Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Dan Turek)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Tue Dec 4 23:30:04 2001
When the d100 system idea first came up I thought the person was kidding.

While the original version of Twilight 2000 had good rules for d100, and
James Bond wasn't horrible, isn't it easier to use d6? The game mechanics
for SR are the most elegant and simplistic I've seen.

I know some people asked for a d20 method to teach/convert D&D players. It
would be faster to make a d6 method for D&D.

There are several reasons for a d6 System:
1. VERY easy to tell how many successes.
2. The Over-6 rule or Mary Kuhner Rule of 6 (got it from a newsgroup), which
someone else mentioned under their name, where if you surpass a TN for every
full 6 points on a die it's an additional success (it works easily when the
dice are in front of you)
3. d6 are easy to find, cheap, and you never have to call which is high.
4. When you get to things having 20 dice, it is usually faster to roll than
do math.

Please answer my curiousity
what is the reason to use d100 or even d8?

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Danyeal De La Luna)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 01:30:01 2001
>Please answer my curiousity
>what is the reason to use d100 or even d8?

I couldn't have said it better myself. The rules aren't that hard, and I can
get a box of 36 d6 for under $5 that store away so nicely. I think that the
reason that people want to make a d100 or d8 mode is to confuse themselves
or generate a new game so that they have something to focus on besides the
unbearable lull between gaming sessions. I was an avid D&D freak for about
10 years, I could play the game without having a book in front of me, just a
few weird dice and a screen-type thing, so my players couldn't tell that I
was fudging dice rolls and so that I could keep the good snacks safely out
of their reach. I had almost every book that was out...then, alas, they
released a new addition with all new rules and required me to buy all new
books...well screw that! I said and sold everything. It was while I was
waiting for the store manager to cut me a check for the oversized duffle bag
full of books and D&D paraphernalia that I happened across Shadowrun (2nd
edition). I was at first kind of skeptical...cyber AND magic AND ELVES???
Yeah, right...some psychotic episode created during an acid trip with
William Gibson and Terry Brooks...but my interest was piqued. I real a
little further (the combat system) and said "hey, ya know, this might
actually work". I asked what books were available...they showed me the 5
books that were out at the time, I bought them and fell in love. The d6
system is the best system the I have seen, and with the gm making the
decision with a bit of forethought, all the problems mentioned on this
thread can be avoided with ease. K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Stupid. This is
what the game designers have done and continue to do. The mechanics are
fine, the rules, mostly, make sense and the only complaint I have ever had
is that I wish that more of the books had game type examples of how to do
stuff...deck building and upgrading are a bit confusing, and the astral
stuff and critters can get a bit mucky around the edges. In short, oops too
late, I think that the dice mechanics are the least of our worries, and that
if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it! just my buck and a quarter

Lunatec
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 08:55:01 2001
Dan Turek writes:

> While the original version of Twilight 2000 had good rules for d100, and
> James Bond wasn't horrible, isn't it easier to use d6? The game mechanics
> for SR are the most elegant and simplistic I've seen.

While I'd probably not entirely agree on the "elegant" and
"simplistic"
points, I can see what you're getting at. But you missed what may well be
the most important thing: massive numbers of dice! In TW2k, when you rolled,
you roll two D10 :-(. In D&D, a _single_ D20. In SR? About two handfulls of
D6. Which is cooler? Rolling more dice than you can hardly pick up, if your
character is good, or rolling the same piddly low number of dice as the guy
who's character could hardly bend over to do up his shoelaces without
screwing up?

> 2. The Over-6 rule or Mary Kuhner Rule of 6 (got it from a newsgroup), which
> someone else mentioned under their name, where if you surpass a TN for every
> full 6 points on a die it's an additional success (it works easily when the
> dice are in front of you)

The "Mary Kuhner" rule? Never heard of it. But I have heard about half a
dozen separate, often slightly dissimilar, versions of the "extra successes
for high rolls" rule. All of them from different people at different times,
some nearly 10 years ago. I really don't think this "Mary Kuhner" exactly has
an intellectual property right to the rule, or anything.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Strago)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 11:30:01 2001
Damion Milliken wrote:

>Dan Turek writes:
>
>>While the original version of Twilight 2000 had good rules for d100, and
>>James Bond wasn't horrible, isn't it easier to use d6? The game mechanics
>>for SR are the most elegant and simplistic I've seen.
>>
>
>While I'd probably not entirely agree on the "elegant" and
"simplistic"
>points, I can see what you're getting at. But you missed what may well be
>the most important thing: massive numbers of dice! In TW2k, when you rolled,
>you roll two D10 :-(. In D&D, a _single_ D20. In SR? About two handfulls of
>D6. Which is cooler? Rolling more dice than you can hardly pick up, if your
>character is good, or rolling the same piddly low number of dice as the guy
>who's character could hardly bend over to do up his shoelaces without
>screwing up?
>
Plus there's those chances of botching. With one die, it's a 5% chance
(1 in 20). With 2d10, there's a (I hate percentages I just want to say
1% and get it over with). With six dice, for them all to roll a 1?
That's gotta be a tiny tiny number. And pool dice? That lowers the
number significantly. And that I like.

><SNIP>
>
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gak The Great)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 13:20:01 2001
Sometime, somwhere down the timeline, Dan Turek whispered:


> When the d100 system idea first came up I thought the person was kidding.
>
> While the original version of Twilight 2000 had good rules for d100, and
> James Bond wasn't horrible, isn't it easier to use d6? The game mechanics
> for SR are the most elegant and simplistic I've seen.
>
> I know some people asked for a d20 method to teach/convert D&D players. It
> would be faster to make a d6 method for D&D.
>
> There are several reasons for a d6 System:
> 1. VERY easy to tell how many successes.
> 2. The Over-6 rule or Mary Kuhner Rule of 6 (got it from a newsgroup),
which
> someone else mentioned under their name, where if you surpass a TN for
every
> full 6 points on a die it's an additional success (it works easily when
the
> dice are in front of you)
> 3. d6 are easy to find, cheap, and you never have to call which is high.
> 4. When you get to things having 20 dice, it is usually faster to roll
than
> do math.
>
> Please answer my curiousity
> what is the reason to use d100 or even d8?

I agree. I think the SR-system is the best RPG system yet. Well, I only know
D&D, wich I don't really like (the system, the game's ok) and DSA, a German
RPG with LOTS of numbers, though the skill system is better than D&D. I'll
normally use d6 when playin SR. I'm just interested in how the d100 thingie
will look.

But, d6 has a problem: The steps between the TN are to big. Weapons get mean
real fast, and a +1 TN is a pretty Large modification (1d6, TN 5, +1TN is a
reduction of chances by 50%)

Another thing I'd like to see would be that the attribute affect the chances
of succes in some way (Does't ED have something like that? I never really
played it, so I don't know how it looks) but that isn't really a d6-problem.

-- GAK THE GREAT

"Ein Ring, sie zu knechten, sie alle zu finden,
Ins Dunkel zu treiben und ewig zu binden,
Im Lande Mordor, wo die Schatten drohn."
Sauron aus "Herr der Ringe von J.R.R. Tolkien
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 13:40:00 2001
According to Damion Milliken, on Wed, 05 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> While I'd probably not entirely agree on the "elegant" and
"simplistic"
> points, I can see what you're getting at. But you missed what may well be
> the most important thing: massive numbers of dice! In TW2k, when you
> rolled, you roll two D10 :-(. In D&D, a _single_ D20. In SR? About two
> handfulls of D6. Which is cooler? Rolling more dice than you can hardly
> pick up, if your character is good, or rolling the same piddly low number
> of dice as the guy who's character could hardly bend over to do up his
> shoelaces without screwing up?

The other side of this is that it's much easier to judge your chances of
success with a single D20 or D100 roll than in a system like SR's. It may not
look so cool, but it is easier to tell (especially for new players) how good
their characters actually are at doing things. OTOH, D20 systems tend to have
problems with high ratings -- D&D works fine if you've got 2nd level
characters with +0 to +5 or so modifiers to the roll, but I doubt it will if
you're a 17th level fighter with a +82 bonus to hit...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 13:50:01 2001
>Sometime, somwhere down the timeline, Dan Turek whispered:
>
> > Please answer my curiousity
> > what is the reason to use d100 or even d8?

