Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Twist0059@***.com Twist0059@***.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 13:25:54 EDT
Does anyone else find the Shadowrun target number system to be a little too
difficult? If you're at 5 or under, it's considered too easy a task. If
you're at 6 or over, you feel pretty much screwed. This situation prompts
GMs to rate at 6 or over to challenge players, while players are continually
trying to power game to get their TNs at 5 or below so they'll have some
chance to succeed.

If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
everyone think?






-Twist
Message no. 2
From: dEr sCHrecKlicHe sVEn Der-schreckliche-Sven@********.de
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 19:43:05 +0200
hey



>If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
>switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
>everyone think?



the whole shadowrun system is based on d6es. by changing such a basic
component of shadowrun, you would destroy the entire concept. i wouldŽnt do
so.

-
GCC dx s++: a--- C++(+++)>$ U? 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++*(**)

dEr-sCHrecKlicHe-sVEn@********.de
uip: 29454728
Message no. 3
From: MC23 mc23@**********.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 13:55:33 -0400
Once upon a time, Twist0059@***.com wrote;

>If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
>switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
>everyone think?

d10 would have been better but the whole system is based on a d6
scale, the conversions need would be tremendous, so much so you could
consider being another game system altogether (after 10 years of
existence it would be a bad idea). Percentile does not lend itself well
to success levels (and limits on such) that Shadowrun it set to.

Besides working with another die system would still set itself up
for a whole new set of min/maxing problems.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

"CYNIC, n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are,
not as they ought to be."
-The Devil's Dictionary, Ambrose Bierce

I am MC23
Message no. 4
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 10:56:59 -0700
On Sat, 7 Aug 1999 13:25:54 Twist0059 wrote:

>Does anyone else find the Shadowrun target number system to be a little too
>difficult? If you're at 5 or under, it's considered too easy a task. If
>you're at 6 or over, you feel pretty much screwed. This situation prompts
>GMs to rate at 6 or over to challenge players, while players are continually
>trying to power game to get their TNs at 5 or below so they'll have some
>chance to succeed.

This all depends upon your level of skill versus the task at hand. If your character has
a low skill in something, he/she/it will probably know that some things are just too far
out of reach and won't waste the time trying.

A TN should reflect the difficulty of the task in the current setting/situation. It
should be the same for everyone trying the same thing at the same time with the same
tools, etc. The only thing that should effect how difficult the task is would be the
skill of whoever is trying to accomplish this task and the tools they have (magic, cyber,
etc.). The TN should be the same, regardless. As I mentioned above, the circumstances
surrounding the situation could alter the TN (i.e. you are trying to scale a wall and it
starts to rain - this would make it more difficult).

>If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
>switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
>everyone think?

I disagree. ;) I spent quite a bit of time figuring out the statistics behind SR die
rolls and I found it to be quite solid. Sure there are a couple of issues, but nothing
worth scrapping the system over. The main thing to keep in mind is consistency. Use all
the appropriate TN mods and use them for everyone. This will help ensure that the game is
more balanced.

>-Twist

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Message no. 5
From: Arcady arcady@***.net
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 11:13:58 -0700
> >Does anyone else find the Shadowrun target number system to be a
>
> >If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
> >switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
>
> I disagree. ;) I spent quite a bit of time figuring out the
> statistics behind SR die rolls and I found it to be quite solid.

This brings up a question. Has anybody every put the SR die mechanics
through a probability statistics test of some kind?

Any idea on what target number vs. what skill level leads to what
probability of success?

I'd love to see such an analysis if one exists.

On the issue of a percentile system. To me even if mathematically those are
superior they 'feel' stale and undynamic. I've never liked the feel of a
percentile roll. And for me the feel that a game mechanic leaves me with is
more important than it's statistical accuracy or mathematical perfection.

Arcady http://www.jps.net/arcady/ <0){{{{><
The Revolution will not be televised; it'll be emailed.
/.)\ Stop making sense. Be an Anti Intellectual
\(@/ Be Tao. Live Tao. Feel Tao. But don't do Tao.
Message no. 6
From: zebulingod zebulingod@*****.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 12:16:25 -0700
>If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
>switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
>everyone think?
>

I personally think that that is a horrible idea....whatever will I do with
my 200 6-sided dice then? That would mean I would have to go out and buy a
bunch of 10-sided. Besides, I like the TN# system...

