Well, and other things too but let's stick with Iridium for now.

So, over in the Iridium V2 thread we have a pretty viable Alpha using Iridium Lite as a template. So, now I want to see if we can take Iridium Standard forward.

Purpose:
1. To evaluate Iridium Standard as an candidate for V2.
2. To evaluate percentile base for V2.
3. To preserve more of the feel and goals of Iridium Standard in V2.

Points to improve:
1. Convert to one dice mechanic. So, I am looking at going to all percentiles rather than all d20s since it gives the granularity I am looking for and is an easier conversion.

2. Standardize combat and skills to one mechanic (roll over or roll under). They are currently split.

3. Evaluate the role of classes and levels int he system. I currently see thwem as highly disposable but they serve the purpose of a metric for advancement. Since we have the EXP spend mechanism in there, I am not sure they are needed but the question is, do they add something?

4. Revisit Armor and how it works. Currently, it is all or nothing, ablative armor. So, you have 30 points in your chain armor and it goes down until it is 0. Then it protects for nothing. Should we have a armor piercing mechanism? Should armor be converted to DR? A monumental task at best requiring all armor values to change and weapon damages to reflect it.

5. Separate weapon damage types. We have visited this before but had it be bog ass slow in execution. It slows combat to a crawl and jacks up book keeping very high. I am currently opposed to this but I am open to some trickery I do not see; ie. highly abstracted concepts like having Piercing type weapons do no damage to armor but have a better chance of piercing armor.

That is the summary. Let's kick it off with what I consider core, the skills and combat roll over/under issue.

Currently, we have skills advancing like so.
Rank 1 40% (chance of success)
Rank 2 60% (chance of success)
Rank 3 70% (chance of success)
Rank 4 75% (chance of success)
Rank 5 80% (chance of success)
Rank 6 82% (chance of success)
Rank 7 84% (chance of success)
.
.
Rank 10 90% (chance of success)
Rank 11 91% (chance of success)
etc.

Skill checks are simply roll % and add or subtract mods from GM or stats.

Combat uses STR+CON+AGL/3 for a Defense. This becomes the target that any attacker must roll at or above on a d20 with mods from GM, Stats, Magic or Weapons proficiency.

So, I am thinking it would be easier to try and port the combat to %. This would basically be just multiplying everything by 5...but we want a unified mechanic as well. So...

If we go with roll under...

Defense becomes a negative modifying to the attacker's roll. The Attacker rolls his ranks of Weapons Use + any Specialization mods. So, If you have a Defense of 75% (15) the attacker has 4 ranks of Weapon Use (Sword) 75% plus 15% in + to hit from his specialization in short sword, he needs to roll a 15 or less on %.

Note: this method means you could have negative target numbers. Iridium is open ended so you would need roll a 5% or less followed by a number on the % equal to or greater than the target Defense. In the above example if the Defense had been 100 then the target would have been -10 meaning a roll of 05 followed by 10.

Ouch that seems needlessly complex.

So, roll over...

We could convert to roll over on the skills easily by basically reversing the skill ranks. 1 rank gets you 60% you need to roll over, 2 ranks gets you 40% and so on.

Defense stays the Target you need to roll over and combat mostly stays the same.

I feel like I am missing something....

Thoughts?

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltWell, and other things too but let's stick with Iridium for now.

So, over in the Iridium V2 thread we have a pretty viable Alpha using Iridium Lite as a template. So, now I want to see if we can take Iridium Standard forward.

Purpose:
1. To evaluate Iridium Standard as an candidate for V2.
2. To evaluate percentile base for V2.
3. To preserve more of the feel and goals of Iridium Standard in V2.

Points to improve:
1. Convert to one dice mechanic. So, I am looking at going to all percentiles rather than all d20s since it gives the granularity I am looking for and is an easier conversion.

2. Standardize combat and skills to one mechanic (roll over or roll under). They are currently split.

3. Evaluate the role of classes and levels int he system. I currently see thwem as highly disposable but they serve the purpose of a metric for advancement. Since we have the EXP spend mechanism in there, I am not sure they are needed but the question is, do they add something?

4. Revisit Armor and how it works. Currently, it is all or nothing, ablative armor. So, you have 30 points in your chain armor and it goes down until it is 0. Then it protects for nothing. Should we have a armor piercing mechanism? Should armor be converted to DR? A monumental task at best requiring all armor values to change and weapon damages to reflect it.

5. Separate weapon damage types. We have visited this before but had it be bog ass slow in execution. It slows combat to a crawl and jacks up book keeping very high. I am currently opposed to this but I am open to some trickery I do not see; ie. highly abstracted concepts like having Piercing type weapons do no damage to armor but have a better chance of piercing armor.

That is the summary. Let's kick it off with what I consider core, the skills and combat roll over/under issue.