I use d8(0-7) to alleviate that pesky "a TN of 7 is the same as a TN of 6"
issue.

One of my players used to play a shamanic conjuror who, when summoning a
large spirit, summoned a Force 7 spirit. He reasoned that as long as he
was needing a spirit with a Force greater than 4, then he might as well
skip Force 5 and go right to Force 6. But seeing as the odds for
succeeding vs a 6 and a 7 are the same, he attempted to summon a Force 7
spirit.

While there is no difference between a TN of 6 and a TN of 7, there is a
difference between a Force 6 spirit and a Force 7 Spirit. A Force 6 spirit
has never been summoned in any game I've ever run.

All things being even, this balanced out. PCs and NPCs alike summoned
Force 7 spirits when the situation called for it. Force 6 spirits did not
exist in my game.

But then there were the little niggling number crunching times when a PC,
for example, would be faced with a situation where he could walk and shoot
at someone with a TN of 6, or run and shoot with a TN of 7. The PC would run.

In short, the 6=7 issue was determining the actions of the PCs. I didn't
like that <shrug>.

So, when the d8(0-7) idea hit me, I ran with it. I compared the
probability "curves" of d6(1-6) and d8(0-7) and they matched perfectly
(except for the flat spots that occurred in the d6 curve at the 6-7
points). I went out and bought around forty d8 and playtested it with my
players. It was very easy to make the adjustment from d6 to d8. If
anything, the pace of the game was improved because players weren't keeping
an eye out to take advantage of the 6=7 issue that d6 had.

I've been using d8(0-7) for well over a year now and it's been working
without a single hitch. Honestly, the hardest part was finding the number
of d8 required (I think I had to go to three different gaming stores
<chuckle>).

Anyway, that's why I use d8. YMMV :)

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 16:50:01 2001
> When the d100 system idea first came up I thought the person was
kidding.
>
> While the original version of Twilight 2000 had good rules for d100,
and
> James Bond wasn't horrible, isn't it easier to use d6? The game
mechanics
> for SR are the most elegant and simplistic I've seen.
>
> I know some people asked for a d20 method to teach/convert D&D
players. It
> would be faster to make a d6 method for D&D.
>
> There are several reasons for a d6 System:
> 1. VERY easy to tell how many successes.
> 2. The Over-6 rule or Mary Kuhner Rule of 6 (got it from a newsgroup),
> which
> someone else mentioned under their name, where if you surpass a TN for
> every
> full 6 points on a die it's an additional success (it works easily
when
> the
> dice are in front of you)
> 3. d6 are easy to find, cheap, and you never have to call which is
high.
> 4. When you get to things having 20 dice, it is usually faster to roll
> than
> do math.
>
> Please answer my curiousity
> what is the reason to use d100 or even d8?
To answer your question simply...because I'm tired of having people try
to bullsh!t how many times they rolled a 6 and added it because they're
trying to do impossible stuff. It's not necessarily that the original
rules are difficult however for my players (most of which are ex D&D
gamers) none of us really like having to roll a different number of dice
for each little thing and all of that crap, it changes it to one die
type and ONE number of dice you roll, there's no "which one is your high
die" because they make dice that are numbered in 10's for the explicit
purpose of being used as a percentile die and they come in most new
packs of dice. I'm also trying it out to see if I can speed up the game
as well. I've made tables of what's actually there for each one so all
you've got to do is look at the chart, subtract the TN and then roll.
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 5 17:05:02 2001
> I use d8(0-7) to alleviate that pesky "a TN of 7 is the same as a TN
of 6"
> issue.
>
> One of my players used to play a shamanic conjuror who, when summoning
a
> large spirit, summoned a Force 7 spirit. He reasoned that as long as
he
> was needing a spirit with a Force greater than 4, then he might as
well
> skip Force 5 and go right to Force 6. But seeing as the odds for
> succeeding vs a 6 and a 7 are the same, he attempted to summon a Force
7
> spirit.
>
> While there is no difference between a TN of 6 and a TN of 7, there is
a
> difference between a Force 6 spirit and a Force 7 Spirit. A Force 6
> spirit
> has never been summoned in any game I've ever run.
>
> All things being even, this balanced out. PCs and NPCs alike summoned
> Force 7 spirits when the situation called for it. Force 6 spirits did
not
> exist in my game.
>
> But then there were the little niggling number crunching times when a
PC,
> for example, would be faced with a situation where he could walk and
shoot
> at someone with a TN of 6, or run and shoot with a TN of 7. The PC
would
> run.
>
> In short, the 6=7 issue was determining the actions of the PCs. I
didn't
> like that <shrug>.
>
> So, when the d8(0-7) idea hit me, I ran with it. I compared the
> probability "curves" of d6(1-6) and d8(0-7) and they matched perfectly
> (except for the flat spots that occurred in the d6 curve at the 6-7
> points). I went out and bought around forty d8 and playtested it with
my
> players. It was very easy to make the adjustment from d6 to d8. If
> anything, the pace of the game was improved because players weren't
> keeping
> an eye out to take advantage of the 6=7 issue that d6 had.
>
> I've been using d8(0-7) for well over a year now and it's been working
> without a single hitch. Honestly, the hardest part was finding the
number
> of d8 required (I think I had to go to three different gaming stores
> <chuckle>).
>
> Anyway, that's why I use d8. YMMV :)
this also applies to 12/13 and 18/19, you get the drift, every 6th and
7th is the same TN essentially so if you've got a good mage he may as
well cast something at the higher because it's just as good of a chance
as the lower and is more powerful....just like his point with the force
6 spirits I've never in my life seen a force 12 Manabolt or manaball but
I've been hit many a time with a 13 because it's just as easy to hit but
does more damage
also like someone else said...it's simpler...I could care less about how
much fun it is and how hard the math is because I've simplified it and
I'm the only one that's gotta do the math and that's why if I get
worried about it I'll keep a calculator behind my screen and do it that
way and that's IF I need it because as I said in my other reply...I put
it all in a chart...how hard is it to subtract 40% from 120%...it's 80%
and that's their TN, which is extremely simple to understand....also the
problem that prompted this thinking and reworking is the fact that a
skill of 6 is supposed to be an innate ability....I'm sorry but if
you're so good at something that it's an innate ability than you
shouldn't be missing at all unless you're trying something overly
difficult, NOT just trying to shoot at someone at a longer range with a
burst fire weapon....the point is that I'm tired of all of the things
that the book says and then unsays and the change is my ability to
tailor it to one or the other...personally I have too many players with
skills of 5 or 6 or even specialized to 7 in something and they don't
even have a background to where they came up with the ability so the
dice mod is just the first of 2 or 3 changes that I'm making. The other
thing to think about is it's not an official rules change...if you don't
like the idea I'm not forcing you to use it or even asking you to. I'm
offering people the chance to look it over and if they like it to use it
or if they don't to offer criticism or to just throw it away. I
personally could care less who uses this or who thinks it's dumb because
as I said...it's a personal decision and I'm not forcing or asking
anyone else to use it. I'm even leaving the actual change up to my
gaming group AFTER we playtest it to see how it works in actual games
and not in theory.
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 6 02:20:01 2001
Graht writes:

> I use d8(0-7) to alleviate that pesky "a TN of 7 is the same as a TN of 6"
> issue.
>
> <Snip Graht's explanation of why.>

That's actually _really_ clever!

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 11
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 6 05:55:01 2001
According to Graht, on Wed, 05 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> While there is no difference between a TN of 6 and a TN of 7, there is a
> difference between a Force 6 spirit and a Force 7 Spirit. A Force 6
> spirit has never been summoned in any game I've ever run.

It does matter a lot if you have a Charisma of 3, or of 6...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 12
From: shadowrn@*********.com (shadowrn@*********.com)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 6 15:15:01 2001
> 2. The Over-6 rule or Mary Kuhner Rule of 6 (got it from a newsgroup), which
> someone else mentioned under their name, where if you surpass a TN for every
> full 6 points on a die it's an additional success (it works easily when the
> dice are in front of you)

Jeez. You make it sound like I was saying that I'd invented it. FYI, I
figure at -least- 60% of the people who played 1e SR picked up this
interpretation of the book at least once.