Zebulin
Message no. 7
From: The Hamm ljvance@*******.edu
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 12:31:09 -0700
At 01:25 PM 8/7/99 EDT, you wrote:
>Does anyone else find the Shadowrun target number system to be a little too
>difficult? If you're at 5 or under, it's considered too easy a task. If
>you're at 6 or over, you feel pretty much screwed. This situation prompts
>GMs to rate at 6 or over to challenge players, while players are continually
>trying to power game to get their TNs at 5 or below so they'll have some
>chance to succeed.
>
>If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
>switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
>everyone think?
>-Twist


No no no no no. One of the reasons I really liked SR was because it was so
easy to navigate the dice system. As opposed to D&D, ED, or just about any
other game system, which I've never had the patience to memorize what dice
to roll when or for what, and it is just easier to remember one number for
what dice to roll.

IMHO.

-The Hamm
Message no. 8
From: Scott Wheelock iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 17:13:12 -0300
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Twist0059@***.com."
] Does anyone else find the Shadowrun target number system to be a little too
] difficult? If you're at 5 or under, it's considered too easy a task. If
] you're at 6 or over, you feel pretty much screwed. This situation prompts
] GMs to rate at 6 or over to challenge players, while players are
continually
] trying to power game to get their TNs at 5 or below so they'll have some
] chance to succeed.

TN Five's tough on three dice...even four's a toss-up sometimes. Six
and up is nasty, depending on how many successes you need, but
certainly not impossible. All in all, the system works for me.

] If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
] switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
] everyone think?

Yay, Palladium! Nothing would get my SR collection on eBay faster,
let me tell you.

-Murder of One

To: All Employees
From: Human Resources
Subject: Short Term Disability benefit plan
-------------------------------------------------------------
"We are pleased to make available to you an
additional opportunity to enroll in the Voluntary
STD benefit option."
Message no. 9
From: stefan casanova@***.passagen.se
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 01:55:03 +0000
> If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
> switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
> everyone think?

Think that would screw everything up big time ... not to mention that
it would totally screw up any kinda of backward compability to old
sourcebooks/adventures.

The type of die you use doesn't really matter, they all have there
flaws. I like it that shadowrun is a one type die kinda game and not
like for example ad&d where you have to have this multitude of dices.

% percentage gaming is nice but it wouldn't fit at all and the work
in conversion would be a giant pain in the butt.

.stefan


------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Frag you and the datastream you came on!" - Sinjin the decker
------------------------------------------------------------------------
... E-Mail .............................. casanova@***.passagen.se ...
... HomePage .................... http://hem.passagen.se/casanova/ ...
... ICQ ................................................... 793828 ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message no. 10
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 18:26:37 -0700
On Sun, 8 Aug 1999 01:55:03 stefan wrote:

>Think that would screw everything up big time ... not to mention that
>it would totally screw up any kinda of backward compability to old
>sourcebooks/adventures.

Definitely. It's best to leave it be.

>The type of die you use doesn't really matter, they all have there
>flaws. I like it that shadowrun is a one type die kinda game and not
>like for example ad&d where you have to have this multitude of dices.

Too true. It might have been nice if D10s were used from the start instead of D6s just to
push back the TN 6/7 hump a bit, but it's not really important.

>% percentage gaming is nice but it wouldn't fit at all and the work
>in conversion would be a giant pain in the butt.

I agree that it wouldn't fit precisely with the system, but it's definitely possible.
After doing a nice long recreational project of figuring out the probabilities of TNs 2
through 20 with anywhere from 1 - 20 dice, I could easily see using the resulting tables
as percentile charts. I wouldn't do it because I like the current system, but it's
certainly feasible if someone wanted to roll a percentile and look up on the chart how
many successes they obtained. At least it would save a little time once you got used to
it. I just prefer to roll buttloads of dice. ;)

>.stefan

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Message no. 11
From: Oliver McDonald oliver@*********.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 19:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
On Sat, 07 Aug 1999 18:26:37 -0700, Kelson wrote:

>At least it would save a little time once you got used to it. I just prefer to roll
buttloads of dice. ;)

Especially as the GM... Scares the players when it takes more than a minute or so to roll
the dice
on an attack...