Currently, we have skills advancing like so.
Rank 1 40% (chance of success)
Rank 2 60% (chance of success)
Rank 3 70% (chance of success)
Rank 4 75% (chance of success)
Rank 5 80% (chance of success)
Rank 6 82% (chance of success)
Rank 7 84% (chance of success)
.
.
Rank 10 90% (chance of success)
Rank 11 91% (chance of success)
etc.

Skill checks are simply roll % and add or subtract mods from GM or stats.

Combat uses STR+CON+AGL/3 for a Defense. This becomes the target that any attacker must roll at or above on a d20 with mods from GM, Stats, Magic or Weapons proficiency.

So, I am thinking it would be easier to try and port the combat to %. This would basically be just multiplying everything by 5...but we want a unified mechanic as well. So...

If we go with roll under...

Defense becomes a negative modifying to the attacker's roll. The Attacker rolls his ranks of Weapons Use + any Specialization mods. So, If you have a Defense of 75% (15) the attacker has 4 ranks of Weapon Use (Sword) 75% plus 15% in + to hit from his specialization in short sword, he needs to roll a 15 or less on %.

Note: this method means you could have negative target numbers. Iridium is open ended so you would need roll a 5% or less followed by a number on the % equal to or greater than the target Defense. In the above example if the Defense had been 100 then the target would have been -10 meaning a roll of 05 followed by 10.

Ouch that seems needlessly complex.

So, roll over...

We could convert to roll over on the skills easily by basically reversing the skill ranks. 1 rank gets you 60% you need to roll over, 2 ranks gets you 40% and so on.

Defense stays the Target you need to roll over and combat mostly stays the same.

I feel like I am missing something....

Thoughts?

Bill

Bill - do you want fast combat or slow? Looks to me like what you have here is that the defense is set so high that hitting the target is very difficult, over which is layered the protection of armor. This means that there's a high whiff factor - i.e. most combat is an exchange of many blows, most of which miss, with gradual erosion of the armor, and a sudden penetration when armor is ablated.

I think your defense is set too high. Try going at it the other way. The sweet spot I have found is for starting skill characters to hit half the time. Figure your chance of hitting a non-dodging object is 100%. Then normal dodging defense shouldn't be more than about 50% for equivalent characters. Work it backwards from there.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceBill - do you want fast combat or slow? Looks to me like what you have here is that the defense is set so high that hitting the target is very difficult, over which is layered the protection of armor. This means that there's a high whiff factor - i.e. most combat is an exchange of many blows, most of which miss, with gradual erosion of the armor, and a sudden penetration when armor is ablated.

I think your defense is set too high. Try going at it the other way. The sweet spot I have found is for starting skill characters to hit half the time. Figure your chance of hitting a non-dodging object is 100%. Then normal dodging defense shouldn't be more than about 50% for equivalent characters. Work it backwards from there.

-clash

See, I think I see a point I need to clarify.

Defense is currently based on stats so it can range from 1 to 20. However, in practice, people place their big scores in the defense stats (STR, AGL, and CON). So, although it is possible to have a 1 defense, most have a 15 or greater.

Originally, since Defense was very difficult to change over the run of a Character, I made it easy to get a high one and keep it.

So, let's rethink along your lines. Using the Roll over since it comes easiest to me.

Say, we have a skill : Dodge. Let's mix stats and use the formula (STR+AGL+CON+Dodge Skill)/4. So,
(75+75+75+40)/4=66.

hmm, a bit high yet. Maybe weight the skill more? ((STR+CON+AGL)/3 + Dodge)/2?....Ahhh! Algebra flashback!!!
O.k. this yields 58.

Mrr, I need coffee cause that seems painful.

Basically, I want stats plus a skill, I think that would work best but it just is not coming.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltSee, I think I see a point I need to clarify.

Defense is currently based on stats so it can range from 1 to 20. However, in practice, people place their big scores in the defense stats (STR, AGL, and CON). So, although it is possible to have a 1 defense, most have a 15 or greater.

Originally, since Defense was very difficult to change over the run of a Character, I made it easy to get a high one and keep it.

So, let's rethink along your lines. Using the Roll over since it comes easiest to me.

Say, we have a skill : Dodge. Let's mix stats and use the formula (STR+AGL+CON+Dodge Skill)/4. So,
(75+75+75+40)/4=66.

hmm, a bit high yet. Maybe weight the skill more? ((STR+CON+AGL)/3 + Dodge)/2?....Ahhh! Algebra flashback!!!
O.k. this yields 58.

Mrr, I need coffee cause that seems painful.

Basically, I want stats plus a skill, I think that would work best but it just is not coming.