And for those who have no idea who Mary Kuhner is, she's the writer of the
'Jayhawk' story, in 144 parts. It is, IMO, a very good story, and brings
forth some interesting concepts that were used in the game in which she
played -- such as magic having as much a psychological impact on an
individual as cybernetics. Through conversations with her, I was able to
clarify the concepts for my own game, and eventually come up with a
solidified game system for it. :)

For Kuhner's work, see http://www-shgc.stanford.edu/~flowers/jayhawk/.


The Wyrm Ouroboros
'Half Russian mathemetician,
half Silicon Valley code freak.'
Message no. 13
From: shadowrn@*********.com (LeBlanc, Lange)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 6 15:20:01 2001
<SNIP>
>Jeez. You make it sound like I was saying that I'd invented it. FYI,
I
>figure at -least- 60% of the people who played 1e SR picked up this
>interpretation of the book at least once.

<SNIP>
The Wyrm Ouroboros
'Half Russian mathemetician,
half Silicon Valley code freak.'

Just so you don't feel all alone, our group interpreted the 1st ED rules
like that. Took our group's rules laywer (me) to finally make the
distinction months later (by accident, BTW)
Message no. 14
From: shadowrn@*********.com (BD)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 7 03:10:01 2001
> Graht writes:
>
> I use d8(0-7) to alleviate that pesky "a TN of 7 is the same as a TN of
6" issue.
>

Graht, I was trying to figure out whether this would mess with all Target
Numbers... since you can roll a 0, does this mean that everything just got
one degree harder (i.e. you now have one more chance of failing at every
TN)? And is your minimum TN now a 1?

====-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
Message no. 15
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 7 10:10:01 2001
At 12:10 AM 12/7/2001 -0800, BD wrote:
> > Graht writes:
> >
> > I use d8(0-7) to alleviate that pesky "a TN of 7 is the same as a TN of
>6" issue.
> >
>
> Graht, I was trying to figure out whether this would mess with all Target
>Numbers... since you can roll a 0, does this mean that everything just got
>one degree harder (i.e. you now have one more chance of failing at every
>TN)? And is your minimum TN now a 1?

It doesn't really mess with target numbers. Yes, your minimum TN would be
a 1 if you used d8(0-7). The base TN would still be a 4. TNs would still
be calculated as normal.

Check the following table which lists the probability of success when using
one die vs a given target number.

TN d6(1-6) d8(0-7)
-----------------------
1 87.50%
2 83.33% 75.00%
3 66.67% 62.50%
4 50.00% 50.00%
5 33.33% 37.50%
6 _16.67% 25.00%
7 16.67% _12.50%
8 13.89% 10.94%
9 11.11% 9.38%
10 8.34% 7.81%
11 5.56% 6.25%
12 _2.78% 4.69%
13 2.78% 3.13%
14 2.32% _1.56%
15 1.85% 1.37%
16 1.39% 1.17%
17 0.93% 0.98%
18 _0.46% 0.78%
19 0.59%
20 0.39%
21 _0.20%

Some TNs are easier, some are harder. The major bonus, for me anyway :),
is that the progression for d8(0-7) is much.. smoother, for lack of a
better word, and the probabilities are close enough to d6(1-6) that no
changes have to be made to the SR rules.

Six doesn't equal seven, players still get to roll hand fulls of dice, and
only three minor adjustments have to be made (Rule of 0s, Rule of Seven,
lowest TN of 1). And like I said in an earlier post, the only issue was
having to go to multiple gaming stores to find enough d8s :)

If the 6=7 is an issue for you, I highly recommend d8(0-7). If not, keep
rolling those d6 :)

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 16
From: shadowrn@*********.com (BD)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 7 13:05:01 2001
> It doesn't really mess with target numbers. Yes, your minimum TN would
be a 1 if you used d8(0-7). The base TN would still be a 4. TNs would
still be calculated as normal.
>
> Check the following table which lists the probability of success when
using one die vs a given target number.
>

<snip table>

So your chances of being successful at TN 2 and 3 are slightly less (not
that that affects the game extremely, it might make it a little better,
IMO) and your chances of nailing TN 5 and 6 actually go UP. Funky.
Y'know, I like that -better-. It's a shame I never play. :)

====-Boondocker

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
Message no. 17
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Bira)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 7 20:30:05 2001
On Fri, 07 Dec 2001 08:06:39 -0700
Graht <davidb@****.imcprint.com> wrote:

>
> If the 6=7 is an issue for you, I highly recommend d8(0-7). If not, keep
> rolling those d6 :)

A tought just crossed my mind... Is there a SR dice roller using
d8? I suppose it wouldn't take long to modify that ultra-simple
dice-roller that comes with the NSRCG to do it...


--
Bira -- SysOp da Shadowland.BR
http://www.shadowland.com.br
Redator de Shadowrun da RPG em Revista
http://www.rpgemrevista.f2s.com
Message no. 18
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sat Dec 8 07:35:14 2001
According to Bira, on Sat, 08 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> A tought just crossed my mind... Is there a SR dice roller using
> d8? I suppose it wouldn't take long to modify that ultra-simple
> dice-roller that comes with the NSRCG to do it...

Here's one I just decided to write, as a response to your question. It's in
Python (my first real attempt at a program in this language, so it's
probably not as neatly done as it could be...), and the way you use it is
to save everything _between_ the line "script starts here" and the dashes
that start my signature on your hard drive (I suggest calling it "d8"). You
will need to have a Python interpreter installed (http://www.python.org)
and, on Unix and similar OS's anyway, make the file executable (chmod +x
d8). You can then run it by calling the file with the number of dice you
want to roll, like so: "./d8 7" or "./d8 100". It'll print a row of
numbers
representing the dice rolls; for example:

gurth@***************:~ > ./d8 10
[0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 6, 13]

-----script starts here-----
#! /usr/bin/env python

import random, sys

random.seed()

n = int(sys.argv[1])
c = 0
r2 = 1
rolls = []

while c < n:
c = c + 1
r = int(random.random() * 8)
while r % 7 == 0 and r != 0 and r2 != 0:
r2 = int(random.random() * 8)
r = r + r2
rolls.append(r)

rolls.sort()

print rolls

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 19
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sat Dec 8 08:55:11 2001
From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
> this also applies to 12/13 and 18/19, you get the drift, every 6th and
> 7th is the same TN essentially so if you've got a good mage he may as
> well cast something at the higher because it's just as good of a chance
> as the lower and is more powerful....just like his point with the force
> 6 spirits I've never in my life seen a force 12 Manabolt or manaball but
> I've been hit many a time with a 13 because it's just as easy to hit but
> does more damage

What does the force of the spell have to do with how easy it is to hit?

It's just as easy to hit with a force 100 spell, as it is with a force 3 spell,
the only difference is the targets resistance, and the drain of the spell (œ
force), and then you should realy go for a force 15 spell, as the drain T# will
be 7, where as the drain T# for a force 13 or 12 manabolt/manaball spell both
are 6.

> also like someone else said...it's simpler...I could care less about how
> much fun it is and how hard the math is because I've simplified it and
> I'm the only one that's gotta do the math and that's why if I get
> worried about it I'll keep a calculator behind my screen and do it that
> way and that's IF I need it because as I said in my other reply...I put
> it all in a chart...how hard is it to subtract 40% from 120%...it's 80%
> and that's their TN, which is extremely simple to understand....

Well if simplicity are all you are concerned about and you wan't D100 then
settle for Basic Roleplaying (the same rules as used for Call of Cthulhu, unless
they have already jumped on the D20 bandwagon *shugs*).

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 20
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sat Dec 8 08:55:20 2001
From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
>
> It doesn't really mess with target numbers. Yes, your minimum TN would be
> a 1 if you used d8(0-7). The base TN would still be a 4. TNs would still
> be calculated as normal.

What do you actually do? Do you count every die roll as one less than the face
showed (D8-1: 8=7, 7=6... 1=0), or do you count the 8 as a 0?

