Quote from: ForumScavenger;732892Someone asked why people hate % dice. I'm explaining.

When a GM picks up a book or a designer picks up a pen and they see, "the player will succeed 1/3 of the time," and they think, "yes, this is the system for me," they are going to act like assholes when they run the game.

No.

Assholes are assholes.  Don't play with assholes.  There, wasn't that easy?

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732893That sounds like something that someone trying to sell a d100 system would say. That's a nice story but it isn't what happens.

In fact, victory is handed to you much easier in a low success game. All you have to do is guess the path of least resistance the GM was forced to spread out on the table and then listen to his NPCs talk.

If the plot was written into the GM's notes that "oh this is a sandbox but they can choose to fight and die or talk and live," because the GM knows there is no scenario where a fight can turn out ok due to the low chance of success, he is forced to write clear talking scenarios or his game is a piece of shit everyone will tire of in a few sessions. No one likes infinite chains of losing scenarios because they are focusing on story.

If the player can make a die roll even a little more than half the time in bad situations, and often in good situations, then there might be some point in working through different forward moving conditions, talking about paths of success, deciding who to go after and so on and on.

d100 = Fight or Talk, Fight and Die, Talk and Fail = Listen to the GM's Story
dChanceofSuccess = GM doesn't know what is going to happen = complexity

Pssst.  A first level fighter in D&D has a 20% chance to hit plate armor and shield.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732892Someone asked why people hate % dice. I'm explaining.

When a GM picks up a book or a designer picks up a pen and they see, "the player will succeed 1/3 of the time," and they think, "yes, this is the system for me," they are going to act like assholes when they run the game.

Does not compute. What matters is WHEN you are going to ask for a roll, under which precise circumstances, not that you have 1/3 theoretical chance to succeed on a roll.

If you only roll once every five game sessions in order to survive the sight of Cthulhu, then those are pretty good odds. If you roll every time you climb a ladder, talk to someone, and/or drive your Model T down to the library, then these are terrible odds.

The key to running such a system competently is to know when to ask for a roll (generally, somewhere between the two extremes outlined in the previous paragraph: under stress, or when the consequences of success or failure provide an input the game can build on either way), not in assuming everyone runs the game the same and making its rules a closed model.

Or if you prefer the short version...

Quote from: Old Geezer;732899No.

Assholes are assholes.  Don't play with assholes.  There, wasn't that easy?

This, basically.

Quote from: Old Geezer;732901Pssst.  A first level fighter in D&D has a 20% chance to hit plate armor and shield.

A first level fighter in a modern version of the system that has been worked on recently, like Pathfinder, can't afford plate mail. In fact, he will probably be 3rd or 4th by the time he has it.

Secondly, this problem can be seen and negotiated. If you see a guy in plate, you know he has some sort of background that permitted it (ie his level or noble birth) in either case, there are warning signs.

Thirdly, that NPC isn't a fair match for a first level character and will probably be fighting the whole group if you pay any attention to the APL vs. CR rules in the case of the GM forcing an unavoidable fight, or can be avoided in a sandbox.

Four, in PF that character in plate could PROBABLY be 4th level and still almost automatically fail to something else in the party like a first level sorcerer with sleep.

Fifth, that isn't the same thing as a first level character having a sub 1/3 chance against a naked goblin half his own size, where no story or description elements identify a fair or good prospect fight.

Finally - in a modern version of the game, not something written by Gary Gygax in one sitting without an editor or plagiarized from him, the GM won't be able to count on the plate armor guy needing to be avoided by a first level party unless their are gross and clearly announced descriptive elements, with the exception of one or two mary sue wondering samurai characters he can get away with over the course of a whole campaign.

Quote from: Benoist;732902Does not compute. What matters is WHEN you are going to ask for a roll, under which precise circumstances, not that you have 1/3 theoretical chance to succeed on a roll.

If you only roll once every five game sessions in order to survive the sight of Cthulhu, then those are pretty good odds. If you roll every time you climb a ladder, talk to someone, and/or drive your Model T down to the library, then these are terrible odds.

The key to running such a system competently is to know when to ask for a roll (generally: under stress, or when the consequences of success or failure provide an input the game can build on either way), not in assuming everyone runs the game the same and making it a closed model.

I agree that that is the better way to play the game. I have not ever seen it played that way. People who want to run a game where players have freedom of action could run anything. It is the people who are attracted to the low odds that choose to run those games, and then they take advantage of them.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732903A first level fighter in a modern version of the system that has been worked on recently, like Pathfinder, can't afford plate mail. In fact, he will probably be 3rd or 4th by the time he has it.

Secondly, this problem can be seen and negotiated. If you see a guy in plate, you know he has some sort of background that permitted it (ie his level or noble birth) in either case, there are warning signs.

Thirdly, that NPC isn't a fair match for a first level character and will probably be fighting the whole group if you pay any attention to the APL vs. CR rules in the case of the GM forcing an unavoidable fight, or can be avoided in a sandbox.

Four, in PF that character in plate could PROBABLY be 4th level and still almost automatically fail to something else in the party like a first level sorcerer with sleep.

Fifth, that isn't the same thing as a first level character having a sub 1/3 chance against a naked goblin half his own size, where no story or description elements identify a fair or good prospect fight.

Finally - in a modern version of the game, not something written by Gary Gygax in one sitting without an editor or plagiarized from him, the GM won't be able to count on the plate armor guy needing to be avoided by a first level party unless their are gross and clearly announced descriptive elements, with the exception of one or two mary sue wondering samurai characters he can get away with over the course of a whole campaign.