-----------------------------------------------------------
Oliver McDonald - oliver@*********.com
http://web2.spydernet.com/oliver/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Space. The Final Frontier. Let's not close it down.
Brought to you via CyberSpace, the recursive frontier.

"that is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may
die."
-H.P. Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu."

ICQ: 38158540
Message no. 12
From: Starrngr@***.com Starrngr@***.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 03:04:12 EDT
In a message dated 8/7/99 12:15:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
zebulingod@*****.com writes:

> >If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
> >switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
> >everyone think?
> >
>
> I personally think that that is a horrible idea....whatever will I do with
> my 200 6-sided dice then? That would mean I would have to go out and buy a
> bunch of 10-sided. Besides, I like the TN# system...

I have to agree with Zeb here. To go to a different die totaly changes the
skill use system. I will agree that TN#s do seem to suffer from inflation...
I seem to commonly run into TN#s greater than six in combat. ABOUT THE
GREATEST CHANGE I could see happening anytime in the future would be going to
a skill plus attribute roll, but that would aslo require increaseing the base
TN's for tasks but would increase the need for improving base stats... As the
game stands right now, the only reason to improve your stats after charecter
creation is if you default to a stat a lot. IF you have skills they are
totaly divorced from the stat controling them. For example, somone with a
decent quickness and a rifles skill of one should have a better chance to hit
than another charecter with a quckness of 2 or 3 and the same rifle skill of
1. In the present game mechanics both would have the same chance of hitting
which I do feel is unrealistic.

I suppose that I am a bit biased, but Ive played games in which the basic
mechanic is Stat+Skill+die roll and I rather like them, but that would
represent a major change to the game mechanics.

In this case, I could live with a stat+skill = number of dice rolled system,
since it would represent minimal changes in the game mechanics, and it would
give charecters with higher stats a better chance of success since they do
roll more dice. On the other hand, I will admit to the possibility of this
leading to munchinism... Have any of the big house rule types ever
experimented with this change? if so, how do you feel it changes game
balance?
Message no. 13
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 10:04:39 +0200
Starrngr@***.com wrote:
>
.
> I seem to commonly run into TN#s greater than six in combat. ABOUT THE
> GREATEST CHANGE I could see happening anytime in the future would be going to
> a skill plus attribute roll, but that would aslo require increaseing the base

I have exactly such skill system in progressive work, it uses no pools
at all.

--
Barbie

"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - Adolf Hitler

barbie@********.de
http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie/index.html

SRGC 0.22: SR1 SR2+++ SR3--- h++++ b++ b--- UB++ IE- RN+ SR_D+++ W++
dk sh++++ ri++++ sa+++ ad+++ m+++(x+++) gm++ m+++ P+++(P*)
Message no. 14
From: Starrngr@***.com Starrngr@***.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 04:28:56 EDT
In a message dated 8/8/99 1:13:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
barbie@********.de writes:

> > I seem to commonly run into TN#s greater than six in combat. ABOUT THE
> > GREATEST CHANGE I could see happening anytime in the future would be
going
> to
> > a skill plus attribute roll, but that would aslo require increaseing the
> base
>
> I have exactly such skill system in progressive work, it uses no pools
> at all.
>

No Pools at all? That seems a little extreme, even for my taste. Still, I'd
like to hear about your end results when you have them, Barbie.
Message no. 15
From: Roger Ramirez chariot@*********.net
Subject: Die Rolls
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 09:08:38 -0400
Hoi There.

The topic of die rolling has interested me.

Does anyone have a formula to figure out the probability of scoring 1 or
more successes if given the number of dice and the target number?

I think it would be interesting to figure out which one is more likely to
happen. 1 success with 4 dice at TN#4 or 6 dice at TN#6. I think the
formula would have a change a bit when you TN# went from the 1-6 range to
the 7-and beyond range, but then a 6 and 7 have the same probability (which
is frustrating occasionally).

Thanks in advance,
Chariot
Message no. 16
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Die Rolls
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 07:59:00 -0700
On Sun, 08 Aug 1999 09:08:38 Roger Ramirez wrote:

>Hoi There.