When I first started playing SR, the 6=7 also annoyed me, and we did think about
changing the rules, but that would have been to D6 (1-5+D6), so we would still
have used D6, but each 6 rolled only counted as 5, but allowed you to roll an
extra dice.

The actual table would have looked like this (combined with the original D6 an
your D8 tables):
T# D6 (1-6) D8 (0-7) D6 (1-5+D6)
0 NA NA 8/8 100,00% NA NA
1 6/6 100,00% 7/8 87,50% 6/6 100,00%
2 5/6 83,33% 6/8 75,00% 5/6 83,33%
3 4/6 66,67% 5/8 62,50% 4/6 66,67%
4 3/6 50,00% 4/8 50,00% 3/6 50,00%
5 2/6 33,33% 3/8 37,50% 2/6 33,33%
6 1/6 16,67% 2/8 25,00% 6/36 16,67%
7 6/36 16,67% 1/8 12,50% 5/36 13,89%
8 5/36 13,89% 7/64 10,94% 4/36 11,11%
9 4/36 11,11% 6/64 9,38% 3/36 8,33%
10 3/36 8,33% 5/64 7,81% 2/36 5,56%
11 2/36 5,56% 4/64 6,25% 6/216 2,78%
12 1/36 2,78% 3/64 4,69% 5/216 2,31%
13 6/216 2,78% 2/64 3,13% 4/216 1,85%
14 5/216 2,31% 1/64 1,56% 3/216 1,39%
15 4/216 1,85% 7/512 1,37% 2/216 0,93%
16 3/216 1,39% 6/512 1,17% 6/1296 0,46%
17 2/216 0,93% 5/512 0,98% 5/1296 0,39%
18 1/216 0,46% 4/512 0,78% 4/1296 0,31%
19 6/1296 0,46% 3/512 0,59% 3/1296 0,23%
20 5/1296 0,39% 2/512 0,39% 2/1296 0,15%
21 4/1296 0,31% 1/512 0,20% 6/7776 0,08%

So as can be seen the D6 (1-5+D6) avoids the 6/7, 12/13 etc. problems, but it
also lowers the chances dratic. T# 7-11 have a 1/36 less chance of succeding,
and higher T# have an even lower chance of succeding.

We actually never used it, and as time showed (at least for us) the 6/7, 12/13
problem wasn't a problem.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 21
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Mon Dec 10 15:55:01 2001
From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
> also like someone else said...it's simpler...I could care less about how
> much fun it is and how hard the math is because I've simplified it and
> I'm the only one that's gotta do the math and that's why if I get
> worried about it I'll keep a calculator behind my screen and do it that
> way and that's IF I need it because as I said in my other reply...I put
> it all in a chart...how hard is it to subtract 40% from 120%...it's 80%
> and that's their TN, which is extremely simple to understand....

So if you ar going for simplicity, and you end up with results of
10/20/30...90/100 % then change it all to a D10 based game.

What is the point of rolling two dice, when it's only realy the one that counts?

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 22
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Mon Dec 10 15:55:03 2001
From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
> To answer your question simply...because I'm tired of having people try
> to bullsh!t how many times they rolled a 6 and added it because they're
> trying to do impossible stuff.

Ohh... and your playesr ar going to stop bulshitting you, just because you
change from xD6 to D100. Hope it works for you, although I would rather try to
explain to the player who they realy are bulshitting!

> I've made tables of what's actually there for each one so all
> you've got to do is look at the chart, subtract the TN and then roll.

Any chance we are going to see those rules somewhere?

Although I'm not going to use them, I would like to give them a lookthrough.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 23
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Mon Dec 10 15:55:06 2001
From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
<Snip strikes again>
> Check the following table which lists the probability of success when using
> one die vs a given target number.

But those small statistically differences between a single D6 and a single
D8(0-7) statistics, can be extrapolated (hope its the right word) into the
extreme when rolling multriple dice.

<Snip takes the table>
> Some TNs are easier, some are harder. The major bonus, for me anyway :),
> is that the progression for d8(0-7) is much.. smoother, for lack of a
> better word, and the probabilities are close enough to d6(1-6) that no
> changes have to be made to the SR rules.

As said the difference can be quite extreme when rolling multriple dice.
Although when it's most extreme it dosn't realy matter.

After all, who would bet anything on your character, just because your chances
are 200% of mine, when my chance are very small?

If my chances are 50% then yours would be 100%.

But when mine are 0.02% yours are still only 0.04%.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 24
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Mon Dec 10 16:45:01 2001
> From: "Derek Hyde" <dhyde@*********.net>
> > also like someone else said...it's simpler...I could care less about
how
> > much fun it is and how hard the math is because I've simplified it
and
> > I'm the only one that's gotta do the math and that's why if I get
> > worried about it I'll keep a calculator behind my screen and do it
that
> > way and that's IF I need it because as I said in my other reply...I
put
> > it all in a chart...how hard is it to subtract 40% from 120%...it's
80%
> > and that's their TN, which is extremely simple to understand....
>
> So if you ar going for simplicity, and you end up with results of
> 10/20/30...90/100 % then change it all to a D10 based game.

It's not all even 10%'s skills are worth 15% as are karma pool dice, as
I told everyone if you wanna scope it out and give me some feedback
e-mail me personally and let me know what compression version you want
me to send it to you using since I'm not allowed to post it to the list
directly (oh and it's in Excel format so unless you've got a way to read
it it won't do you any good for me to send it to you)
Message no. 25
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Mon Dec 10 16:50:01 2001
At 09:55 PM 12/10/2001 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
>From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
><Snip strikes again>
> > Check the following table which lists the probability of success when using
> > one die vs a given target number.
>
>But those small statistically differences between a single D6 and a single
>D8(0-7) statistics, can be extrapolated (hope its the right word) into the
>extreme when rolling multriple dice.

I would love to see the math that this statement is based on :)

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 26
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Tue Dec 11 05:40:03 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> It's not all even 10%'s skills are worth 15% as are karma pool dice,

That makes it a D20 system, essentially; it might be easier going to that
if the smallest step you use in the system is 5%.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 27
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Tue Dec 11 16:45:02 2001
> According to Derek Hyde, on Mon, 10 Dec 2001 the word on the street
was...
>
> > It's not all even 10%'s skills are worth 15% as are karma pool dice,
>
> That makes it a D20 system, essentially; it might be easier going to
that
> if the smallest step you use in the system is 5%.
No......there's both 10's and 15's and umm....one condition for a 5 so
no it's percentile....the other huge reason for it is that I want them
to understand just how advanced these higher level skills are because
they're taking them like they're candy and ending up with a 5/7 in
smg's/ingram smartgun as an example...that score according to the book
is that of an expert...someone that's so flawless with the gun that they
never miss or if they do it doesn't happen twice in a row
Message no. 28
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Damion Milliken)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 12 02:35:01 2001
Derek Hyde writes:

> > That makes it a D20 system, essentially; it might be easier going to that
> > if the smallest step you use in the system is 5%.
>
> No......there's both 10's and 15's and umm....one condition for a 5 so
> no it's percentile...

Er, it still sounds to me like the largest step is 5%, thus Gurth is still
correct in saying a D20 system would be easier.

> the other huge reason for it is that I want them to understand just how
> advanced these higher level skills are because they're taking them like
> they're candy and ending up with a 5/7 in smg's/ingram smartgun as an
> example...that score according to the book is that of an expert...someone
> that's so flawless with the gun that they never miss or if they do it
> doesn't happen twice in a row

Yeah, I know what you mean. On one hand, though, shadowrunners _are_ supposed
to be good. They're supposed to be able to wipe the floor with a team of
security goons single handedly. So high skills are, in my view at least, more
or less justified for runner characters.

OTOH, I do think that the SR skill "guidelines" are rather wonked. It's more
or less trivial to get a skill to double figures even. That's where I'd
start saying that your ability was "innate", not at around 6. Pretty much
the average goon can get a skill of 6 without too much experience.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong
Unofficial Shadowrun Guru E-mail: dam01@***.edu.au
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GE d- s++:-- a25 C++ US++>+++ P+ L+>++ E- W+ N++ o@ K- w+(--) O-@ M--
V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP-@>++ t+ 5 X+>+++ R++ !tv(--) b+ DI+++@ D G+
e++>++++$ h- r++>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 29
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 12 05:45:04 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 11 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> No......there's both 10's and 15's and umm....

