Re: (TFT) Re: D20 TFT battle report (and followup)

["Ty Beard" <tbeard@tyler.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <srydzews@ix.netcom.com>
To: <tft@brainiac.com>

> Well hey, there's always 2d10. Its curve fits nicely in between the two.

I rejected 2d10 because it really doesn't solve the problem of too narrow a
mid-range, which is at the core of what I believe to be the main problem
with TFT. Also, the range of rolls for a d10 is too large, so you cannot
easily use the "add a dice when you add difficulty" method.

To illustrate:

With 3d6, you'll roll 8- 26% of time and 12- 74% of the time. So the middle
half of the range is contained in 5 numbers (8,9,10,11, and 12).

With 2d10, you'll roll 8- 28% of the time and 13- 72% of the time. The
middle half of the range is contained in 6 numbers -- only a slight
improvement.

With 1d20, you'll roll 5- 25% of the time and 15- 75% of the time. The
middle half of the range is doubled in size -- 11 numbers rather than 5 or
6. It also helps eliminate the "sweet spot" that causes players to prefer DX
over ST (see below).

***

Also, with a d20 system, you also lose the annoying player tendency to
maximize DX at 11 or 12 (examples assume normal rolls):

In a 3d6 system, a DX of 10 gives a 50% chance of success. A DX of 11 gives
a 63% chance -- a jump of 13%. A DX of 12 gives a 74% chance of success --
another jump of 11%. So 2 points of DX increase your chance of success by
24%. (And the converse is true, so DX 8- figures are hopeless in combat).*

In a 2d10 system, a DX of 10 gives a 45% chance of success. A DX of 11 gives
a 55% chance -- a jump of 10%. A DX of 12 gives a 64% chance of success --
another jump of 11%. So 2 points of DX give a 21% bonus.

In a d20 system, there is no "sweet spot" where adding 1 point of DX will
give you a disproportionate increase in your chance to hit. Each point of DX
adds 5%. This eliminates the systemic incentive to prefer DX in the
mid-ranges. I consider this an advantage, though your mileage may vary.

* (This points out the fatal flaw in GURPS by the way. It is as easy in
GURPS to get an attack or parry chance of >74% as it is in TFT. SO you can
wind up with guys that hit most of the time and parry most of the time -- a
stupifyingly dull situation. The "parry only works if it makes the roll by
more than the attack roll succeeded" rule is adequate to address this
problem, but it is [a] optional and [b] a bit clumsy to use.)


*****

In other words, I do not see that the 2d10 system provides a significant
benefit over the 3d6 system. It does provide a very modest benefit and it
would probably be preferable to the 3d6 system if I were designing a new
system (and if those were my only options), if only to distinguish my game
from GURPS.

But I think that the d20 approach has the most promise.

*****

Interestingly enough, the only way to really flatten the "sweet spot" in the
middle, yet retain the bell curve is to go with *more* dice rather than
less.** So you would be better off rolling 5d4 (!) rather than 2d10 if you
want to acieve that goal. Or you could go to a 4 or 5 d6 roll in TFT. But
this causes 4 nasty problems. First, you must add 7 to the ST, DX and IQ of
everything, resulting in the non-intuitive number 17 being average. Second,
counting up 5 dice takes more time than counting up 3 dice. Third, if
average ST goes up 70%, you'll have to adjust weapons damage accordingly.
Finally, the DX adjustments will have to be multiplied by 1.7. Bleh.

--Ty

**This is not exactly true. You could create a chart which would allow you
to tune the probabilities, but I assume we're all in agreement that this
would be a case of the cure being worse than the disease.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"