Replacing 3d6 with 4d6 or 3d10?
Peter Knutsen
using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
I see some advantages of replacing 3d6 with something that gives
a larger range of outcomes:
1. The halfpoint-skill incentive can be decreased strongly,
although I'm not sure how.
2. The rules for Critical Fumbles and Critical Succes can be
made more detailed, so that skill level has more influence on
the chance of a critical
The downside is, that attributes gets more finely grained, and
I'm not sure that this is good.
--
Peter Knutsen
Thor Thomas aka Kerr Avon
-be seeing you,
AVON
--
/// Thor Thomas AKA Kerr Avon | tjth...@nyx.net th...@pobox.com
/// "http://pobox.com/~thor" | av...@pobox.com av...@galaxycorp.com
\\\///
\/// Microsoft is a monopoly -- US D.O.J. <*>
Necruar
>
> Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
> using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
> I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
Yes, well, sortof, I never actually got around to doing all the math.
3d10 was my preferred method however there were problems with it because 30
wasn't as easily divisible into a hundred as 18 is, or something like that.
I suppose one could try 3d8, this would actually be *better* than both
because 24 divides nicely (there's only a small remainder) which would mean
there'd be less lumps in the system.
Hmm.. the more I think about it the more I like the idea of 3d8, it'd give
you the extra range, very little reworking of the system would be needed
and it would fit even better than 3d6!!!
Any math gurus out there?
Btw, on a related note (well sorta), GURPS as is would make a mighty fine
Attribute-less system. Instead of having attributes you simply have a
default of 10 for anything that needs doing. If you want better hearing you
buy Acute Hearing. If you want more HP you buy Extra Hit Points, extra will
power, buy Extra Willpower, more fatigue?, buy Extra Fatigue etc.
This would actually solve a few problems with GURPS as well (3000 point
Supers no more!). Some people might say that you'd end up getting munchkins
because all the extra points usually spent on Attributes would be used
elsewhere but all that really needs doing is lowering the attributions
associated with point levels, i.e. a 75 point character is now a potential
hero rather than a 100 point character being a potential hero.
The devil's in the detail though, there'd have to be some major reworking
of skills to associate them with all the differing aspects of the
attributes, still...
N.
--
-128 point lamer...
Rev Robert Weaver
Peter Knutsen wrote in message <3835FFEF...@knutsen.dk>...
>Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
>using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
>I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
>
>a larger range of outcomes:
>
was to create a system that used only one kind of die, and that being the
most common to all games and gamers. I'm reluctant to mess with something
that simple. If I want to play GURPS all I have to do is raid the "Monopoly"
box. All this different dice stuff makes the game into D&D on acid. +-:- )
Rob
Wrathchild
While I'm personally happy with the state of the system there's got to be
somebody out there with lots of material to spare. Or maybe try Deja.
Wrath
Ricky Hunt
percentages are too flat on the ends and too steep in the middle. After
fiddling around with all kinds of multidice replacements (the best I found
was d10+d8), I couldn't get the probabilities where I wanted them. Then it
finally dawned on me that I could set the probabilities where I wanted them.
I wanted 10 to be ~50%, 7 to be ~25% and 14 to be ~75%. I made 3 be 1% and
18 be 99%. Then I messed around with the numbers until I got them where I
wanted them. Now I just roll percentile dice after making all of the normal
skill adjustments and get the final number. For example, someone with a
skill of 14 in broadsword is fighting in semidarkness -2. The skill is
adjusted to 12, looked up on the chart and rolled on percentile dice with a
target of 64% or less.
I like this because it has a minimal impact on the game mechanics. I don't
have to determine a new cost formula for skills or change how the combat
works. It will probably encourage players to push their skills a little
higher because 14 is no longer as good as it was.
I set criticals to be crit failure on 10% of the chance of failure and crit
success on 10% of the chance of success. One thing I am considering is
adjusted numbers that go over 18 increase the chance of a critical success
by 1 or 2% and below 3 would increase the chance of a fumble by 1 to 2%,
while leaving the success chance at 99 or 1% respectively.
Here is the chart: (apologies for the formatting. It is hard to do in plain
text)
3d6 1d100 crit fail
3 1 -- 91
4 5 -- 91
5 10 1 92
6 17 2 93
7 25 3 93
8 33 3 94
9 41 4 95
10 49 5 96
11 57 6 97
12 64 6 97
13 71 7 98
14 77 8 99
15 83 8 99
16 89 9 100
17 94 9 100
18 99 10 --
Rick
Peter Knutsen <pe...@knutsen.dk> wrote in message
news:3835FFEF...@knutsen.dk...
> Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
> using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
> I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
>
> I see some advantages of replacing 3d6 with something that gives
> a larger range of outcomes:
>
Lyle Youngblood
Necruar wrote in message <3837268E...@tig.com.au>...
>Adam vanLangenberg wrote:
>>
>> If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
>It is broke, get a wrench.
>
Wrench? Oh, you mean one o' them funny lookin' hammers.
Lyle
Adam vanLangenberg
Necruar
>
> If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
It is broke, get a wrench.
Necruar
And yet never a satisfactory outcome. Maybe this is why the topic keeps on
cropping up.
Necruar
> I hate to be a purist but I believe part of the original purpose of GURPS
> was to create a system that used only one kind of die, and that being the
> most common to all games and gamers.
Then you stick with your conservative stance while we make the system
better for us.
Amber, Dan, DARE, or Julie
<snip>
> I hate to be a purist but I believe part of the original purpose of GURPS
> was to create a system that used only one kind of die, and that being the
> most common to all games and gamers.
Yes, but 4D6 wouldn't mess with that.
(Personally, I'd go with an odd number of dice, unless you want to
retouch the rolling system, or require at least some points be
spent/received from attributes(which is a little weird).)
7D6 wouldn't be bad... the average attribute would be 24, with a finer
grain near the center and a much finer grain toward the edges... I can't
see any disadvantages, other than needing more than twice as many dice.
- DARE, GURPSist extraordinaire and plenipotentiary
* Today is the first day of the rest of your sentence.
* Hi! I'm a .sig virus! Join the fun and copy me into yours! :)
prei...@my-deja.com
> Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
> using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
> I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
I've used 3d10-6. The average is the same as 3d6, but there's much more
effective range - you've got almost twice as many numbers to play with
before getting 95%+ success rates.
I liked it - you raise the number of skill levels by which a competent
person differs by an expert so they're not so close, you lower the
massive effect which high stats give to skills, and so on.
> 1. The halfpoint-skill incentive can be decreased strongly,
> although I'm not sure how.
Not directly - flattening the bell curve means each skill raise means
less. Skills need to be higher for the same effect, though, so
generally more points will have to be spent in them - making 50-point
characters with 80 experience (or so) tends to help with this.
> 2. The rules for Critical Fumbles and Critical Succes can be
> made more detailed, so that skill level has more influence on
> the chance of a critical
And it offers a chance to remove that weird skill-15 to skill-16 glitch.
> The downside is, that attributes gets more finely grained, and
> I'm not sure that this is good.
They need not - I used the same attribute scale. Higher attributes are
less overwhelming, though - a Dex 16 person now has a nontrivial chance
to fail a straight Dex check, and the difference between him and a Dex
20 person is much clearer.
OTOH, perhaps this is the case - Int 16 is no longer so vastly better
than Int 10 in terms of its effects on game mechanics, so there's much
more scope to use more of the stat range in a reasonable manner.
Since the bought stats of characters won't change much, I view this as a
generally good thing - they don't push the fragile edges of the system
any more. GURPS works pretty well for pretty normal people, and IMHO
gets progressively worse the farther outside the norm you go. This just
alleviates that a bit IMHO - Dex 15 is no longer such a rules abuse.
-P
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Necruar
> GURPS works pretty well for pretty normal people, and IMHO
> gets progressively worse the farther outside the norm you go. This just
> alleviates that a bit IMHO - Dex 15 is no longer such a rules abuse.
Actually this is one subject in which your opinion doesn't matter :)
It says in either Basic or C1 (can't remember, haven't got the books on me
to look up) under skill progression that the system is designed to work
within the 3-18 range but can cope adequately up to around 25. Beyond that
it says the system degrades and recommends ways around the problem that
are, quite frankly, inadequate.
However, a 3d8 bell curve would be VERY nice indeed. I only wish I could do
the math on this to prove it, sigh.
prei...@my-deja.com
> However, a 3d8 bell curve would be VERY nice indeed. I only wish I
> could do the math on this to prove it, sigh.
What sort of math do you need, the probability distribution? If that's
all, I could probably hack something up quick to figure out the distrib
for NdX.
You might want to do 3d8-3, though - that way the average's the same, so
you can use the rest of GURPS without changes. The nice thing about 3d8
is that you can do this simply by saying "count any rolls of 8 as 0
instead", and you can be sure your players will remember because they'll
keep failing their skill checks if they don't...