But 10% equals a +/-2 in a D20 system, and 15% a +/-3.

> one condition for a 5 so no it's percentile....

It's your adaptation, of course, but if I were to set up D100 rules for SR
(or any game), I'd try to make use of the resolution, instead of letting
80% of it go to waste :)

> the other huge reason for it is that I want them
> to understand just how advanced these higher level skills are because
> they're taking them like they're candy and ending up with a 5/7 in
> smg's/ingram smartgun as an example...that score according to the book
> is that of an expert...someone that's so flawless with the gun that they
> never miss or if they do it doesn't happen twice in a row

It is true that a percentile system makes it easy for players to judge
their chances, yes.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 30
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 12 13:55:00 2001
From: "Gurth" <Gurth@******.nl>
> According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 11 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...
>
> > No......there's both 10's and 15's and umm....
>
> But 10% equals a +/-2 in a D20 system, and 15% a +/-3.
>
> > one condition for a 5 so no it's percentile....
>
> It's your adaptation, of course, but if I were to set up D100 rules for SR
> (or any game), I'd try to make use of the resolution, instead of letting
> 80% of it go to waste :)

I have had a look through Dereks tables, and everything could be scaled for D20,
as everything is a base of 5%, except for one tiny rule:
a roll of 100 is always a failure, and a roll of 01 is always a success,
nomatter what your actual chances are.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 31
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Anders Swenson)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Dec 12 14:40:01 2001
On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:12:40 +0100
"Lars Wagner Hansen" <l-hansen@*****.tele.dk> wrote:
> From: "Gurth" <Gurth@******.nl>
> > According to Derek Hyde, on Tue, 11 Dec 2001 the word
> on the street was...
> >
> > > No......there's both 10's and 15's and umm....
> >
> > But 10% equals a +/-2 in a D20 system, and 15% a +/-3.
> >
> > > one condition for a 5 so no it's percentile....
> >
> > It's your adaptation, of course, but if I were to set
> up D100 rules for SR
> > (or any game), I'd try to make use of the resolution,
> instead of letting
> > 80% of it go to waste :)
>
> I have had a look through Dereks tables, and everything
> could be scaled for D20,
> as everything is a base of 5%, except for one tiny rule:
> a roll of 100 is always a failure, and a roll of 01 is
> always a success,
> nomatter what your actual chances are.
>
> Lars
So roll an additional D10 to confirm on rolls of 01 and 20.
No Problem!
Now, in D20 Runequest, when you're on the Hero Plane, you
have to roll on a D30...
--Anders
Message no. 32
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 13 06:05:01 2001
According to Lars Wagner Hansen, on Wed, 12 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> I have had a look through Dereks tables, and everything could be scaled
> for D20, as everything is a base of 5%, except for one tiny rule:
> a roll of 100 is always a failure, and a roll of 01 is always a success,
> nomatter what your actual chances are.

Which is easy enough to do in a D20 system by saying that a roll of 1 or 20 is a
_chance_ for an automatic success or failure, requiring a second die roll. You
could even base the degree of success/failure on that second roll.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 33
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 13 16:15:01 2001
> > I have had a look through Dereks tables, and everything could be
scaled
> > for D20, as everything is a base of 5%, except for one tiny rule:
> > a roll of 100 is always a failure, and a roll of 01 is always a
success,
> > nomatter what your actual chances are.
>
> Which is easy enough to do in a D20 system by saying that a roll of 1
or
> 20 is a
> _chance_ for an automatic success or failure, requiring a second die
roll.
> You
> could even base the degree of success/failure on that second roll.

Ok.....since everyone seems to think that it'd be easier to use my
system as a D20 system would anyone that I sent the file to want to send
me exactly how you'd go about converting it to that so that it's not an
insane amount of math at the table? I'm not opposed to the d20 setup
either because all of my gamers are die hard AD&D players too and we'd
all pick up the 20's again for the sake of more play for them, (besides
we've gotta have some use for those dang unlucky dice that insist on
rolling LOW)
Message no. 34
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Kesh)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Thu Dec 13 20:00:01 2001
On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:11:29 -0600, Derek Hyde wrote:

>Ok.....since everyone seems to think that it'd be easier to use my
>system as a D20 system would anyone that I sent the file to want to send
>me exactly how you'd go about converting it to that so that it's not an
>insane amount of math at the table? I'm not opposed to the d20 setup
>either because all of my gamers are die hard AD&D players too and we'd
>all pick up the 20's again for the sake of more play for them, (besides
>we've gotta have some use for those dang unlucky dice that insist on
>rolling LOW)

I haven't really been paying much attention to this discussion, but I'm
willing to help if you can summarize what you're trying to do. Perhaps a
new thread title would keep it under control. :)
Message no. 35
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 14 05:35:07 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Thu, 13 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> Ok.....since everyone seems to think that it'd be easier to use my
> system as a D20 system would anyone that I sent the file to want to send
> me exactly how you'd go about converting it to that so that it's not an
> insane amount of math at the table? I'm not opposed to the d20 setup
> either because all of my gamers are die hard AD&D players too and we'd
> all pick up the 20's again for the sake of more play for them, (besides
> we've gotta have some use for those dang unlucky dice that insist on
> rolling LOW)

It's very simple: all the modifiers in your system are multiples of 5. As I
recall, each level of skill gave you 15%, every attribute level +10%, and
so on. So what you do, is divide all numbers by 5: each skill level gives a
+3, each attribute level a +2, etc.

The only thing this really changes, is the fumble and automatic success
chances, so if you want to keep those at 1% each, you'll need to say that,
if you roll a 1 or a 20, you need to roll again, and if you score 4 or less
(I think...) on it, you get the automatic failure/success. This way, you've
got the exact same chances as in your D100 system, but using a D20.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 36
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Derek Hyde)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 14 10:20:01 2001
> It's very simple: all the modifiers in your system are multiples of 5.
As
> I
> recall, each level of skill gave you 15%, every attribute level +10%,
and
> so on. So what you do, is divide all numbers by 5: each skill level
gives
> a
> +3, each attribute level a +2, etc.
>
> The only thing this really changes, is the fumble and automatic
success
> chances, so if you want to keep those at 1% each, you'll need to say
that,
> if you roll a 1 or a 20, you need to roll again, and if you score 4 or
> less
> (I think...) on it, you get the automatic failure/success. This way,
> you've
> got the exact same chances as in your D100 system, but using a D20.

Ok I went through my tables and redid them as a d20 system but now the
numbers seem to be ok OTHER than for the people that have upped
attributes...once you break the skill 6 attribute 6 barrier the numbers
start getting WAY up there...to the point that (as far as I take my
tables out, not that they'd be getting used much) if you were to come up
with someone with a skill of 10 and an attribute of 19-20 they'd be able
to do ANYTHING up to a normal TN 25!!!! With no chance of failure other
than the critical. Granted you're not likely to see many of these types
but I do have a player that every time he gets any karma he banks it
towards his next level of initiation, when you start at a magic of 6 and
you figure that each level of initiation adds one to it it can start
adding up fast....and a skill of 10 that's going to take an insane
amount of karma to get it but if/when he does get it (which is his goal
I might add) he's going to be unstoppable. Is this pretty much
realistic or do you think it'll cause a problem? (if you want I'll send
you the new d20 charts since I reworked them for the swap off)
Message no. 37
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 14 11:05:02 2001
According to Derek Hyde, on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> Ok I went through my tables and redid them as a d20 system but now the
> numbers seem to be ok OTHER than for the people that have upped
> attributes...once you break the skill 6 attribute 6 barrier the numbers
> start getting WAY up there...to the point that (as far as I take my
> tables out, not that they'd be getting used much) if you were to come up
> with someone with a skill of 10 and an attribute of 19-20 they'd be able
> to do ANYTHING up to a normal TN 25!!!!