Hello

>The topic of die rolling has interested me.

>Does anyone have a formula to figure out the probability of scoring 1 or
>more successes if given the number of dice and the target number?

I'll go one better and e-mail you the results from when I did all this awhile back, if you
like. I have tables that will show you your percent chance of getting any given number of
successes with anywhere from 1-20 dice for TNs 2-20. They also show your percent chance
of failing, your percent chance of botching, and the number of successes you will attain
on average. All figures are determined to the nearest 1/100th of a percent (2 decimal
places). Yes, this was a lot of work, but it was fun and it kept me off the streets. ;)

>I think it would be interesting to figure out which one is more likely to
>happen. 1 success with 4 dice at TN#4 or 6 dice at TN#6. I think the
>formula would have a change a bit when you TN# went from the 1-6 range to
>the 7-and beyond range, but then a 6 and 7 have the same probability (which
>is frustrating occasionally).

1 success with 4 dice vs. a TN of 4 is much more likely than 1 success with 6 dice vs. TN
of 6. The former has a 93.75% chance of success, whereas the latter only has a 66.51%
chance. In fact, you still have a greater chance of success if you were to only roll 2
dice vs. the TN of 4 (75.00% chance of getting 1 success). Only if you go down to 1 die
vs. a TN of 4 do you have a lesser chance (only 50.00%) of generating 1 success than if
you rolled 6 dice vs. a TN of 6.

>Thanks in advance,
>Chariot

Let me know if you want me to e-mail those tables to you. They're kind of interesting.
It's pretty humbling to see that even when you're rolling tons of dice vs. a moderate TN
that the average # of successes can seem very low. ;)

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Message no. 17
From: Scott Wheelock iscottw@*****.nb.ca
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 13:38:52 -0300
"And now, a Channel 6 editorial reply to Starrngr@***.com."
<snip stuff>

] As the
] game stands right now, the only reason to improve your stats after
charecter
] creation is if you default to a stat a lot.

Well, that's just not true. You increase Body to take damage better,
to have more overflow, to avoid knockdown, to have higher TNs against
spells. You increase Quickness to raise Reaction, to move further
faster, to increase Combat Pool. You increase Strength to carry more,
to hit harder. You increase Intelligence to increase Reaction, for
more Perception, to resist spells, and to raise Combat and Spell Pool.
You raise Charisma to raise TNs on social tests, to raise Astral Combat
Pool, to be a better conjuror, and to do more damage against Spirits.
You raise Willpower to resist Drain, to raise Combat Pool, Spell Pool,
Astral Combat, resist spells. If I've forgotten some, forgive me.

] IF you have skills they are
] totaly divorced from the stat controling them. For example, somone with a
] decent quickness and a rifles skill of one should have a better
chance to hit
] than another charecter with a quckness of 2 or 3 and the same rifle
skill of
] 1. In the present game mechanics both would have the same chance of
hitting
] which I do feel is unrealistic.

Well, skills cost more to imporove if the linked attribute is low, so
the one with the lower Quickness should take longer to become good at
Rifles than the other one. So not totally divorced, but not joined at
the hip, either, you're right about that.

-------------------------------------------
PLEASE WATCH YOUR STEP
NICK UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Message no. 18
From: Arcady arcady@***.net
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 11:33:39 -0700
> > I seem to commonly run into TN#s greater than six in combat. ABOUT THE
> > GREATEST CHANGE I could see happening anytime in the future would be
going to
> > a skill plus attribute roll, but that would aslo require
> increaseing the base
>
> I have exactly such skill system in progressive work, it uses no pools
> at all.

Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0. ?

Arcady http://www.jps.net/arcady/ <0){{{{><
The Revolution will not be televised; it'll be emailed.
/.)\ Stop making sense. Be an Anti Intellectual
\(@/ Be Tao. Live Tao. Feel Tao. But don't do Tao.
Message no. 19
From: Graht Graht@**********.worldnet.att.net
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 13:31:02 -0500
Twist0059@***.com wrote:
/Does anyone else find the Shadowrun target number system to be a little too
/difficult? If you're at 5 or under, it's considered too easy a task. If
/you're at 6 or over, you feel pretty much screwed. This situation prompts
/GMs to rate at 6 or over to challenge players, while players are continually
/trying to power game to get their TNs at 5 or below so they'll have some
/chance to succeed.