Bill

How about dropping STR from the calculation? (AGL+CON+DODGE)/4 = (75+75+40)/4 = 190/4 = 47.5

I'm sure they'll be pumping STR for other reasons anyway.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceI think your defense is set too high. Try going at it the other way. The sweet spot I have found is for starting skill characters to hit half the time. Figure your chance of hitting a non-dodging object is 100%. Then normal dodging defense shouldn't be more than about 50% for equivalent characters. Work it backwards from there.

Ironically, this is somewhat like d20 AC. There's a side bar in one of the books (I forget at the moment, think it's the DMG) that talks about the fact that AC, which is 10 plus a bunch of modifiers, is really based on the Take 10 rule.  In essence, the defender doesn't roll defense, but "takes a 10 roll" - which is, as clash points out, the 50% mark for a d20*.




* Yeah, I know, in reality, since you can get a 10 and still succeed, it's the 55% success mark...sue me...

Quote from: flyingmiceHow about dropping STR from the calculation? (AGL+CON+DODGE)/4 = (75+75+40)/4 = 190/4 = 47.5

I'm sure they'll be pumping STR for other reasons anyway.

-clash

And really, how does STR stop you from getting hit? That's not a snarky question - I'm serious...

Will there be other skills that could be added in? As we discussed over on d20 Haven, what about Parry? I mean, in essence, that's stopping you from getting hit, no?

Quote from: James J SkachAnd really, how does STR stop you from getting hit? That's not a snarky question - I'm serious...

Will there be other skills that could be added in? As we discussed over on d20 Haven, what about Parry? I mean, in essence, that's stopping you from getting hit, no?

I have had people argue CON more often. In fact, guys who play elves in Tales of Gaea used to make the argument for AGL only defense. Oi!  

That said, yeah, it would be easier to pull STR out. Hmm, I just do not know about Dodge though. Skills can be bought pretty cheap during char creation and you would end up with people have 80 in Dodge. So, let's try that.

(75 +75+80)/4 = 58. Hrm...not much improvement. If we keep levels, you end up with 10th level fighter having a +30 making Dodge 110.
(75+75 +110)/4 = 65.

Let's try averages with the above.
(75+75 +40)/3 = 63
(75 +75+80)/3 = 76
(75+75 +110)/3 = 87

hmm, sweet. I suppose you guys don't like it? It has always been my experience that those higher numbers aren't that hard to hit.

Let's look at the extreme.
(100+100+110)/3 = 103

Not impossible but pretty tough.

Worthy of some thought. It would make defense yet another thing to improve and it is skill based which I like.

Thanks,
Bill

Oops, sorry James, missed your question. STR represents the character's ability to have the STR to move out of the way. AGL is the coordination to do so. CON is the endurance to keep doing it. In a perfect world you would have CON going down as combat wore on. I originally had a fatigue mechanism that dropped Defense 1 point for every three round of combat. Eventually, you would be too tired to defend yourself. It was a bit of a pain.

So, let's stick with Defense as (CON+AGL+Dodge)/3 for now given the ranges.

If we have roll under skills as we do now, how do we get combat in line?

Some ideas.

If we use a standard Weapon Use skill check as a base. Man, I want to but I am having the hardest time making that work...

Well, how about we try and explain it in the context of the skills. So,
1. Roll %.
2. Roll under Weapon Use skill.
3. Defender rolls under Defense.
4. Compare the amount each roll is made by.
Man, that sucks.

O.k. What elements are we looking at.
Defense: between 60-105
Weapon Use Skill : 40-80 initially.
Mods from Dex : up to 20 but can be adjusted.
Mods from Weapon Proficiency : +5 to 25 usually but could go higher.

Mechanic: We have a roll under option and a roll over option. Let's look at both.

Roll over: We could have a base of 50 + Defense giving a range of something like 110-155. Roll % add Weapon Skill and Pluses. The low end, you need a 70 to hit, high end, a 10 or less.

Roll under: We need a target. Weapon Use makes sense. hmm, Can we use Defense some how. Make a roll under from defense.Well, we could flip it. Not very intuitive.

I have tried this before an I usually get complaint about combat where lower numbers are "wrong" or "bad".

Hmm, maybe I will go talk it over with Linda. She will just raise an eyebrow and give me a dirty look saying "Why are we changing it again?".

Thanks,
Bill

Another roll under solution.

1. Roll Weapon Use.
2. Defender rolls Defense. If he makes it then you miss.

Meh, thought I would mention it but not very sexy.

Bill

Edit: Slightly more sexy would be subtracting the amount the attacker made his Weapon Use by from the defender's Defense. Oh, I could catch it for that...evil math.

An idea from Iridium Lite V2 we could use is the Skill + Roll >= Difficulty. So, and I mention this up stream, we could have Difficulty start at 50, go up by 25 (with option for smaller increments) so a Simple Difficulty would be 50, Normal would be 75, Difficult would be 100 and so on.