Yeah, at this point you're just whining and making up reasons why you win, so it's time for you to tongue my pee hole.

Quote from: Old Geezer;732907Yeah, at this point you're just whining and making up reasons why you win, so it's time for you to tongue my pee hole.

Sorry, I know that was a lot to follow.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732903A first level fighter in a modern version of the system that has been worked on recently, like Pathfinder, can't afford plate mail. In fact, he will probably be 3rd or 4th by the time he has it.

Or he's a 0 level squire passing himself off as a knight.

Or he's a 1-6 hit points brigand who stole the armor out of the back of a wagon at a fair.

Or he's the 2nd level fighter henchman of a mid-level magic-user.

There are more things in heaven and earth, ForumScavenger, than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Quote from: Black Vulmea;732910There are more things in heaven and earth, ForumScavenger, than are dreamt of in your philosophy

* Orson Welles doing a slow clap *

Quote from: Black Vulmea;732910Or he's a 0 level squire passing himself off as a knight.

Should be clear by observation. Can he work the armor?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;732910Or he's a 1-6 hit points brigand who stole the armor out of the back of a wagon at a fair.

Should be clear by observation. Can he work the armor?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;732910Or he's the 2nd level fighter henchman of a mid-level magic-user.

Good angle. Unless there is some kind of story arc you are following, this shouldn't be stumbled across a lot. Is the GM following any kind of wealth by level for his NPCs? If so, this is a good sign that the wizard will be weak when you get to him. If not, at least the loot is great vs. the effort taking it. Then, when you hit mid level, your PC wizard should be able to shit thousands of gold coins out of the void for his hirelings.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;732910There are more things in heaven and earth, ForumScavenger, than are dreamt of in your philosophy

Not by much.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732892When a GM picks up a book or a designer picks up a pen and they see, "the player will succeed 1/3 of the time," and they think, "yes, this is the system for me," they are going to act like assholes when they run the game.

lolwut?  This doesn't make any sense.  I think RPGs might not be about what you think they are.  I think you might be trapped in some sort of late 90s anti-railroad player agency pro-story mentality that has nothing to do with how the hobby started or the activities that make up the core of it.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732893That sounds like something that someone trying to sell a d100 system would say. That's a nice story but it isn't what happens.

Actually it is.  These d100 systems have been around for 35 years.  That's an incredible amount of functional and enjoyable play, even if you don't get how to approach them.

QuoteIn fact, victory is handed to you much easier in a low success game. All you have to do is guess the path of least resistance the GM was forced to spread out on the table and then listen to his NPCs talk.

Ugh.  It's not about the easiest path to victory.  You seem to be labouring under the idea that if the character can succeed more often than you as a player will somehow "win" more.

QuoteIf the plot was written into the GM's notes that "oh this is a sandbox

If you have a plot, you do not have a sandbox.  In a sandbox the plot emerges from play.

Quote...he is forced to write clear talking scenarios or his game is a piece of shit everyone will tire of in a few sessions. No one likes infinite chains of losing scenarios because they are focusing on story.

Concentrating on story is for chumps.  The referee should create interesting situations and let the players explore them as they see fit and fairly adjudicate their actions.

As for "tire of in a few sessions" you do realize that these games where you play relatively normal people who are not action movie heroes or fantasy super heroes are some of the most enduring?  Call of Cthulhu, for example, has been continuously in print for 32 years and has had an incredible amount of material published for it.

Quoted100 = Fight or Talk, Fight and Die, Talk and Fail = Listen to the GM's Story
dChanceofSuccess = GM doesn't know what is going to happen = complexity

Are you aware that any chance of success in statistics is expressed as a fraction, ratio or percentage right?

Quote from: NathanIW;732916Are you aware that any chance of success in statistics is expressed as a fraction, ratio or percentage right?

Hush, you and your "not having your head stuffed completely up your ass".

Nathan, my opinion on the topic is clear from my posts. Someone asked why people don't like %dice mechanics. I am explaining it.

I'm not going to delve into some weird conversation about late 90's player agency when I would have to start by explaining the difference in how statistics are spoken about between math majors and how they are used in ordinary conversation when conveying a clear point anyone who isn't autistic or asshole could follow.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732903...can't afford plate mail ...see a guy in plate

I think you may be missing the forest for the trees.  His point had nothing to do with platemail in of itself.

QuoteFifth, that isn't the same thing as a first level character having a sub 1/3 chance against a naked goblin half his own size, where no story or description elements identify a fair or good prospect fight.

When you look at your character sheet and see a 30% attack stat, that should be your clue right there that you are not a combat god or a super hero warrior like you play in Pathfinder.  You are playing a different type of character, so I'd suggest putting on big boy pants and actually roleplaying your character rather than complaining about what he's not.

Quote from: ForumScavenger;732919Nathan, my opinion on the topic is clear from my posts. Someone asked why people don't like %dice mechanics. I am explaining it.

And people are trying to point out that you're reasons are not logically connected to the claims you are making.  You completely missed all the points about statistics, for example.

 dChanceOfSuccess = d100 <-- think about it

QuoteI'm not going to delve into some weird conversation about late 90's player agency

You're the one who brought up railroading, asshole GMs, concentration on story and the like, not me.

I guess my point is that you don't know if you like d100 roll under systems or not because you don't seem to have any idea what they actually are.  A bad GM touched you in a bad place with one of these systems and you think that's what they are all about.