Shenron]

Since this is the 4e forum, and in 4e Action Points are not used for re-rolls but for additional actions...

Could you clarify whether it is AP you dislike or re-rolls (as given by some feats and class abilities in 4e)?

Cheers

I think my previous post more details, but to summarize:

- I generally dislike things that give me some trouble explaining in-game

- I dislike rerolls, unless they happen quite rarely

So as long as AP have an in-game explanation which I like, and they cannot be used to reroll (or at least they are limited in that), I'm fine with AP. This is why I definitely like the Void Points in Rokugan, and why even if I don't play SW, I would have no problems with Force points. But in a classic D&D game they irk me, because the "heroes' luck" explanation just doesn't cut it for me.

I don't know exactly what AP allow in 4e, I was just making general observations.