Goblin
you all get past all the balance problems. I mean every number and bonus in
GURPS was written around a 3D6 curve. How do you adjust the rest without
throwing it all out of whack? I'm not criticizing, I'm honestly curious.
Although I must say it seems like an awful lot of work for something that
won't make much difference in the end. ; ) By all means though... After
all; that's what GURPS is for. : )
Goblin
--
A man said to the universe, "Sir, I exist."
"However," came the reply, "The fact does not
produce in me any sense of obligation."
-Stephen Crane-
If you're not part of the PWOB you're part of the solution.
You have just received a goblin bite!!
Necruar <nec...@tig.com.au> wrote in message
news:383726FF...@tig.com.au...
> Rev Robert Weaver wrote:
>
> > I hate to be a purist but I believe part of the original purpose of
GURPS
> > was to create a system that used only one kind of die, and that being
the
> > most common to all games and gamers.
>
> Then you stick with your conservative stance while we make the system
> better for us.
>
>
Robert Scott Clark
>Peter Knutsen wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
>> using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
>> I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
>
>Yes, well, sortof, I never actually got around to doing all the math.
>
>3d10 was my preferred method however there were problems with it because 30
>wasn't as easily divisible into a hundred as 18 is, or something like that.
>I suppose one could try 3d8, this would actually be *better* than both
>because 24 divides nicely (there's only a small remainder) which would mean
>there'd be less lumps in the system.
>
Umm...why exactly is something dividing evenly into 100 a good thing
to avoid "lumpyness", and what do you mean by lumpyness anyway?
Matthew Henrichsen
>
> Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
> using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
> I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
use d8 or d10. several other posts in this thread have commented
on the trouble of converting all the bonuses, costs, etc to a
different scale (since they were all made to work on a 3d6 scale).
I'd use a 3d12 - because then most things are off by only a factor
of 2.
Any change in the dice changes the mathematics. The average changes
when a different die is used, and the relative* width of the bell
curve (i.e. relative standard deviation) changes when the number
of dice is changed. IN terms of game effects, more dice means that
average results will be more common (not a good thing IMHO).
(* relative to the spread between the high and the low)
3d12 has an average of 19.5 (3d6 average is 10.5)
3d12 max is 36, min is 3 (vs 18 and 3 for 3d6)
To adapt for the new scale, point costs need to be adjusted too.
Average stat is 19 (20 if you're generous). I'd have the incremental
cost for raising a stat be something like 10,10,10,10,10,10,15,15,
15,15,20,20,20,20,25,25... This effectively doubles the cost to
increase attributes (because the effect of a +1 here is about half
the effect of a +1 with 3d6). Advantages and disadvantages would have
to be addressed individually. I'll give a couple examples:
Animal Empathy. Gives a +4 to animal skills in standard GURPS. With
a 3d12 system and the attribute costs above the bonus per point of advantage
is about right with the cost as given. I would allow a person to buy
2 levels of it - to get +8 on animal skills. (I like this approach
because it allows some of the resolution [lack of graininess] I wanted
to add to the 3d6 system.)
Alternatively, I could double the cost of the advantage and double the
bonuses.
Danger sense. SInce there is no direct skill bonuses there is no
change in the effect of the advantage. However - it is now too cheap
compared to the cost of attributes so double the cost.
Doubling the attribute cost allows the use of the same skill progression.
Default skill are at double the penalty: -8 for most easy, -10 for
most avg, etc.
damage dice are d12 as well.
Fright Checks, crit hits and misses, hit locations, reaction tables,
etc. could be left the same or rescaled. If left the same, any bonus
from a 3d12 roll/attribute on a 3d6 roll would need to be halved &
vice versa.
This results in a system where a 200 pt character is about
equivalent to a 100 pt character in standard GURPS.
> I see some advantages of replacing 3d6 with something that gives
> a larger range of outcomes:
>
> 1. The halfpoint-skill incentive can be decreased strongly,
> although I'm not sure how.
This can be done in standard GURPS as easily as on an altered scale-
simply by stretching out the low end so that the .5 skill levels
are closer to the defaults
For instance an easy skill in standard GURPS:
pts 3d6
0.5 -2
1 -0
2 +1
In 3d12 GURPS there is more space to work in...
pts 3d12
0.5 -4
1 -2
2 -0
4 +2
6 +3
> 2. The rules for Critical Fumbles and Critical Succes can be
> made more detailed, so that skill level has more influence on
> the chance of a critical
and so that a 3 and a 6 have different results (6 is rare, but not
nearly as rare as a 3)
> The downside is, that attributes gets more finely grained, and
> I'm not sure that this is good.