This would also be the case in your D100 system: skill 6, attribute 6, TN 4
gives a roll of 6 x 15% + 6 x 10% - 4 x 10% = 90% + 60% - 40% = 110% in
your D100 system, or 6 x 3 + 6 x 2 - 4 x 2 = 18 + 12 - 8 = 22 or less in
the D20 system. (Skill 10, attribute 20, TN 4 gives a percentage chance of
310, while with this D20 system it'd be a roll of 62 or less.) The odds of
success are exactly the same, but it may _appear_ a bit different depending
on your mental picture of D20 and D100 chances.

> Is this pretty much realistic or do you think it'll cause a problem?

I think it works out OK -- skill 6, attribute 6 gives you virtually no
chance of failure on an average task, which is the way it should be. If you
want to check your chances against the basic SR's system, you'll need to
work out the chances of each number of dice succeeding against each TN
(Lars should be able to help you there :) and do the same for your system
(which is easy enough, because you're already working with percentages) and
compare the two.

> (if you want I'll send you the new d20 charts since I reworked them for
> the swap off)

Since you've based everything on fixed multipliers (like the 15% per skill
level), I don't think there's much need to post tables, since everything
can be calculated with easy formulas. For this discussion, as long as
everyone involved knows the multipliers, that should do.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 38
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Fri Dec 14 12:00:02 2001
On Friday, December 14, 2001, at 04:56 , Gurth wrote:

>
> I think it works out OK -- skill 6, attribute 6 gives you virtually no
> chance of failure on an average task, which is the way it should be. If
> you
> want to check your chances against the basic SR's system, you'll need to
> work out the chances of each number of dice succeeding against each TN
> (Lars should be able to help you there :) and do the same for your
> system
> (which is easy enough, because you're already working with percentages)
> and
> compare the two.
>

You can look at all the percentage chances for TN up to 20 with up to 20
dice in the PDF files I have on my web page. Then you can compare that
to this other system to see how far out of whack things may be. From
what I have seen, I think converting over to a RuneQuest way of using
skills would be better, but I will stick with straight SR rules since
they seem to work well.

--Scott
Message no. 39
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sat Dec 15 06:25:01 2001
According to Scott Harrison, on Fri, 14 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> You can look at all the percentage chances for TN up to 20 with up to 20
> dice in the PDF files I have on my web page.

That would be even easier, yeah :)

> Then you can compare that
> to this other system to see how far out of whack things may be.

I think that, if simple multipliers are used like in Derek's system, it's
only really going to fit for a small range of skill levels, so the trick
would be to try and find the range into which typical shadowrunner and
opposition skills fall and adjust the multipliers to suit those.

> From
> what I have seen, I think converting over to a RuneQuest way of using
> skills would be better, but I will stick with straight SR rules since
> they seem to work well.

How does that system work?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 40
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sun Dec 16 05:40:01 2001
From: "Gurth" <Gurth@******.nl>
>> (if you want I'll send you the new d20 charts since I reworked them for
>> the swap off)
>
>Since you've based everything on fixed multipliers (like the 15% per skill
>level), I don't think there's much need to post tables, since everything
>can be calculated with easy formulas. For this discussion, as long as
>everyone involved knows the multipliers, that should do.

There is only one table needed, as Derek decidede that Attributes dosn't give a
straight % per point.
The table looks like this:
Attribute D100/D20
1-2 20%/4
3-4 30%/6
5-6 40%/8
7-8 45%/9
9-10 50%/10
11-12 55%/11
13-14 60%/12
15-16 65%/13
17-18 70%/14
19-20 75%/15

Which IMO is a bit silly. I would rather got for the formula:

D100: Attribute*5 + Skill*15 - TN*5
D20: Attribute + Skill*3 - TN

It doest change things for characters with attributes under 10, and with
attributes over 11, but the advantage is that you only need one formula, instead
of tables.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 41
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sun Dec 16 05:40:07 2001
From: "Gurth" <Gurth@******.nl>
>> From
>> what I have seen, I think converting over to a RuneQuest way of using
>> skills would be better, but I will stick with straight SR rules since
>> they seem to work well.
>
>How does that system work?

RuneQuest?

It works very well :-)

Attributes are on a 3-18 scale (usually rolled on 3D6, but some rolled on 6+2D6,
or 3+3D6 or some other weird combination of a base and some D6).

There are 6-8 Attributes depending on what edition, and combination (some
players incorporate things from other Basic Roleplay games).

>From your attributes you figure secondary attributes like Hit Points (and Sanity
Points if those are used, improted from CoC).

Skills are based on your attributes. Skills are grouped, and you get a ceratin
amount of points for each group. So with Strength of 15, you could have 75% to
distribute among your Strength skills. Most skills have a base value.

A skill check is simpley rolling under you skill on D100. If you roll under 20%
of your skill, you get a critical success. If you roll over you fail, and over
20% of your failure gives a critical failure:

Example: Skill 75%
01-15 Critical success
16-75 Success
76-95 Failure
96-00 Critical failure

If you use a skill successfully, you have a chance of improving the skill. At
the end of the adventure, or whenever the GM says is appropriate, you cna check
all skills that you have used successfully. You can only try to improve each
skill once, nomatter how many times you succeded. To improve the skill you must
roll over the skill rating on D100, if you do you improve by D6 points (%).

That's what I can remember, and I'm sure it's half wrong as we used to have a
lot of house rules.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 42
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Sun Dec 16 06:50:04 2001
According to Lars Wagner Hansen, on Sun, 16 Dec 2001 the word on the street was...

> There is only one table needed, as Derek decidede that Attributes dosn't
> give a straight % per point.
> The table looks like this:
> Attribute D100/D20
> 1-2 20%/4
> 3-4 30%/6
[snip]
> 17-18 70%/14
> 19-20 75%/15
>
> Which IMO is a bit silly.

The problem I see with it is that there's no point in having a skill at an even
rating -- it's like D&D3 abilities scores. If you want to use a table, you may
want to do it more like this:

Attribute D100/D20
1 10%/2
2 20%/4
3 25%/5
4 30%/6
5 35%/7
6 40%/8
7 43%/-
8 45%/9
9 48%/-
10 50%/10
11 53%/-
12 55%/11
13 58%/-
14 60%/12
15 63%/-
16 65%/13
17 68%/-
18 70%/14
19 73%/-
20 75%/15

In which case you at least get a benefit from having even skill levels and from
using a D100 system.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
"I know you're expecting me to take that as good news," Randy says.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L++ E W-(++) N o? K w+(--) O V?
PS+ PE(-)(+) Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++(-)>$ tv+ b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 43
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Mon Dec 17 05:35:01 2001
On Saturday, December 15, 2001, at 11:55 , Gurth wrote:

>> From
>> what I have seen, I think converting over to a RuneQuest way of using
>> skills would be better, but I will stick with straight SR rules since
>> they seem to work well.
>
> How does that system work?
>

Skills all have a percentage chance to work (and can exceed 100%).
There are different types of skill roll : critical, special, normal,
failure, and fumble (In ScottQuest there is also botch which lies
between failure and fumble). The chance for a critical is 5% your skill
chance, the special is 20%, etc. E.g., a skill of 67% yields the
following table:
01 - 03 critical
04 - 13 special
14 - 67 success
68 - 98 failure
99 - 00 fumble
There are the edge rules of 01 is always a success (not necessarily
a critical), and 00 is always a failure (not necessarily a fumble).

Skills are grouped into categories like Manipulation, Attack,
Parry, Stealth, Agility, Communication, etc. These categories have
modifiers that are influenced by the character's attributes. E.g.,
Stealth has Size as a negative modifier, and Dexterity as a positive
modifier -- so a bigger character is naturally less stealthy, and a
dextrous one is more stealthy. All skills within a category inherit the
modifier.

The reason skills can go over 100% is because this influences the
chances to get a Special or Critical success. This is important
especially in combat where better types of success have better results.

Typically, in using a skill the GM modifies the chance of success
based on situational modifiers. So, in a combat scenario if you are
attacking someone from behind, you get +20% on your skill to hit because
you are in a better position. A GM may declare that since the surface
has lots of nooks and crannies (good places for hand and footholds) and
all characters climbing it get +30% on their skill to do so.

