PDA

View Full Version : what the problem with this?



oxinabox
2009-10-27, 05:04 AM
Ok,
This is about using a role under skill system to acompish a task.
It's a difficult task you you have to do better than just role under your skill

excaple PC:
PC1: skill of 60
PC2: skill of 40

In system A:
Becuse it is a disifcult task to succeed you must roll under half your skill.
PC1: has to roll bellow 30
PC2: has to roll bellow 20

in System B:
Becuase it is a dificult task you take a -20 penalty to your skill.
PC1: has to roll bellow 40
PC2: has to roll bellow 20.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I say theres something wrong with the way it's done in system A, but i can't lay my hands on what...

Kurald Galain
2009-10-27, 05:11 AM
I say theres something wrong with the way it's done in system A, but i can't lay my hands on what...
The point is that an expert character takes a greater penalty for trying something difficult. If you take a very difficult task (e.g. divide by four) then the expert has almost the same chance of succeeding as the amateur. This feels wrong - on a very difficult task, the amateur should just fail automatically.

truemane
2009-10-27, 05:33 AM
Kurald Galain's got it exactly. In System A, the difficulty scales with Skill Level. Difficulty penalties should be static since, presumably, the situation is static.

oxinabox
2009-10-27, 06:36 AM
that's what I thought, I'm having trouble arguing this point...

For the EXTRA difficult task:

example PC:
PC1: skill of 60
PC2: skill of 40

In system A:
Because it is a difficult task to succeed you must roll under 1/4 your skill.
PC1: has to roll bellow 15
PC2: has to roll bellow 10


in System B:
Because it is a difficult task you take a -40 penalty to your skill.
PC1: has to roll bellow 20
PC2: Can't succeed
=------------------------------

On the other hand in System A PC2 is still 2/3 as good as PC1, wich it the point i keep failing to make a counter argument to...


For an incredibly Hard task. Climbing up a Glass wall...
example PC:
PC1: skill of 60
PC2: skill of 40

In system A:
Because it is a absurd task to succeed you must roll under 10/59 your skill.
PC1: has to roll 1
PC2: has to roll 1
(rounding to nearest whole number)


in System B:
Because it is a absurd task you take a -59 penalty to your skill.
PC1: has to roll 1
PC2: Can't succeed

As skills tasks get harder, skill makes almost no differnce
what about a check to Spot bacteria?...

Kurald Galain
2009-10-27, 06:55 AM
On the other hand in System A PC2 is still 2/3 as good as PC1, wich it the point i keep failing to make a counter arguement to...

An amateur is not expected to be 2/3rds as good as an expert. That doesn't really make sense. Can you jump 2/3rds the height of a skilled pole vaulter? Run 2/3rds of a marathon? Solve a difficult puzzle in 3/2nds the time it takes an expert? I thought not.

A simple task is something an amateur can usually do, and an expert can (almost) always do. Eample: climb a tree.
A regular task is something an amateur can sometimes do, and an expert can usually do. Example: hit an archery target.
A difficult task is something an amateur can rarely do, an expert can sometimes do, and a master can usually do. Example: pick a lock.
An extreme task is something an amateur can't do, an expert can rarely do, and a master can sometimes do. Example: perform surgery.

Linear math fits this model much better than division. With division, you'll quickly get to an area where being an expert offers little or no benefit over an amateur; you end up with "an extreme task is something an amateur and expert have equal chances at succeeding, and a master can rarely do."

Zeta Kai
2009-10-27, 07:41 AM
1) Your spelling is completely atrocious. Use a spell checker, please. It would make it a lot easier to understand you & take you seriously.

2) There is nothing "wrong" with using a different skill system; it's just that D&D doesn't automatically work that way. You'd have to recalibrate the system to accomodate the alternative approach, which may be problematic. Things like ability checks, modifiers, etc, could get out of hand.

3) What would be your proposed benefit of using an alternate system? I see a lot of homebrew on here that tries to fix things, & the question that doesn't always get answered properly is "Why?". Why tweak that rule? Why use your version of a class? Why change that race? That question needs to be answered to at least someone's satisfaction, otherwise your homebrew is art built on a bad premise.

oxinabox
2009-10-27, 07:53 AM
1) Your spelling is completely atrocious. Use a spell checker, please. It would make it a lot easier to understand you & take you seriously.

2) There is nothing "wrong" with using a different skill system; it's just that D&D doesn't automatically work that way. You'd have to recalibrate the system to accomodate the alternative approach, which may be problematic. Things like ability checks, modifiers, etc, could get out of hand.

3) What would be your proposed benefit of using an alternate system? I see a lot of homebrew on here that tries to fix things, & the question that doesn't always get answered properly is "Why?". Why tweak that rule? Why use your version of a class? Why change that race? That question needs to be answered to at least someone's satisfaction, otherwise your homebrew is art built on a bad premise.

1) I apologise for my spelling.

2) Since when were we talking about DnD?
I've never heard of dnd being used with a roll under system.
It would be a radical change...


3) I'm not making Homebrew... :smallconfused:
I'm talking about 2 general skill rolling systems, used in some RPSes (roleplaying systems).
I never mentioned Homebrew or dnd.


I like the DC system myself, i like the ST dice pool system alot too,
But we're not taking about those.
I dislike both system A and system B, but they are used, and i want to discuss them. A more than B

Another_Poet
2009-10-27, 09:32 AM
As others have pointed out, halving their skill is problematic while adding a penalty to their skill will work just fine mathematically.

That said, I feel that the problem with the approach is not in the numbers, but in the reasoning. You're making a simple system complicated and annoying.