This is what I liked the most about the idea. GURPS does not
allow for the village idiot to be smarter than the average
beagle because there isn't enough space between human average
and the average farm animal. Having a human average IQ of 19
allows a lot more space to play in.
Matthew Henrichsen
Amber, Dan, DARE, or Julie
>
> X-no-archive: yes
>
> Use 3d12 and double or halve everything as appropriate. Use 20 as
> starting point for stats.
Actually, the stat average should be 19. 3D6___ = 10.5, while 3D12____
= 19.5, so a stat of 19 would have a 50% chance of success.
Peter Knutsen
Goblin wrote:
>
> Isn't this kinda like adding a fourth item to paper-scissors-rock? How do
> you all get past all the balance problems. I mean every number and bonus in
> GURPS was written around a 3D6 curve. How do you adjust the rest without
> throwing it all out of whack? I'm not criticizing, I'm honestly curious.
> Although I must say it seems like an awful lot of work for something that
> won't make much difference in the end. ; ) By all means though... After
> all; that's what GURPS is for. : )
I have thought about that issue, and it is going to be a lot of work,
but it might be worth it. The ideal would be if all values could
simply be doubled. If a skill default used to be DX-5, it is now
DX-10. But that would happen if 3d6 is replaced with 6d6, and that
is not going to happen. If the switch is made to 4d6, then maybe each
default should be reduced with -1 (i.e. IQ-5 becomes IQ-6) and if
3d10 is used, every default should be reduced with -2 (DX-4 becomes
DX-6).
> Goblin
--
Peter Knutsen
Monk
> Peter Knutsen wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone tried this? I've seen Bryan Maloney's attempts at
> > using 1d20 or 1d100, but honestly, I like the bell curve, while
> > I do find 3d6 to be too grainy.
>
>
> 3d10 was my preferred method however there were problems with it because
30
> wasn't as easily divisible into a hundred as 18 is, or something like
that.
> I suppose one could try 3d8, this would actually be *better* than both
> because 24 divides nicely (there's only a small remainder) which would
mean
> there'd be less lumps in the system.
>
> you the extra range, very little reworking of the system would be needed
> and it would fit even better than 3d6!!!
>
> Any math gurus out there?
>
no other modifications to the system at all and we've been very happy with
it. The 3d8 system seems to help with returning the 'average' (by average I
mean the average my players tend to end up with) skill ratings of 11-14 back
to the realm of average.
It also took care of very high attributes (18+ which are extremely rare)
only failing on the bell curve by an act of god.
I recommend you try it during your next session, just put the 6 sideds away
and grab some 8's... if you don't like it, switch back, no harm
--
At least LAPD only beats you up:
BATF occasionally starts off by
shooting family members, and
sometimes finishes by setting the
building on fire.
the above thoughtfully stolen in entirety
I can't go to work today, the voices in my
head said to stay home and clean the guns
Necruar |The Dark Mage|
> I'm not a math guru in any way shape or form, but I have been using 3d8 with
> no other modifications to the system at all and we've been very happy with
> it. The 3d8 system seems to help with returning the 'average' (by average I
> mean the average my players tend to end up with) skill ratings of 11-14 back
> to the realm of average.
> It also took care of very high attributes (18+ which are extremely rare)
> only failing on the bell curve by an act of god.
> I recommend you try it during your next session, just put the 6 sideds away
> and grab some 8's... if you don't like it, switch back, no harm
Awesome! Glad someone out there has the guts to experiment...
Now I've just got to convince the GM and players.
Have you seen on this thread the argument for the use of 3d7? Basically you
roll d8's but mark the 8 as a 0. It fits even better than 3d8 or 3d6!
N.
--
Paul T.
"Necruar |The Dark Mage|" <nec...@tig.com.au> wrote in message
news:38558E3A...@tig.com.au...
It's not 3d7, but rather 3d8-3 (3 times 1d8-1).
There is a substantial difference.
P.
Monk
you
> roll d8's but mark the 8 as a 0. It fits even better than 3d8 or 3d6!
