RE: (TFT) d20 TFT Battle Report --> Rick's comments.

["rsmith" <rsmith@lightspeed.ca>]

>So, the $50 question is -- what is the appropriate d20 modifier for a 4D
>roll and a 5D roll. Here are the issues that I am working with:
>
>1. I assume all would agree that a linear progression is best (i.e., +1 die
>= -6, +2 dice = -12 and so on). A strict interpolation of the TFT averages
>might be -6 for 4D rolls, -9 for 5D rolls. This feels funny to me, though
>you could simply insert a nominal 3.5D roll and define it as -3 in the d20
>system. What do you guys think would be the best approach?
>
>2. What is the appropriate degree of difficulty? I've always thought that
>50% for average tasks (3D in TFT), 25% for hard tasks (4D in TFT) and 5%
for
>very hard tasks (5D in TFT) was correct. This is a -5 and -10 in a d20
>system. But TFT has a 4D roll only being successful by an average person
>about 15% of the time. So do I keep the TFT difficulty scale or change it
to
>my ideal scale? Note that a compromise is possible -- you can keep the TFT
>scale in combat and keep my scale in the GM rules.
>
>--Ty


Hi Ty, everyone.
	I agree with your math but I think
it misses the point.

	You are suggesting smaller DX
penalties for 4 or 5 (or 6 or 7) dice
rolls, so that the percentage drop stays
constant for low DX figures.  (Between
old TFT and you new system, that is.)


	But the heroes that attempt the 6 die
rolls have high attributes!  In normal TFT
adding a die is the same as a -3.5 point DX
penalty.

	So what if for some DX 10 peasant
the chance of him making a 6vsDX are tiny,
it is SUPPOST to be tiny!  That is what the
52 attribute PC heroes are for!


	For this system to be successful, it
has to be simple to understand.  Say that
adding a die in old TFT is a -8 DX modifier
in TFT d20.  (See my previous post for why
I suggest -8 DX.)  Then a 5 die roll should
be -16 DX.  A 6 die roll is -24 DX.  Simple.
If the person has a 12 DX then that is what
auto hits are for.

	Note that the bell curve of 3d6 works
as an advantage on these large penalties. In
a flat system, add up a few penalties, and
you suddenly have no chance for a hit (not
counting auto hits).  Where as with an 6 die
roll, adding even a point of DX to a medium
DX figure has a changes the chances of
hitting.  The system behaves gracefully at
the ends of the curves.

	You will have to accept that the flat
curve rapidly slaps people down to the
standard automatic hit, and once that happens
a 5 die and an 8 die roll are the same.

	Where as the decay at the ends of the
bell curve means that for a moderate level
character, a 5 die and an 8 die roll are
different.


	But in practice this won't be a big
deal.  In TFT GM's could throw around 6
die rolls knowing that the actual difference
between a 5 and a 6 die roll was small for
most characters.  The chances of getting
lucky is about the same in both cases.  But
it is more dramatic to make a 6 die roll!

	In TFT d20, GM's won't bother with a
6 die roll.  Why?  It requires EXACTLY THE
SAME auto hit in both cases, for all but
the most extraordinary figures.


	I think that the complexity needed to
capture this graceful degradation of chances
on multidie rolls for your d20 system will
be more than it is worth.  The TFT d20 system
will not handle low probabilities for tough
tasks as easily as the bell curve.

	However I think that the system's
simplicity makes up for this lack.

	****


	This discussion has driven home to me
an advantage of Steve Jackson's design that
had not occurred to me before.  His two types
of penalties system allows a kind of drama
in attempting difficult tasks.  But I think
that it boils down to a bell curve being a
more interesting shape than a flat curve.


	***
	I have found myself arguing for the
bell curve in the last couple posts.  I
think that I should give a bit of support
for the flat curve here as well.

	Take a look at my Battle of Will's
rules on Ty's site.  I was proud as heck
with them, and they are playable.  But as I
have got more experience with them, I've
found a hidden disadvantage.

	The complexity and richness of the
curve (especially for different numbers of
dice) encourages player to spend long
periods of time calculating odds.  (Do I
roll 5 or 6 dice on this battle of wills?)
The stakes are enormous, so you can't
discourage the PC's from being careful.
However long periods of fretting over odds
is not the dramatic roleplaying I want.

	I belive that the system would work
better in TFT d20 since the calculations
become trivial.  In this case the simplicity
of the curve works in its favor.

	***

	Anyway, thanks to everyone for the
posts!  This is the sort of chewing on
design ideas that I love.

	Rick
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"