Tom's Hardware: Topic Right of abysmal success rates
Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions.
Sign up now! Its free!
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
"konijn_" <konijn@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117485682.035974.135390@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> In DD there is such a thing as a abysmal success rates,
> throw a 20 and no matter who can damage a demi-god.
> In another system ( name escapes me ), you can keep rolling
> ( and adding ) your dice, as long as you roll the maximum.
> My current system ( I go for simplification ) doesnt allow
> this abysmal success rate and it somehow bugs me.
>
> How do you deal with abysmal succes rates ? Allow it ?
> I am more affraid for boredom ( 'yawn, a kobold' ) than
> frustration ( 'Hey, I cant kill this Iron Lich with my lvl 1 thief' )
>
> Of course, I dont care about 'reality arguments' , I want a
> game, not a simulation.
>
I wouldn't really call a critical hit in D&D "abysmal" by any means. It is
just a critical hit 
. Consider that no matter how badass an opponent is,
you have a 5% chance (1/20) of at least nicking him with your weapon. Now,
remember, you can't "damage a demi-god" necessarily because there is also DR
(Damage Reduction). So, although you might connect with a critical, you'll
only do 1 damage to said demigod.
Also consider that, as of 3d D&D (the d20 system), when you roll a critical
on the first roll of an attack you merely "threaten"-- which means that you
have a guaranteed hit, but can only multiply the damage if you "confirm the
critical" with a subsequent roll that at least hits. Some alternative rules
include stacking damage with multiple critical rolls, or even insta-kill
with 3 simultaneous 20's (that's a 1/8000 probability!).
I find that if you use Damage Reduction (or "Soak" as it's called in other
systems), you can allow yourself more flexibility in implementing criticals.
In fact, my favorite system is quite generous with criticals, but places a
high importance on damage reduction. This is roughly the way it works:
1. Opposed rolls: attack/weapon skill vs. some flavor of dodge/speed skill.
It is important to have this variability of opposed rolls in this system,
plus I like to think it's more intuitive that you're 'actively' dodging,
rather than by some constant number, as in D&D. "Natural" numbers don't
matter, as in a "natural 1" or a "natural 20" being displayed on the dice.
2. If attack roll with modifiers (skill, related stat, etc. etc.) is equal
to or above dodge roll with modifiers, you hit. If the attack roll is at
least *twice* the dodge roll, you critically hit, at which point you roll
for critical effect on a table. You can also simplify this and go for good
ol' double damage, but critical effects are more fun in a Pencil-and-Paper
role-playing context. If your attack roll is less than *half* of the dodge
roll, you critically miss, and go on to roll critical miss effect from
table.
3. If you connected, then now you roll for damage according to your weapon +
Strength + any other modifiers you like. Opponent takes that damage, but is
able to *reduce* it by means of their armor. So if attacker deals 6 damage,
and your armor has a rating of 2, you'll actually take 4 damage. (You have
the option of damaging the armor here with the soaked damage if you like to
have item durability).
Now, the main thing that I like about this system is that it is very
intuitive, and uses the various stats in a way that is quickly grasped. It
always struck me as backwards that in D&D, "Armor Class" actually determines
how fast you can dodge out of the way (so really heavy armor like Platemail
makes you magically faster!). I'm not trying to argue for realism here, by
all means, D&D is a lot of fun even with this [IMHO] huge simplification--
the issue arises when you try to expand this system, and end up with a mess,
just like 3rd edition did. They tried to make all these distinctions to
armor, such as Touch, Flatfooted, Natural Armor, Deflection Bonus, etc.
etc., and it gets to be pretty un-intuitive thinking about which bonuses to
add to what category (Does Natural go to Touch or Flatfooted? How about
Deflection? How about your base Dex bonus? or the base Armor bonus?
*headache*). It went on to become blatantly obvious that the system was
broken when new versions of the rules started changing things quite a bit
(some leaning very close to the system I proposed, like the d20 Star Wars by
WOTC-- which also tried to partition HP to add depth, although it's not the
first system to try that-- but that's beyond the scope of this topic 
.
I usually like rolling large dice: d20 on Pencil-and-Paper, and even higher
on my own wacky code (d54, wtf?! 
), so I don't have much advice for
systems that use multiple small dice.
But anyhow, I hope my rant helped you explore some possible ways of
implementing a simple combat system with critical hits.
Have fun!
--Nolithius
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
Hello,
the wording could be better
I mean that in any situation,
the player has the right to succeed,
the odds are small but it stays possible.
T.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
Dnia Tue, 31 May 2005 02:33:08 GMT,
airolson napisal(a):
>> I mean that in any situation,
>> the player has the right to succeed,
>> the odds are small but it stays possible.
> What's good for the goose is good for the gander, I say. If the PC can
> potentially hit anything with a critical hit, then *anything* can
> potentially hit him/her.
That's why you don;t use the same rules for PC and monsters
--
Radomir 'The Sheep' Dopieralski @**@_ Bee!
(^^) 3
The Quest for the Real World, try #1: cd /..
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
>Aren't these just artifacts of the dice system?
>Does your game use dice?
Did you ever play HeroQuest, you would have dice with symbols.
You would have to count symbols to determine success.
My game uses something in that vein.
I actually found a mistake in my simulation with Excel,
and found out there is a chance the kobold wins.
Still, a good discussion this was
T.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
<gatti@dsdata.it> wrote in message
news:1117553974.207356.278040@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
[...]