A simple roll of the percentile dice indicates what type of success
someone gets when attempting the skill. Therefore, instead of staging
damage like the normal SR way of things, one only stages when one gets a
Special or Critical success. A normal success just does base damage.
Since RQ does not use firearms (for the most part) you usually just
start bypassing armor points with better types of success.

It would be interesting to see an adaptation of SR to the
percentile system used by RQ because I would imagine it would be hard to
stage up damage, and therefore, make combat even longer. Unfortunately
I have no time to dedicate to this since I am working on Java utilities
at the moment.

--Scott
Message no. 44
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lars Wagner Hansen)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Tue Jan 8 20:40:05 2002
From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
> At 09:55 PM 12/10/2001 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
> >From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
> ><Snip strikes again>
> > > Check the following table which lists the probability of success when
using
> > > one die vs a given target number.
> >
> >But those small statistically differences between a single D6 and a single
> >D8(0-7) statistics, can be extrapolated (hope its the right word) into the
> >extreme when rolling multriple dice.
>
> I would love to see the math that this statement is based on :)

OK I'll try to explain what I mean:

Try this for arguments sake (read: I can't be bothered to figure out the real
numbers)

Chances of rolling 18 (these are the real numbers):

D6=1/(6*6*6)=1/216=0.46% (You have to roll 6 three times in a row)

D8(0-7)=1/(8*8*4)=0.78% (You have to roll 7, 7, 4-7)

The difference between the D6 and the D8 is only 0.32%, which isn't that much,
and the chance to succed on both dice rolls are next to impossible in any case.

But if you roll enough dice you "might" get the following results:

XD6=4.63% XD8=7.81%

Still not that much difference, but if I was to bet money on the outcome, I know
where I would put it down.

XXD6F.29% XXD8x.13%

And now we see a real difference. Less than 50% on the D6, but over 75% on the
D8 system. Which system would you prefer to use, if your characters life was
depending on it?

But then again, it dosn't realy matter, as the bad guys would use the same
system as you, and thus their chances would be screwed in the same matter..

It all boils down to "Have Fun! Play Shadowrun!" and use what ever rules suit
you and your group.

Lars
--
Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
--
SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
--
Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 45
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Jan 9 10:30:01 2002
At 02:27 AM 1/9/2002 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
>From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
> > At 09:55 PM 12/10/2001 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
> > >From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
> > ><Snip strikes again>
> > > > Check the following table which lists the probability of success when
>using
> > > > one die vs a given target number.
> > >
> > >But those small statistically differences between a single D6 and a single
> > >D8(0-7) statistics, can be extrapolated (hope its the right word) into the
> > >extreme when rolling multriple dice.
> >
> > I would love to see the math that this statement is based on :)
>
>OK I'll try to explain what I mean:
>
>Try this for arguments sake (read: I can't be bothered to figure out the real
>numbers)
>
>Chances of rolling 18 (these are the real numbers):
>
>D6=1/(6*6*6)=1/216=0.46% (You have to roll 6 three times in a row)
>
>D8(0-7)=1/(8*8*4)=0.78% (You have to roll 7, 7, 4-7)
>
>The difference between the D6 and the D8 is only 0.32%, which isn't that much,
>and the chance to succed on both dice rolls are next to impossible in any
>case.
>
>But if you roll enough dice you "might" get the following results:
>
>XD6=4.63% XD8=7.81%

From the research I've done, I think it's as simple as adding the
probabilities together a number of times equal to the number of dice
rolled. For example:

Six dice are rolled vs a target number of 18.

6d6 = %2.76 (0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46, or 6 * 0.46)

6d8 = %4.68 (6 * 0.78)

>Still not that much difference, but if I was to bet money on the outcome,
>I know
>where I would put it down.
>
>XXD6=46.29% XXD8=78.13%

Just by working the math backwards, you would have to roll 100 dice to get
those percentage chances :)

Lets say the target number is a 4. With 1d6 the chance is 2 in 6, or
%33. With 1d8(0-7) the chance is 3 in 8, or %37.

6d6 = %198

6d8 = %222

In either case this means that odds are that either roll with result in two
successes. The person rolling d8s has a %20 chance of getting a third success.


>Which system would you prefer to use, if your characters life was
>depending on it?

The d8 system, but that's a no brainer :)

As a GM I don't see enough of a difference to worry about d8 breaking the
game, and it takes care of the 6=7 issue, which is a major issue for me (


>But then again, it dosn't realy matter, as the bad guys would use the same
>system as you, and thus their chances would be screwed in the same matter..
>
>It all boils down to "Have Fun! Play Shadowrun!" and use what ever rules
suit
>you and your group.
>
>Lars
>--
>Lars Wagner Hansen, Jagtvej 11, 4180 Sorø
>l-hansen@*****.tele.dk http://home4.inet.tele.dk/l-hansen
>--
>SRGC v0.22 SR1 SR2++ SR3+++ h+ b+++ B--- UB++ IE+ RN LST W++ dk sa++ ma+
>sh++ ad++++ ri mc rk-- m- (e-- o t-- d-) gm+ M- P-
>--
>Main Rule of Usenet: Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to
>their level, then beat you with experience.
Message no. 46
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: d6 SR, why not?
Date: Wed Jan 9 10:40:01 2002
Sorry for the double post. Eudora sent the previous one before I was
finished saying what I wanted to say.

At 02:27 AM 1/9/2002 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
>From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
> > At 09:55 PM 12/10/2001 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
> > >From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
> > ><Snip strikes again>
> > > > Check the following table which lists the probability of success when
>using
> > > > one die vs a given target number.
> > >
> > >But those small statistically differences between a single D6 and a single
> > >D8(0-7) statistics, can be extrapolated (hope its the right word) into the
> > >extreme when rolling multriple dice.
> >
> > I would love to see the math that this statement is based on :)
>
>OK I'll try to explain what I mean:
>
>Try this for arguments sake (read: I can't be bothered to figure out the real
>numbers)
>
>Chances of rolling 18 (these are the real numbers):
>
>D6=1/(6*6*6)=1/216=0.46% (You have to roll 6 three times in a row)
>
>D8(0-7)=1/(8*8*4)=0.78% (You have to roll 7, 7, 4-7)
>
>The difference between the D6 and the D8 is only 0.32%, which isn't that much,
>and the chance to succed on both dice rolls are next to impossible in any
>case.
>
>But if you roll enough dice you "might" get the following results:
>
>XD6=4.63% XD8=7.81%

From the research I've done, I think it's as simple as adding the
probabilities together a number of times equal to the number of dice
rolled. For example:

Six dice are rolled vs a target number of 18.

6d6 = %2.76 (0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46, or 6 * 0.46)

6d8 = %4.68 (6 * 0.78)

>Still not that much difference, but if I was to bet money on the outcome,
>I know
>where I would put it down.
>
>XXD6F.29% XXD8x.13%

Just by working the math backwards, you would have to roll 100 dice to get
those percentage chances :)

Lets say the target number is a 4. With 1d6 the chance is 2 in 6, or
%33. With 1d8(0-7) the chance is 3 in 8, or %37.

6d6 = %198

6d8 = %222

In either case this means that odds are that either roll with result in two
successes. The person rolling d8s has a %20 chance of getting a third success.


>Which system would you prefer to use, if your characters life was
>depending on it?

The d8 system, but that's a no brainer :)

As a GM I don't see enough of a difference to worry about d8 breaking the
game, and it takes care of the 6=7 issue, which is a major issue for me.

>But then again, it doesn't really matter, as the bad guys would use the same
>system as you, and thus their chances would be screwed in the same matter..

Here is where we differ, which is okay :) I don't feel that there's enough
of a difference that anyone gets screwed, PC or NPC.

>It all boils down to "Have Fun! Play Shadowrun!" and use what ever rules
suit
>you and your group.

<nod> On that I agree completely.

