While researching systems pertaining to the Starcraft thread I was reminded of a refrain I've heard a few times over the years - that "roll a d100 under an attribute or % DC" is a widely disliked mechanic. I've never quite understood this sentiment.

Have you noticed this attitude in your circles? What's the reasoning?

Usually it comes from the same people who claim that AD&D or Warhammer is broken, because people had to/used to houserule them to "fill the gaps in the shitty old mechanic", and why should anyone play a different version of the game that what author intended, so I pay such opinions little heed.

I've had the misfortune to play WFRP2e (great people and premise, tedious setting and shit system), anything involving percentile dice deserves disdain.

I like roll under mechanics.

Works fine for me in the Chtulhu's.

Not enough games use the Unknown Armies "only roll if your character is under stress" and "this is what each %age band means in real-life terms, you don't need 100% to be an expert" advice, though. The percentages look low, but they're the percentages for doing things under pressure, not for just doing things.

Hell no. About the only systems I play are d100-roll-under. (Though, they're roll-under a skill %, not usually roll-under an attribute % - except in the case of Star Frontiers).

None of the gamers "in my circles" have ever had a problem with playing a percentile system, and many have found it quite intuitive. I can't recall anyone ever complaining about the mechanic.

There is unreasonable prejudice against it, just as there is against any resolution mechanic. In the end, it's all about personal taste.

-clash

some of my players like roll under % as their favorite, and very intuitive

Quote from: Ladybird;731173Works fine for me in the Chtulhu's.

Not enough games use the Unknown Armies "only roll if your character is under stress" and "this is what each %age band means in real-life terms, you don't need 100% to be an expert" advice, though. The percentages look low, but they're the percentages for doing things under pressure, not for just doing things.

Unknown Armies is a fucking masterpiece. Aside from it's own many merits it's got lots of sub-systems and ideas ripe for plucking to use with other percentile systems.

Quote from: Kiero;731169I've had the misfortune to play WFRP2e (great people and premise, tedious setting and shit system), anything involving percentile dice deserves disdain.

Weird, i think you deserve disdain.

I feel like a character sheet with skill percentages tells me a lot more than one with lists of + to hit, or + to save etc... Totally agree also with the idea from UA that these are the chances "under pressure", so a guy with a 60% skill might well be making a living off it.

One really nice thing that RuneQuest 6 does, which, to my mind, FINALLY ties in attributes in a 3-18 range to skills is that most skill starting percentages are based off the sum of two attributes. So for example a character who starts off pretty strong and nimble (STR 16, DEX 16) has a minimum chance, with no training, to succeed in unarmed combat, as the Unarmed skill will be STR+DEX %, so for that guy 32%. It means that naturally skilled but totally untrained characters can have up to 36% off the bat in Common Skills (as opposed to Professional Skills which can't be attempted without training). It feels like a really intuitive way to meld the characteristic ranges we just can't seem to get away from with a percentile system.

No, I haven't noticed any disdain in my circles.  We played both AD&D and RuneQuest extensively back in the heyday of our gaming circle, and there was disdain for it.

I don't believe it's a universal disdain. As someone who plays games like Rogue Trader and generally enjoys themselves, I have a number of issues that would make me avoid them, personally, if designing a system from the ground up:

1) Pass/Fail - With no gradient in between, pass/fail mechanics tend to produce fairly boring results. Of course a "good GM" can make it more interesting, but I believe "good GM" gets thrown around in the same manner as "true scotsman".

2) Variable Target Numbers - In some systems, you end up with situations where a professional has a 50% chance of doing his 40+ hour a week trade correctly. It could be said that he's under pressure, but pressure could be part of his daily routine! A fireman doesn't have a 50% chance of missing a fire with a torrent of water just because fire is scary.

And thus, the variable target numbers are brought in. These are typically situational modifiers based on the difficulty, or contextual buffs, that add or take away up to 30%.

Where I take issue is that there's no internal logic as to where these apply, behind the GM screen, at least in the 40k RPGs. You're told to apply them with "common sense". This common sense tends to end up with big penalties on skills you know your players can cheese out and pump up to 95%, and bonuses on checks that will stall the railroad ride if failed. And the published adventures don't really teach you better practices.

3) Put Down The Dice - The obvious solution to #1 and #2 is only roll if the stakes are interesting, right? Well sure, if it works for your group. Often however, the percentile roll-under games are used at simulationist tables. There, if you're not using the rules you pay for (paid quite a bit in the case of Fantasy Flight Games's product lines), that's a lot of wasted money just to play cops & robbers.

EDIT: The preceding was pure opinion. As far as a Starcraft RPG would go, I would probably actually recommend hacking Deathwatch as the first step, regardless of my feelings.

Quote from: Kiero;731169I've had the misfortune to play WFRP2e (great people and premise, tedious setting and shit system), anything involving percentile dice deserves disdain.

Well that settles it, if Kiero hates it it must be good design.

Next thread?

I actually like percentile systems. Never understood why people have problems with them.