[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: tft@brainiac.com*Subject*: Re: Re: (TFT) Number Crunching: Example*From*: srydzews@ix.netcom.com*Date*: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:22:35 -0400*Reply-to*: tft@brainiac.com*Sender*: tft-owner@brainiac.com

Dan Tulloh writes: >Stan asks: > >> I've been trying to follow this WHOLE topic and I just >> get confused. ('Stan asks'? Er, it wasn't me asking that question. I was the one who posted the original number crunching. My stupid habit of not signing my messages probably made things confusing.) But you raise an interesting point, that in AM there's no reference to changing the range of automatic success/ critical hits on rolls of 4+ dice, meaning that if you're rolling six dice there is not even a chance of automatic success, since you can't roll a five or less. I'm not sure, but I believe the compendium may change things to allow for critical hits on 4+ dice. (Not that the compendium is infallible...) But regardless, since we're already talking about modifying the rules there's no reason why we can't say that we'll just apply the ITL p.38 rules to AM (which is of course what I've been doing all along). I think I prefer such a system, but I'll admit it's a matter of taste. I don't like the way that "highest three" increases the chance of critical failure so greatly...also, while H3 does always gives you a chance of double or triple damage, the chance of it rapidly becomes almost theoretical. On a regular 3d6 roll there's approximately a 2% chance of rolling a 17 or 18, and a 2% chance of a 3 or 4. Here's my estimate of the percentages for such things happening with the H3 method: Chance of | Rolling: | 4d6 5d6 6d6 ----------|----------------------- 17 or 18 | 6% 12% 18% 3 or 4 | .42% .08% .01% These are estimates...if they're off by a material margin I apologize. >We can argue about whether there's an increased chance >of weapon breakage (I don't feel there would be) Why not? On an 18 your weapon breaks, right? Since your chance of rolling an 18 increases on 4+ die rolls with H3, doesn't that mean more more broken weapons? > I think this system applies very well to saving rolls. > If I attempt a very difficult task, there should be > an increased risk of failure. If I am an expert in the > field of the task, I can mitigate this chance due to > my superior knowledge/skill. I have no objections to the idea of increasing the chance of critical failure on harder rolls and decreasing the chance of critical success. My concern is with the degree to which H3 changes the chances of these events. Look at it this way: on a 3d6 roll there's about a 4% chance of a non-standard result, with that 4% being evenly split between critical failure and critical success. I wouldn't mind if the chance of something bad happening became greater on a harder roll and the chance of something good became less, but I think the sum chance of unusual things happening shouldn't go too far above the four percent level. Having four percent of rolls give critical results is plenty for me. With H3, the chances ramp up to the point where over one out of six rolls 'go critical' if you're rolling 6d--way too much for my liking. But this is just my preference in such things. To each his own... Stan ===== Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com. Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body "unsubscribe tft"

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: (TFT) Number Crunching: Example***From:*dwtulloh@zianet.com

**(TFT) Auto successes on 4+ dice.***From:*Pasha and or Rick Smith <pnrsmith@istar.ca>

- Prev by Date:
**(TFT) Re: TFT Digest V3 #49 Hercules & Xena?** - Next by Date:
**Re: Re: (TFT) Number Crunching: Example** - Previous by thread:
**Re: (TFT) Number Crunching: Example** - Next by thread:
**Re: Re: (TFT) Number Crunching: Example** - Index(es):