In actual game play TNs of 6, 7, 8 and 9 aren't impossible. At 10 or
higher the PCs start to have a pretty rough time of it.

And FWIW, when my players are confronted with a high target number it
prompts them to get creative and try something else.

/If SR does eventually come out with a Fourth Edition, maybe FASA should
/switch to a percentile system or start using 10-sided dice. What does
/everyone think?

I like the system the way it is. It's nice and basic and combat is over
quickly, and skill tests are decided quickly, leaving more time for
roleplaying. The more complex, or broad, the rules, the more it's like a
minitures game, IMHO.

Also, at one point I tried to convert Shadowrun to a d12 system. The
amount of work involved was outrageous, and I quickly gave it up. Also, my
players weren't interested in playtesting a system built from scratch when
they already knew the Shadowrun system and were happy with it.

-Graht
--
ShadowRN GridSec
The ShadowRN FAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3
Geek Code: GCS d-( ) s++:->+ a@ C++>$ US P L >++ E? W++>+++ !N o-- K-
w+ o? M- VMS? PS+(++) PE+(++) Y+ !PGP t+(++) 5+(++) X++(+++) R+>$ tv+b++ DI++++
D+(++) G e+>+++ h--->---- r+++ y+++
http://home.att.net/~Graht
"The battles that count aren't the ones for gold medals.
The struggles within yourself; the invisible, inevitable
battles inside all of us; that's where it's at."
-Jesse Owens
Message no. 20
From: Dennis Steinmeijer dv8@********.nl
Subject: Die Rolls
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 23:27:48 +0200
oh oh,...can I have a copy of those chance-calculations?

Dennis

"Abashed the Devil stood,...and felt how awful Goodness is..."

----- Original Message -----
From: Kelson <kelson13@*******.com>
To: <shadowrn@*********.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 1999 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: Die Rolls


> On Sun, 08 Aug 1999 09:08:38 Roger Ramirez wrote:
>
> >Hoi There.
>
> Hello
>
> >The topic of die rolling has interested me.
>
> >Does anyone have a formula to figure out the probability of scoring 1 or
> >more successes if given the number of dice and the target number?
>
> I'll go one better and e-mail you the results from when I did all this
awhile back, if you like. I have tables that will show you your percent
chance of getting any given number of successes with anywhere from 1-20 dice
for TNs 2-20. They also show your percent chance of failing, your percent
chance of botching, and the number of successes you will attain on average.
All figures are determined to the nearest 1/100th of a percent (2 decimal
places). Yes, this was a lot of work, but it was fun and it kept me off the
streets. ;)
>
> >I think it would be interesting to figure out which one is more likely to
> >happen. 1 success with 4 dice at TN#4 or 6 dice at TN#6. I think the
> >formula would have a change a bit when you TN# went from the 1-6 range to
> >the 7-and beyond range, but then a 6 and 7 have the same probability
(which
> >is frustrating occasionally).
>
> 1 success with 4 dice vs. a TN of 4 is much more likely than 1 success
with 6 dice vs. TN of 6. The former has a 93.75% chance of success, whereas
the latter only has a 66.51% chance. In fact, you still have a greater
chance of success if you were to only roll 2 dice vs. the TN of 4 (75.00%
chance of getting 1 success). Only if you go down to 1 die vs. a TN of 4 do
you have a lesser chance (only 50.00%) of generating 1 success than if you
rolled 6 dice vs. a TN of 6.
>
> >Thanks in advance,
> >Chariot
>
> Let me know if you want me to e-mail those tables to you. They're kind of
interesting. It's pretty humbling to see that even when you're rolling tons
of dice vs. a moderate TN that the average # of successes can seem very low.
;)
>
> Justin
>
>
> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
>
Message no. 21
From: Dennis Steinmeijer dv8@********.nl
Subject: Die Rolls
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 23:28:36 +0200
My bad,...was supposed to go off the list.