>
>
> --
I have, it seemed to be a little more work than the majority of my players
like (not a one of them can do most simple math in their heads ;)
3d8 has a similar spread and doesn't make my players add or subtract
anything... very limited math makes for quick combats... I also use TS/SI
style damage boxes so no math at all involved in combat except adding die
totals... very nice, very quick fights and then back to the real roleplaying
Altaron Natherill
> anything... very limited math makes for quick combats... I also use TS/SI
> style damage boxes so no math at all involved in combat except adding die
> totals... very nice, very quick fights and then back to the real roleplaying
Nice, please explain TS/SI damage boxes? Is it sort of how Cyberpunk had
damage boxes? Cause if so I'd be interested to see how you work it into GURPS.
N.
--
Altaron Natherill
> It's not 3d7, but rather 3d8-3 (3 times 1d8-1).
> There is a substantial difference.
Err... 'scuse me? Do I give a rats arse what you think? I said 3d7 and I
meant 3d7, not friggin 3d8-3.
Try telling me I'm wrong and that there is a substantial difference to my
opinion on this matter, dickwad.
N.
--
Steffan O'Sullivan
>"Paul T." wrote:
>
>> It's not 3d7, but rather 3d8-3 (3 times 1d8-1).
>> There is a substantial difference.
>
>Err... 'scuse me? Do I give a rats arse what you think? I said 3d7 and I
>meant 3d7, not friggin 3d8-3.
If you meant 3d7, then why did you give a dice result that returns
3d8-3?
Since you have repeated the error instead of acknowledging it, and
added an insult while doing so, you are obviously an idiot whose
opinion doesn't matter at all to anyone in the world beyond your own
nose.
>Try telling me I'm wrong and that there is a substantial difference to my
>opinion on this matter, dickwad.
*PLONK* Yep, into the killfile you go. You cannot have anything to
say worth reading. Too bad I don't get to read your sparkling reply to
this ...
--
-Steffan O'Sullivan | "I am not one of those who in expressing
s...@vnet.net | opinions confine themselves to facts."
Plymouth, NH, USA |
www.io.com/~sos | -Mark Twain
itzu ihug
> *PLONK* Yep, into the killfile you go. You cannot have anything to
> say worth reading. Too bad I don't get to read your sparkling reply to
> this ...
That won't, however, stop me from mailbombing you...
N.
--
NEil Phillips
Oh, wow. Now there's a great way to make friends. Bet you're an 31337
HaXoR, DuDe..
>N.
How dare you despoil such a sacred Letter.
--
NEil (phil...@webzone.net.au)
Support the use of real names on the Internet.
The opinions expressed in this message are not my own,
but rather are those of Microsoft Corporation.
Monk
> damage boxes? Cause if so I'd be interested to see how you work it into
GURPS.
>
>
> N.
> --
TS/SI = TSR's Top Secret/S.I. for those of you who never saw it for the week
it was out about ten years ago.
The damage system worked like this: Every location had a box with ten boxes
in it(head, arms (ea), torso, legs (ea)), when you took damage in one of the
aforementioned locations that didn't bleed, you marked off slashes in the
boxes for that area (that was 'bruise' damage and healed faster, when you
filled up an area's boxes with bruise, that indicated something like a minor
broken bone and if you took any more damage to that area, the damage would
wrap around as 'wound' damage).
When you took damage that pierced the skill, went right through you, etc
(bullets, knives, etc) you would mark an X in the boxes for that area
depending on how many points you took. Wound damage overwrites bruise
damage. When an area is all filled up with wound damage, it's pulp or
sliced clean off. If your head, or torso gets pulped, you're dead.
Also, if an area fills up, check for unconsciousness.
There's some more details about it that I'm sure I'm missing, if you have
any more questions, feel free to post here or write me at
LordP...@excite.com
Altaron Natherill
> The damage system worked like this: Every location had a box with ten boxes
> in it(head, arms (ea), torso, legs (ea)), when you took damage in one of the
> aforementioned locations that didn't bleed, you marked off slashes in the
> boxes for that area (that was 'bruise' damage and healed faster, when you
> filled up an area's boxes with bruise, that indicated something like a minor
> broken bone and if you took any more damage to that area, the damage would
> wrap around as 'wound' damage).
Yes that's a bit like cyberpunks way of doing things. I really quite like a
few things from that system.
They did it by having a standard amount of boxes for every person. The idea
being that everyone could only take about the same amount of damage to
their bodies. However, they had a modifier to how much injury you actually
sustained because everyone is affected by injury in different ways.
As it says in the book, some people can have limbs ripped off and still
survive, others can shoot themselves in the foot with a .22 and die of shock.
N.
--