For combat, this would mean:

Difficulty to hit would be Defense + 50. So, with above examples, a 75 Defense would yield a 125 Difficulty.

Weapon Use + from Stat + from specialization would be something like
40 + 20 =60 requiring a roll of 65 at the lower end.
80 +20 + 20 = 120 or a roll of 05.

We could adjust it up with making the base for combat 75.

I still like the idea of Dodge factoring in but I might just decide on an average.

I think we might be on to something here...

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltAn idea from Iridium Lite V2 we could use is the Skill + Roll >= Difficulty. So, and I mention this up stream, we could have Difficulty start at 50, go up by 25 (with option for smaller increments) so a Simple Difficulty would be 50, Normal would be 75, Difficult would be 100 and so on.

For combat, this would mean:

Difficulty to hit would be Defense + 50. So, with above examples, a 75 Defense would yield a 125 Difficulty.

Weapon Use + from Stat + from specialization would be something like
40 + 20 =60 requiring a roll of 65 at the lower end.
80 +20 + 20 = 120 or a roll of 05.

We could adjust it up with making the base for combat 75.

I still like the idea of Dodge factoring in but I might just decide on an average.

I think we might be on to something here...

Thanks,
Bill

My concerns with this method.

1. Percentiles. When we used to have % in Iridium the most common issue in AP was "Wah!!! I rolled a 53 and need to add 25 in mods!!! AAAAHHHHH I SUMMON THE GOD CALCULATOR!" This could be worse since potentially you might need to add three numbers or more. We could mitigate that by having a pre-calculated combat total than all you do is add your roll but... So, thoughts?

2. It is a significant departure from the original skills and combat methods. Is that bad? I am not sure. All the elements are still there. Stats influence skills, Defense and attacks. We even extend skill to cover ability. Still, this one is hard for any of you to say but opinions are always welcome.

3. Linda has voiced the concern that back in the day, we made the specific design decision to go with Stats as Defense because we did not like the way levels would advance and make you harder to hit. However, I like the idea of it being tied to a skill since that is one of the tenets of Iridium, what you do is important and skills and training a how you do what you do (even that voodoo that you do). Sol, I still think Dodge is good.

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltMy concerns with this method.

1. Percentiles. When we used to have % in Iridium the most common issue in AP was "Wah!!! I rolled a 53 and need to add 25 in mods!!! AAAAHHHHH I SUMMON THE GOD CALCULATOR!" This could be worse since potentially you might need to add three numbers or more. We could mitigate that by having a pre-calculated combat total than all you do is add your roll but... So, thoughts?

2. It is a significant departure from the original skills and combat methods. Is that bad? I am not sure. All the elements are still there. Stats influence skills, Defense and attacks. We even extend skill to cover ability. Still, this one is hard for any of you to say but opinions are always welcome.

3. Linda has voiced the concern that back in the day, we made the specific design decision to go with Stats as Defense because we did not like the way levels would advance and make you harder to hit. However, I like the idea of it being tied to a skill since that is one of the tenets of Iridium, what you do is important and skills and training a how you do what you do (even that voodoo that you do). Sol, I still think Dodge is good.

Thanks,
Bill

Then bring the stat numbers down. Divide them by five before you add them. Then Skills influence combat more than Stats, but stats still matter. Plus it's easier to add.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceThen bring the stat numbers down. Divide them by five before you add them. Then Skills influence combat more than Stats, but stats still matter. Plus it's easier to add.

-clash

You're messing with me right? We are returning to the same path I was on some 20 years ago with ending up with stats going from 1-20...

Then again, I seem to have goine into responding to myself....and Clash...so, I am Clash?  I need more coffee...

Bill

I have friends who vastly prefer small numbers for adding during gaming (so they don't have to drop out of "Game" mode to "math" mode--their words not mine.)

To me its all the same thing as long as its simple mathematics (and not algebra )

Quote from: SilverlionI have friends who vastly prefer small numbers for adding during gaming (so they don't have to drop out of "Game" mode to "math" mode--their words not mine.)

To me its all the same thing as long as its simple mathematics (and not algebra )

Definitely. I also want to be clear, I am doing this as a method of evaluating the V2IS vs V2IL which seems really to be coming down to % vs d20. D20 is easier to add. So, some questions:

1. Do you think it is just too close to the d20 system? I mean, there is derivative then their is OMG!

2. Anyone have experience with roll under combat systems? Man, I am finding I have none. They must exist but I am getting old and don't remember.

3. If we go with a roll over for % combat (how it works now sort of), any ideas on how to do a roll over skill system? Just throwing it open for discussion. I could see a simple reverse of the current roll under progression (60, 40, 30, 25, ... instead of 40, 60, 70, 75...) but I was not sur eif that would work well and it still means combat is this separate roll off by itself, not very unified but close.

Thanks,
Bill