Dennis

"Abashed the Devil stood,...and felt how awful Goodness is..."
Message no. 22
From: Mockingbird mockingbird@*********.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 11:20:13 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: <Starrngr@***.com>
To: <shadowrn@*********.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 1999 2:04 AM
Subject: Re: Die rolls



> In this case, I could live with a stat+skill = number of dice rolled
system,
> since it would represent minimal changes in the game mechanics, and it
would
> give charecters with higher stats a better chance of success since
they do
> roll more dice. On the other hand, I will admit to the possibility of
this
> leading to munchinism... Have any of the big house rule types ever
> experimented with this change? if so, how do you feel it changes game
> balance?


Although I have not tried this system, I have dealt with a munchkin who
used bioware and cyberware to increase his attributes to the point where
he tended to default everything. He figured that when rolling fifteen
dice, the extra dots on the skill web (this was in SR2) didn't matter.
He tended to be right. For this reason, I would hate to see a
stat+skill system.

--Mockingbird

Of course, if they wanted to go to a stat+skill system, change to a d10,
and put a limit of 5 on all attributes and skills it might be ok. :) :)
:) :) :) :) :) :)
Message no. 23
From: Mark A Shieh SHODAN+@***.EDU
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 12:40:48 -0400 (EDT)
"Mockingbird" <mockingbird@*********.com> writes:
> Although I have not tried this system, I have dealt with a munchkin who
> used bioware and cyberware to increase his attributes to the point where
> he tended to default everything. He figured that when rolling fifteen
> dice, the extra dots on the skill web (this was in SR2) didn't matter.
> He tended to be right. For this reason, I would hate to see a
> stat+skill system.

defaulting tended not to be as useful as skill+pool. Without
the pool dice, they frequently weren't that different in effectiveness
though...

> Of course, if they wanted to go to a stat+skill system, change to a d10,
> and put a limit of 5 on all attributes and skills it might be ok. :) :)
> :) :) :) :) :) :)

This sounds oddly familiar. Would you also be in favor of 1s
cancelling successes? :/

Mark
Message no. 24
From: Mockingbird mockingbird@*********.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 12:39:50 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark A Shieh <SHODAN+@***.EDU>
To: <shadowrn@*********.org>
Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: Die rolls


> "Mockingbird" <mockingbird@*********.com> writes:
> > Although I have not tried this system, I have dealt with a munchkin
who
> > used bioware and cyberware to increase his attributes to the point
where
> > he tended to default everything. He figured that when rolling
fifteen
> > dice, the extra dots on the skill web (this was in SR2) didn't
matter.
> > He tended to be right. For this reason, I would hate to see a
> > stat+skill system.
>
> defaulting tended not to be as useful as skill+pool. Without
> the pool dice, they frequently weren't that different in effectiveness
> though...
>
> > Of course, if they wanted to go to a stat+skill system, change to a
d10,
> > and put a limit of 5 on all attributes and skills it might be ok. :)
:)
> > :) :) :) :) :) :)
>
> This sounds oddly familiar. Would you also be in favor of 1s
> cancelling successes? :/
>
> Mark
>

Actually, that is how I defeated his defaulting. Boy was he pissed when
he only got one success after canceling to resist the 9D wound he took.

Mockingbird
Message no. 25
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 19:32:37 +0200
Starrngr@***.com wrote:
>
>
> No Pools at all? That seems a little extreme, even for my taste. Still, I'd
> like to hear about your end results when you have them, Barbie.

Well, considered that the pools are actualy the SR way of including the
attributes into the skill, but since it was never carried out over all
skills, it makes imho sense to drop pools altogether when going to a
system with attribute+skill value.

i can send you, and to those who are interested, the skill system.

