Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Ben Murray <bakm@***.ED.AC.UK>
Subject: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 15:25:30 +0000
Well, its my first post, and possibly something you are all very sick of
hearing about on this list. If so, then I abjectly apologise, but...

That Difficulty Situation

Yup, sorry about this. Its something a number of Shadowrun type people are
less than enthusiastic about having brought up in gaming conversation, but
rather than create pages of invective regarding the relative merits or
flaws of the SR difficulty system, I would rather just ask the following
simple question:

Are there any house rules presenting an alternative way of dealing with
difficulties and dice rolling based situations? Has anyone come up with,
had experience using, or even shaken the Pointy Sticks of Wrath at any
alternative difficulty/dice rolling system type thang. If so, where can
such a beast be found?

Cheers,
Ben M.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Murray bakm@***.ed.ac.uk Umm, thats about it really...
Message no. 2
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 09:34:16 -0700
Ben Murray wrote:
/
/ Well, its my first post, and possibly something you are all very sick of
/ hearing about on this list. If so, then I abjectly apologise, but...

Welcome. And don't worry about asking questions. I haven't seen this one
in over a year :)

[snip]

/ Are there any house rules presenting an alternative way of dealing with
/ difficulties and dice rolling based situations? Has anyone come up with,
/ had experience using, or even shaken the Pointy Sticks of Wrath at any
/ alternative difficulty/dice rolling system type thang. If so, where can
/ such a beast be found?

I've seen an attempt at a full blown conversion to Earthdawn's
system, but I don't know if it's on the web or not.

The problem with adjusting SR's system is the fact that there are
three types of tests. Your basic skill(4) test, opposed tests, and
damage resistance tests. I've been working on converting SR to a d12
system (for a broader range of target numbers), but I can't get past
the power/force of attacks and damage/drain resistance tests.
Skill(4) tests become skill(7) tests. Opposed tests become
skill/attribute(7) tests. My first thought was to double the
power/force of attacks but then that gives spells twice as many
dice. And it doesn't do anything for the strength of characters in
melee combat. No problem, double all stats and modifiers... yeah,
right. My players would revolt completely if I told them they'd have
to go out and buy twice as many d12s as they currently have d6s.

And that's the most basic problem with changing SR's system, you have
to do a full-blown conversion that affects every aspect of the game.
My d12, double all numbers, is the simplest you'll find but it's
still a pain in the ass.

If you *and* your players want to do it, go for it.

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 3
From: Ben Murray <bakm@***.ED.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 17:21:22 +0000
On Fri, 5 Dec 1997, David Buehrer wrote:

> Ben Murray wrote:
> /
> / Well, its my first post, and possibly something you are all very sick of
> / hearing about on this list. If so, then I abjectly apologise, but...
>
> Welcome. And don't worry about asking questions. I haven't seen this one
> in over a year :)
>
> [snip]
>
> / Are there any house rules presenting an alternative way of dealing with
> / difficulties and dice rolling based situations? Has anyone come up with,
> / had experience using, or even shaken the Pointy Sticks of Wrath at any
> / alternative difficulty/dice rolling system type thang. If so, where can
> / such a beast be found?
>
Snipped useful reply, but I do agree with the players not wanting to buy a
zillion d12s. There is the additional problem that the damn things never
stop rolling.

>
> -David
> --
> "Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
> Art is knowing which ones to keep."
> --
> http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
>

Well, the cunning plan that I had in mind was to do the following...

When making a test against a difficulty number of 1 - 6, roll the dice and
try to achieve the appropriate number. Simple.

When making a test against a difficulty number of 7+, treat the difficulty
to roll against as 6, but for each level above 6, remove one of the
successes gained. As an example, a difficulty of 9 is converted to 6 + 3,
4 sixes rolled would actually give 1 success.

Obviously, this is going to make higher difficulty levels very difficult
very quickly. One possible fix would be to make a roll of a 6 give the
player an extra roll. This would allow low dice pool characters a
sporting chance at achieving high difficulties, but is still fairly
brutal.

I don't know how much of a help this would be, so I will play around with
it to see what the effects are. Meanwhile, has anyone seen such a system
try and fail? Comments?

Ben M.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Murray bakm@***.ed.ac.uk Umm, thats about it really...
Message no. 4
From: Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 11:43:13 -0800
The house rule that we use is borrowed from a campaign in Cambridge (England)
that actually worked out the probability curves on the dice rolling system,
and found one that was much like the standard SR probability curve but much
smoother, without the sudden jumps at the multiples of 6.

Instead of rolling the dice, taking 6's, rerolling, and adding 6, what we do
is roll the dice, reroll 5's and 6's, and add 4. (So getting a 12 requires
rolling 5 or 6, rolling 5 or 6 again, and then rolling at least a 4.)