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 47
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Jan 9 12:35:10 2002
On Wednesday, January 9, 2002, at 04:25 , Graht wrote:

> At 02:27 AM 1/9/2002 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
>> From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
>> > At 09:55 PM 12/10/2001 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
>> > >From: "Graht" <davidb@****.imcprint.com>
>> > ><Snip strikes again>
>> > > > Check the following table which lists the probability of success
>> when
>> using
>> > > > one die vs a given target number.
>> > >
>> > >But those small statistically differences between a single D6 and a
>> single
>> > >D8(0-7) statistics, can be extrapolated (hope its the right word)
>> into the
>> > >extreme when rolling multriple dice.
>> >
>> > I would love to see the math that this statement is based on :)
>>
>> OK I'll try to explain what I mean:
>>
>> Try this for arguments sake (read: I can't be bothered to figure out
>> the real
>> numbers)
>>
>> Chances of rolling 18 (these are the real numbers):
>>
>> D6=1/(6*6*6)=1/216=0.46% (You have to roll 6 three times in a row)
>>
>> D8(0-7)=1/(8*8*4)=0.78% (You have to roll 7, 7, 4-7)
>>
>> The difference between the D6 and the D8 is only 0.32%, which isn't
>> that much,
>> and the chance to succed on both dice rolls are next to impossible in
>> any case.
>>
>> But if you roll enough dice you "might" get the following results:
>>
>> XD6=4.63% XD8=7.81%
>
> From the research I've done, I think it's as simple as adding the
> probabilities together a number of times equal to the number of dice
> rolled. For example:
>
> Six dice are rolled vs a target number of 18.
>
> 6d6 = %2.76 (0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46, or 6 * 0.46)
>
> 6d8 = %4.68 (6 * 0.78)

This is not how statistics works. The true probabilities for at least 1
success at TN 18 for 6 dice are very close to these values at:

6d6 method: 2.74583%
6d8 method: 4.5969%


>
>> Still not that much difference, but if I was to bet money on the
>> outcome, I know
>> where I would put it down.
>>
>> XXD6F.29% XXD8x.13%
>
> Just by working the math backwards, you would have to roll 100 dice to
> get those percentage chances :)
>
> Lets say the target number is a 4. With 1d6 the chance is 2 in 6, or
> %33. With 1d8(0-7) the chance is 3 in 8, or %37.
>
> 6d6 = %198
>
> 6d8 = %222
>
> In either case this means that odds are that either roll with result in
> two successes. The person rolling d8s has a %20 chance of getting a
> third success.
>
>
I am not sure I understand what is trying to be demonstrated here, but
the chances of getting at least a TN4 on either the d6 system or the d8
system is the same. Therefore, the charts are identical for TN4 (or for
any other chances you can think of that are the exact same).

This is a table of the chances to get each of the lower TNs with the
different dice techniques:

d6 d8
TN1 87.5%
TN2 83.3333% 75%
TN3 66.6667% 62.5%
TN4 50% 50%
TN5 33.3333% 37.5%
TN6 16.6667% 25%
TN7 16.6667% 12.5%
TN8 13.8889% 10.9375%
TN9 11.1111% 9.375%
TN10 8.33333% 7.8125%
TN11 5.55556% 6.25%
TN12 2.77778% 4.6875%
TN13 2.77778% 3.125%
TN14 2.31481% 1.5625%
TN15 1.85185% 1.36719%
TN16 1.38889% 1.17188%
TN17 0.925926% 0.976562%
TN18 0.462963% 0.78125%
TN19 0.462963% 0.585938%
TN20 0.385802% 0.390625%

The reason to illustrate the chart is because you can see how the chance
to succeed using one die influences the chance to succeed using multiple
dice. For example, here are some chances of interest to compare the two
techniques:

At least 3 successes with 10 dice:
d6 d8
TN3 99.6596% 99.2154%
TN8 15.1811% 8.72432%
TN12 0.222099% 0.963877%

As you see, you cannot just compare the chances for a single die and get
some sort of linear relationship to the results when rolling dice as
they are used in Shadowrun. You can see at TN3 the chances are almost
the same even though there is more of an advantage when rolling one with
d6. However, at TN8 you can see the d6 technique has almost twice as
likely a chance to succeed even though with one die it only is 30%
better. And at TN12 where the d8 has less than a 100% advantage with a
single die, the d8 technique with multiple dice leads to over a 400%
advantage.

So you see that the performance of each system will be different based
on your target numbers primarily, and how much better you do with one
system over the other will depend on the number of successes you need
and how many dice you roll.

Enjoy.

--Scott
Message no. 48
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Graht)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Jan 9 12:50:01 2002
At 06:38 PM 1/9/2002 +0100, Scott Harrison wrote:

>On Wednesday, January 9, 2002, at 04:25 , Graht wrote:
>
>>At 02:27 AM 1/9/2002 +0100, Lars Wagner Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>>Chances of rolling 18 (these are the real numbers):
>>>
>>>D6=1/(6*6*6)=1/216=0.46% (You have to roll 6 three times in a row)
>>>
>>>D8(0-7)=1/(8*8*4)=0.78% (You have to roll 7, 7, 4-7)
>>>
>>>The difference between the D6 and the D8 is only 0.32%, which isn't that
>>>much,
>>>and the chance to succed on both dice rolls are next to impossible in
>>>any case.
>>>
>>>But if you roll enough dice you "might" get the following results:
>>>
>>>XD6=4.63% XD8=7.81%
>>
>> From the research I've done, I think it's as simple as adding the
>> probabilities together a number of times equal to the number of dice
>> rolled. For example:
>>
>>Six dice are rolled vs a target number of 18.
>>
>>6d6 = %2.76 (0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46 + 0.46, or 6 * 0.46)
>>
>>6d8 = %4.68 (6 * 0.78)
>
>This is not how statistics works. The true probabilities for at least 1
>success at TN 18 for 6 dice are very close to these values at:
>
>6d6 method: 2.74583%
>6d8 method: 4.5969%

Heck, I'm amazed I came that close ;)

Just for reference, what is the formula used to figure that out? I really
want to know how to calculate the odds for different numbers and types of dice.

>>Lets say the target number is a 4. With 1d6 the chance is 2 in 6, or
>>%33. With 1d8(0-7) the chance is 3 in 8, or %37.
>>
>>6d6 = %198
>>
>>6d8 = %222
>>
>>In either case this means that odds are that either roll with result in
>>two successes. The person rolling d8s has a %20 chance of getting a
>>third success.
>>
>I am not sure I understand what is trying to be demonstrated here, but the
>chances of getting at least a TN4 on either the d6 system or the d8 system
>is the same. Therefore, the charts are identical for TN4 (or for any
>other chances you can think of that are the exact same).

Sorry, my bad. I *meant* to type a 5 there.

To Life,
-Graht
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader II
--
Message no. 49
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Scott Harrison)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Jan 9 16:40:02 2002
On Wednesday, January 9, 2002, at 06:51 , Graht wrote:

>>
>> This is not how statistics works. The true probabilities for at least
>> 1 success at TN 18 for 6 dice are very close to these values at:
>>
>> 6d6 method: 2.74583%
>> 6d8 method: 4.5969%
>
> Heck, I'm amazed I came that close ;)
>
> Just for reference, what is the formula used to figure that out? I
> really want to know how to calculate the odds for different numbers and
> types of dice.
>
I have some source code on my web page (www.mithrandir.com -- follow
links to Software and Shadowrun) and it's called tn.c. You can see the
algorithm that is used. I have also whipped up a variation of that
called tnd8 which does the same thing but using the d8 (0 - 7) system.
I hae not yet put that onto the site, but probably will. And if you
want, you can just fill in the blanks on the tn Java page and just run
it from the web page. You can also download tables of chances in PDF
format as well.

--Scott
Message no. 50
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Iridios)
Subject: d6 SR, Why not?
Date: Wed Jan 9 19:30:01 2002
Graht wrote:

<snip: bunch'o'math>

>
> Lets say the target number is a 4. With 1d6 the chance is 2 in 6, or
> %33. With 1d8(0-7) the chance is 3 in 8, or %37.

Err... With a target number of 4 the chance of success on one d6 is 3
in 6 (4,5,6) and 4 in 8 on a d8 [0-7] (4,5,6,7). 50% chance either way.


--
Iridios
--
Thinking of changing my name to Monkeywrench.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about d6 SR, Why not?, 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!