Some people REALLY like their d20s?

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;731165While 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?

Not to me. I am fond of the percent roll under mechanic.

Quote from: markfitz;731180One 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.

Harnmaster, which is so similar to BRP that I think it must have its roots as a variant, has used something similar since its first edition. Skill bases for various skill categories are the average of 3 characteristics, often 1 counted 2x, one counted 1x, and then skills start at some multiplier of the SB.

I don't understand the fuss over needing to roll only for stressful situations. It makes perfect sense of course but the worry over it seems to come from a misperception that d% rolls are never modified. This is a detail that has nothing to do with the dice. Various percentile systems use either add/subtract modifiers or multiply/divide.

Benefits of d% roll-under:

Give a transparent view of your chances, where other approaches range from a little math all the way to nigh-incalculable (ORE)

Evenly granular detail. D20-based methods are have a moderately large "grain". Nd6 additive and dice-pool with counting successes vary from enormous "grain" to very fine depending on the portion of the curve you are comparing.

Lend themselves easily to an "experience check" system of advancement, where you improve a skill by rolling against it (sometimes with a modifier) and if you roll OVER, you improve.

For those who like pure roll-over systems, Frank Trollman presented a method of converting to roll-over on these boards, and argued some of the benefits. I guess the chief one was that you could use a DC-like approach to defining the difficulty of various actions. I'm not sure his method would translate some of the details/refinements found in some d% systems such as success levels, since I haven't looked at it too closely.

IIRC the old Ysgarth (2e? 3e?) used d% roll-high for some actions and so did the old High Fantasy (Dillow).

Quote from: hagbard;731185I actually like percentile systems. Never understood why people have problems with them.

This is the Internet.  You could be giving away free money and some people would bitch.

Roll % under is a great mechanic, especially for new players.  Simply saying "You are competent under normal circumstances, and this is your percentage chance of succeeding under stress, just like an ordinary driver can drive to the grocery store on a nice day with no problem" makes "Starship Piloting: 57%" instantly comprehensible.

Quote from: Shipyard Locked;731165I've never quite understood this sentiment.

It's pretentious jackholery, nothing more.

Quote from: Piestrio;731183Well that settles it, if Kiero hates it it must be good design.

Next thread?

That's pretty much my yardstick. :rotfl:

Quote from: Piestrio;731183Well that settles it, if Kiero hates it it must be good design.

It's amazing how often that works as a metric.

Quote from: markfitz;731180One 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.

This was present in MRQ2 - and, I think in MRQ1 - RQ6's predecessors. Same designers, of course, between MRQ2 and RQ6. My point is just that this technique existed for a few years before RQ6 was published.

It's an approach that I wish would be incorporated into CoC.

Quote from: Piestrio;731183Well that settles it, if Kiero hates it it must be good design.

Next thread?

:hatsoff:

Yeah it really seems like you can eye-ball the character sheet and get a really good idea of just how good your guy is. When it's dice-pool, or d20+mods or whatever, there's no real absolute.

+1 also to the "skill-check system" comment, where a roll-over gives you an advance. It all seems very intuitive.

Other systems have many charms (picking up a whole handful of dice can be nice, and racking up bonuses to your d20 roll too), but they never have the sheer transparency of d% roll-under.

Quote from: Piestrio;731183Well that settles it, if Kiero hates it it must be good design.

Next thread?

Quote from: One Horse Town;731193That's pretty much my yardstick. :rotfl:

Quote from: Black Vulmea;731194It's amazing how often that works as a metric.

so I'm not the only one who thought that

Quote from: K Peterson;731195This was present in MRQ2 - and, I think in MRQ1 - RQ6's predecessors. Same designers, of course, between MRQ2 and RQ6. My point is just that this technique existed for a few years before RQ6 was published.

It's an approach that I wish would be incorporated into CoC.

Yeah, of course you're dead right. I sort of see MRQ2 as the dress-rehearsal for RQ6 at this point ...

I don't see any reason not to just throw it into CoC as well. It wouldn't break anything, and it would tie a character's primary stats into their skills pleasingly.

I played some Trail of Cthulhu recently, and while I quite like the simplicity of the mechanic, I found myself missing the percentile dice. Somehow Cthulh-esque antics aren't the same without it. Particularly the slow erosion of literally what PERCENT sane you are ...

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.

Pretty much this.

I guarantee that 99% of the people who say "I don't like percentile systems" really mean "I don't like the way some people run percentile systems". A substantial portion would eat up a system where you roll a D20 instead, even if the math is near-identical (merely divided by 5).

Quote from: markfitz;731202I don't see any reason not to just throw it into CoC as well. It wouldn't break anything, and it would tie a character's primary stats into their skills pleasingly.

Sure, I've done it myself for a couple campaigns. It was entertaining breaking down the skills down into combinations of stats. With some, I used the EDU stat as well.

I just wish that with all the "improvements" coming along with CoC7e, that they'd use stat-derived-base-skill-levels rather than flat, universal base percentiles.

Quote from: Shauncat;7311821) 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".

Not implicit in percentile systems; D20 stuff does this, for instance.

Quote2) 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%.

Situational modifiers aren't implicit to percentile systems either. D&D 3.X, especially at high levels, is infamous for the number of special modifiers you have to consider before you roll the damn dice.

QuoteWhere 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.

This is nothing to do with the system as such and everything to do with bad GMing - which again, no system is immune to. A GM running a D20-based game who sets shitty target numbers, or a Vampire GM setting shitty difficulty numbers, is basically doing the same thing.

I take the point that some percentile games have bad GMing advice. But so do most White Wolf games, so do many D20-based games. Again, this isn't something implicit in percentile systems.

Quote3) 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.

This is a huge misunderstanding of "simulationist" (it doesn't mean "rules-heavy" or "roll all the time").

I've literally never been at a table running a percentile system - WH40K, BRP/Cthulhu, whatever - where people haven't been happy to set aside the dice for long stretches.

And again, this isn't something implicit in percentile systems.

There is literally no objection you have raised which doesn't rear its head in non-percentile systems, and which I notice happening consistently in percentile systems. 0/10, try again.