--
Barbie

"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - Adolf Hitler

barbie@********.de
http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie/index.html

SRGC 0.22: SR1 SR2+++ SR3--- h++++ b++ b--- UB++ IE- RN+ SR_D+++ W++
dk sh++++ ri++++ sa+++ ad+++ m+++(x+++) gm++ m+++ P+++(P*)
Message no. 26
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 19:44:29 +0200
Arcady wrote:
>
> > I have exactly such skill system in progressive work, it uses no pools
> > at all.
>
> Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0. ?
>
No, my own, has nothing at all top do with CP2020 skill system.
Its more a mix of Kult and RMSS

--
Barbie

"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - Adolf Hitler

barbie@********.de
http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie/index.html

SRGC 0.22: SR1 SR2+++ SR3--- h++++ b++ b--- UB++ IE- RN+ SR_D+++ W++
dk sh++++ ri++++ sa+++ ad+++ m+++(x+++) gm++ m+++ P+++(P*)
Message no. 27
From: Mark Fender markf@******.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 13:02:28 -0500
> > > I seem to commonly run into TN#s greater than six in combat. ABOUT
> THE
> > > GREATEST CHANGE I could see happening anytime in the future would be
> going
> > to
> > > a skill plus attribute roll, but that would aslo require increaseing
> the
> > base
> >
> > I have exactly such skill system in progressive work, it uses no pools
> > at all.
> >
>
> No Pools at all? That seems a little extreme, even for my taste. Still,
> I'd
> like to hear about your end results when you have them, Barbie.
>
Extreme? I've never really liked the Pool system really. I've always been
pretty pleased with how my characters ended up stat wise, without having to
throw in some extra dice somewhere. That, and I never remember pools for
NPCs.
Message no. 28
From: Starrngr@***.com Starrngr@***.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 20:41:00 EDT
In a message dated 8/9/99 10:41:55 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
barbie@********.de writes:

> Well, considered that the pools are actualy the SR way of including the
> attributes into the skill, but since it was never carried out over all
> skills, it makes imho sense to drop pools altogether when going to a
> system with attribute+skill value.
>
> i can send you, and to those who are interested, the skill system.

Indeed, by al means send them along Barbie....
Message no. 29
From: Jeremy Baker meroeandjeremy@*******.com.au
Subject: Die Rolls
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 20:44:23 +1000
>>Does anyone have a formula to figure out the probability of scoring 1 or
>>more successes if given the number of dice and the target number?
>
>I'll go one better and e-mail you the results from when I did all this
awhile back, if you like. I have tables that will show you your percent
chance of getting any given number of successes with anywhere from 1-20 dice
for TNs 2-20. They also show your percent chance of failing, your percent
chance of botching, and the number of successes you will attain on average.
All figures are determined to the nearest 1/100th of a percent (2 decimal
places). Yes, this was a lot of work, but it was fun and it kept me off the
streets. ;)

>Let me know if you want me to e-mail those tables to you. They're kind of
interesting. It's pretty humbling to see that even when you're rolling tons
of dice vs. a moderate TN that the average # of successes can seem very low.
;)
>
>Justin


I would very much appreciate seeing such a list of tables, and I
suspect I am not the only one. If they are not to big you might consider
posting them to the list, but if you feel this would be inappropriate; then
a personal posting would be gratefully received. Email address
meroeandjeremy@*******.com.au

JB.
Message no. 30
From: Kelson kelson13@*******.com
Subject: Die rolls
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 07:14:51 -0700
On Sat, 7 Aug 1999 11:13:58 Arcady wrote:

>This brings up a question. Has anybody every put the SR die mechanics
>through a probability statistics test of some kind?

>Any idea on what target number vs. what skill level leads to what
>probability of success?

>I'd love to see such an analysis if one exists.

This will be included with what I will be e-mailing out to those who requested the TN
tables. Each table shows the percent chance to get x amount of successes with y dice, the
percent chance of failing, the percent chance of botching, and the average number of
successes expected. This should be everything you need. ;) It will be headed your way
this weekend.

>On the issue of a percentile system. To me even if mathematically those are
>superior they 'feel' stale and undynamic. I've never liked the feel of a
>percentile roll. And for me the feel that a game mechanic leaves me with is
>more important than it's statistical accuracy or mathematical perfection.

A percentile system is actually slightly less accurate, because you would have to round
off to the nearest whole percent in order to generate a table to roll against. Also, when
doing so, you are strictly playing the odds. There is no room for rolling a statistically
"lucky" or "unlucky" roll. You're always playing the odds.

So, while it simplifies die rolling, it takes away some of the fun, IMO. However, once
you get my tables, you will see that you can use them for a percentile system if you
wanted to.

>Arcady http://www.jps.net/arcady/ <0){{{{><

Justin


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Die rolls, 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!