--
%% Max Rible %% slothman@*****.com %% http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "Ham is good... Glowing *tattooed* ham is *bad*!" - the Tick %%
Message no. 5
From: Barbie <barbie@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 23:29:55 -0500
At 05-Dez-97 wrote Ben Murray:


>Well, the cunning plan that I had in mind was to do the following...

>When making a test against a difficulty number of 1 - 6, roll the dice and
>try to achieve the appropriate number. Simple.

>When making a test against a difficulty number of 7+, treat the difficulty
>to roll against as 6, but for each level above 6, remove one of the
>successes gained. As an example, a difficulty of 9 is converted to 6 + 3,
> 4 sixes rolled would actually give 1 success.



I won`t do it this way, since SR uses both T# *and* nummer of successes.

--

Barbie
---------------------------------------------------------------
Did you know what a rhinoceros is?
All that is left from the unicorn.

http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie
FAQ keeper of SR_D, the german Shadowrun mailing list.
Amiga RC5 Team effort member.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 6
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 16:12:19 -0700
Max Rible wrote:
/
/ The house rule that we use is borrowed from a campaign in Cambridge (England)
/ that actually worked out the probability curves on the dice rolling system,
/ and found one that was much like the standard SR probability curve but much
/ smoother, without the sudden jumps at the multiples of 6.
/
/ Instead of rolling the dice, taking 6's, rerolling, and adding 6, what we do
/ is roll the dice, reroll 5's and 6's, and add 4. (So getting a 12 requires
/ rolling 5 or 6, rolling 5 or 6 again, and then rolling at least a 4.)

Why not reroll 6's and add 5?

-David
--
"Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes.
Art is knowing which ones to keep."
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 7
From: Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 15:27:35 -0800
At 16:12 12/5/97 -0700, David Buehrer wrote:
>Max Rible wrote:
>/
>/ The house rule that we use is borrowed from a campaign in Cambridge (England)
>/ that actually worked out the probability curves on the dice rolling system,
>/ and found one that was much like the standard SR probability curve but much
>/ smoother, without the sudden jumps at the multiples of 6.
>/
>/ Instead of rolling the dice, taking 6's, rerolling, and adding 6, what we do
>/ is roll the dice, reroll 5's and 6's, and add 4. (So getting a 12 requires
>/ rolling 5 or 6, rolling 5 or 6 again, and then rolling at least a 4.)
>
>Why not reroll 6's and add 5?

The probability curves fit better with that method. (I've seen the
Mathematica graphs that compared the different methods, and that one
had a good fit and a smoother curve. Unfortunately, I don't have
those graphs on my web site...) It seems to work pretty well.

--
%% Max Rible %% slothman@*****.com %% http://www.amurgsval.org/~slothman/ %%
%% "Ham is good... Glowing *tattooed* ham is *bad*!" - the Tick %%
Message no. 8
From: NightRain <nightrain@***.BRISNET.ORG.AU>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 1997 09:13:01 +1000
>Are there any house rules presenting an alternative way of dealing with
>difficulties and dice rolling based situations? Has anyone come up with,
>had experience using, or even shaken the Pointy Sticks of Wrath at any
>alternative difficulty/dice rolling system type thang. If so, where can
>such a beast be found?


I use a house rule that I call 'alternate' successes. You can find it at
http://elf.brisnet.org.au/~macey under my house rules section. Any way,
the way I work it is that for every multiple of the TN rolled on a dice,
you get an extra success. eg if you have a TN of 5, and roll a 10 on one
of your dice, that dice counts as two successes. If you get a 15, it
counts as three. You get the idea I'm sure. Anyway, for TN's of less than
4, count them as four for the purpose of determining multiples. eg if you
have a TN of 3, then you need an 8 to get two successes, a 12 to get three
etc.

<plug mode> I also have a Win 3.1 dice roller that can be set to use these
rules, or to ignore them on my downloads page </plug mode>

NightRain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|The universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://elf.brisnet.org.au/~macey/index.html

EMAIL : nightrain@***.brisnet.org.au
: macey@***.brisnet.org.au
ICQ : 2587947
Message no. 9
From: Matthew Johnson <mjohnson@*.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject: Re: A rules question
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 1997 10:41:50 -0700
> Ben Murray wrote:
> / Are there any house rules presenting an alternative way of dealing with
> / difficulties and dice rolling based situations? Has anyone come up
with,
> / had experience using, or even shaken the Pointy Sticks of Wrath at any
> / alternative difficulty/dice rolling system type thang. If so, where can
> / such a beast be found?
Couldn't you just ignore target numbers of 7, 13, etc.? I haven't done the
statistics on this of course.

---------------------------
Matthew Johnson
mjohnson@*.arizona.edu
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~mjohnson
ftp://150.135.184.121 login: anonymous pw: email
----------------------------

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about A rules question, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!