The whole point of having a higher skill in a roll-under system is that you now have a better chance of accomplishing difficult tasks. The guy with Thieving 10 can almost never crack the vault while the guy with Thieving 90 can do it reliably even though it's very difficult.

If you want to add a circumstance penalty in a roll-under system, don't subtract numbers from someone's skill. That's confusing and likely to upset players. If you have to, have to do it then tell them they add a +10 (or whatever) to their d% roll as a circumstance penalty.

As comparison, this is akin to adding a -2 penalty to a d20 roll in a roll-over d20 system. You would never tell someone their skill ranks go down because the vault is extra secure or because they are distracted, you would raise the DC or add a circumstance penalty to the dice roll. The same principle applies in roll-under, and helps keep things clear.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 09:33 AM
Keep it simple. This applies to any system.

Thus, added difficulty always means a harder DC, and added skill always means a bonus to reach the DC. This should be the case regardless of what particular system you use.

kjones
2009-10-27, 09:41 AM
1) I apologise for my spelling.

Your apology means less when "apologize" is misspelled... technically it's correct but it's an archaic spelling. Take the 5 seconds to spell-check your posts, or use a browser that supports spell-checking for text boxes (most modern ones do - Firefox does for sure).

As for the skill system question, Kurald nailed it. System A does not do well at modeling a world in which experts can do things that amateurs simply cannot. You could certainly create a world in which training, talent, etc. did not give one a significant advantage... then I guess you could use that system.

2nd edition used something akin to System A (or at least, the DMs that I played with did - "roll under half your strength to pull yourself up from the ledge", etc.) but that usually worked out all right since it was just a quick and dirty way to resolve things that the rules didn't cover. (Such as practically everything :smallwink:)

sambo.
2009-10-27, 09:44 AM
2) Since when were we talking about DnD?
I've never heard of dnd being used with a roll under system.
It would be a radical change...
*cough*some aspects of 1ed ADnD required you to roll under a target number, eg: a dex check*cough*


Praise Be To Cthulhu that those days are over.

oxinabox
2009-10-27, 10:30 AM
Your apology means less when "apologize" is misspelled...




Your apology means less when "apologize" is misspelled... technically it's correct but it's an archaic spelling.

apologise is a common spelling in australia, US and UK english ain't the only ones there are, mate.

We tend as a rule not to use 'z's for much...
I actually can't bring any words to mind (though I'm sure it's a mental blank) that use 'z' anywhere other than the start.


anyway, back on topic:
The Reason I'm asking is not becasue I'm in favour of the systems (let me repeat).
I'm asking because a friend of mine use system A in a CoC game (I've never played with her) and I say that that system is wierd, because it's not linear, and means that for any difficult task the expert is only slightly better off, and for any simple task he's comparitivly massivly better off.


System B is basically Dark Heresy*, you can say add 10 to the d%, subtract 10 from your score, need to get one or more degree's of sucess, it all comes out the same.

With while is not a system I like, I say is much more balanced than a dividing your skill by a number.

My friend argues this (division) is much more accurate, and is better than any other system (incuding the d20 DC, and System B) for allowing the GM, to set the difficulty of the roll.

(ooh another advantage of DC's: you don't have to tell the person how hard something was, so you don't have to tell them if they succeeded. Same goes for most systems actully)


(roughly, i only played one and found the roll-under system annoying, I'ld rather not play sci-fi anyway.)

Altair_the_Vexed
2009-10-27, 11:00 AM
Your apology means less when "apologize" is misspelled... technically it's correct but it's an archaic spelling.
British Person: "Other English standards are available, and are by no means archaic, you colonial upstart! We don't use zeds that often. Means we score higher in Scrabble, too."
:smallwink:

Return to topic!
CoC and other systems that use the "roll under 0.5 x skill" rule to represent difficult tasks are failing in exactly the way Kurald Galain mentioned.
I'd strongly recommend that players of such systems adopt my old mate's house rule of penalising the skill in increments of 10 or 20 (with near to impossible tasks having a -60 to the skill).

Caveat: I do remember someone suggesting that there was an interpretation issue with the ruling in CoC - that the 50% penalty diodn't mean "half the skill" it meant a "50 point" penalty.
Don't know if that works with the text of the rule books, I don't have a copy.

Tyndmyr
2009-10-27, 11:05 AM
apologise is a common spelling in australia, US and UK english ain't the only ones there are, mate.

We tend as a rule not to use 'z's for much...
I actually can't bring any words to mind (though I'm sure it's a mental blank) that use 'z' anywhere other than the start.

Pazuzu. Alternatively, kazoo. =)

Roll under systems tend to be awkward for complex systems, IMO. They're fine for things like tabletop games where modifiers are rare, but they get kludgy in roleplaying games. Stick with "beat the DC" or "roll and keep".

Adjust the availability of skill points/die or the target DCs to match the desired difficulty of the system.

Tiki Snakes
2009-10-27, 11:37 AM
As I understand it, Dark Heresy (and friends) uses both, to some degree.

If you are untrained in something, ie, getting by on purely your base agility or so on, you halve the relative stat and roll under.

Ie, with an Agility of 40, you'd have a target of 20 or under. BUT they also have flat percentile modifiers to difficulty, that would ALSO apply. So if you were attempting to, for an example, walk a tightrope with no training (or some equally random task. You get the point), you'd halve your Agility, and then possibly take an additional -10 or more to the resulting stat.

So if you were completely untrained and of middling/normal agility, you'd not have a chance in hell. If you had super-human agility, or some agility increasing equipment or something, you'd maaaybe be able to fluke it. but if you are trained, you'd be at a vast advantage, starting with the same score you'd still have a 1 in 5 or so chance of making it. Maybe more.

It's not perfect, but it's an interesting one.