> I consider the D&D rule that a d20 attack roll of 1 is always a miss
> and a roll of 20 is always a hit a problem, not a solution: it is
> supposed to ensure risk (both for and against the player), but it means
> that:
It is a problematic solution, but a solution nonetheless
> - getting attack bonuses (increasing level, wielding better weapons,
> obtaining situational modifiers) is completely ineffective up to a
> certain amount, then hit probability doubles suddenly (20 only to 19 or
> 20), then improvements are gradually and severely diminishing (3/2,
> 4/3, ... 19/18), until they are completely useless again.
> - improving defense has the same silly utility curve.
Although this is not entirely true (better weapons actually sometimes have
increased critical range and multiplier, and several feats improve upon
criticals), it is indeed limited-- very limited. It always irked me that
increasing in skill did not result in an increase in critical frequency--
3rd edition tried to remedy that with these patchwork-like changes
characteristic of D&D, but was only very marginally successful. It was,
however, an improvement from the previous system of straight 1s and 20s.
> - no matter what the situation, no attack roll ever can be easier than
> 95% or more difficult than 5%: this saturation is as unrealistic as
> attaining the perfection of 100% or 0%, and more arbitrary.
Besides the fact that your use of "unrealistic" here is horribly
unqualified, there is a simple fact for us all to consider: at some point
game design is arbitrary. You often make certain arbitrary choices for the
sake of fun and sanity. Although I dislike the D&D natural critical system,
it does fulfill those two criteria. It is fun: rolling a 20 is immediately
oh-so-sweet in any battle scenario, and a 1 immediately recognized as a big
screw-up. And it keeps players sane: as a seasoned D&D player I can say that
I wish combat had a lot more depth, but as any newbie will attest, the
natural critical idea is very easily grasped and requires little to commit
to memory, as well as little to calculate in real-time.
> - outside the 19 point sweet spot, any attacker and any defender
> perform identically regardless of how good they are: boring and unfair.
Wow! Firstly, "unfair" is right out of the question-- the same rules apply
to everyone. Secondly, I fail to see what you're claiming here about "any
attacker and any defender" performing "identically regardless of how good
they are". Have you forgotten about non-critical hits? In case the scope for
this claim is only the critical hit range then you're just blatantly
mistaken-- as stated earlier, not everyone has the same critical range.
On the whole, however, I agree about your critique of D&D's critical system
being quite coarse. A computer game can very well handle the few additional
calculations it could take to make this style of system more complex but
still keep it easily grasped.
Cheers.
--Nolithius
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
Sherm Pendley wrote:
> konijn_ wrote:
>
>> In another system ( name escapes me ), you can keep rolling
>> ( and adding ) your dice, as long as you roll the maximum.
>
> RoleMaster is like that. It uses "open-ended" d100 - if you roll 96-100,
> you roll again and add the result.
>
> Rolls over 100 aren't all that rare - there's a 5% chance. Rolls over
> 200 are rare but not unheard-of - 0.25% chance.
>
>> How do you deal with abysmal succes rates ? Allow it ?
>
> D&D's 1 in 20 odds make such a success *far* too likely.
In 3rd edition, rolling a 20 doesn't award you a critical but only an
automatic hit. There's a new rule for critical hits which require you in
order to :
- roll a d20 dice to check if you hit the oponent
- hit the oponent, either by beating their AC or by rolling a 20
- that number you rolled must be in the critical hit range ( and here, a 20
always count too )
- roll a second d20 to check if you hit your oponent again
If all of those pass, you get to do x2 up to x5 damage depending on feats
and current weapon.
Considering most kobolds are using simple daggers or shortbows, the best
they can do is x2 damage on a critical and if you have high AC, they must
roll a double 20 to do that anyway.
> I'd allow it, but with a success rate far, far lower - maybe a roll of
> 250 or greater with an "open-ended" d100 system like the above.
On the other hand, an open ended damage roll is really dangerous for the
players since you can always get instakilled if you are unlucky.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
Timothy Pruett wrote:
> John wrote:
>> On 2005-06-03, Christophe Cavalaria <chris.cavalaria@free.fr> wrote:
>>
>>>>I'd allow it, but with a success rate far, far lower - maybe a roll of
>>>>250 or greater with an "open-ended" d100 system like the above.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, an open ended damage roll is really dangerous for the
>>> players since you can always get instakilled if you are unlucky.
>>
>>
>> In my game, weapons have a certain strength based on what they are made
>> out of, if they are of superior construction, and if they are magical.
>>
>> If you deal more damage with the weapon than its strength then there is a
>> chance the weapons breaks. The higher the damage the higher the chance.
>> If that happens then only the weapons strength is dealt as damage (and
>> you have no weapon anymore).
>>
>> This combined with the ability to parry and dodge makes kobold-player
>> insta-kills almost impossible. If your hit points are over the point
>> where the break chance is 100% then it is impossible.
>
> I don't know whether this is an original idea of yours, or borrowed
> from a P&P system, but I like it. A lot. Hope you don't mind if I
> borrow it for future projects of mine. ;-)
>
> It seems to be a rather fantastic blend of reality and gameplay. It
> really brings up some interesting possibilities, as well. For
> example, if I was playing some sort of muscle-bound barbarian, and all
> I had was a flimsy dagger, I might purposely try to not hit as hard as
> I could, to keep it from breaking. Interesting approach. Really adds
> a new level of depth to combat. Great idea.
Well, it probably gives a good gameplay ( if you like breaking weapons at
random ) but it is hardly realistic. I don't expect a puny goblin to be
able to break a good weapon just because ofa lucky roll. And also, in the
case of swords the damage doesn't come from brute strength which is what is
required to break a weapon but from careful placement around vital points.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
On 2005-06-03 12:30:23, Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> wrote:
> ABCGi wrote:
> > Yeah. Effecting depth perception - thus penalty to missile fire
> > the further you aim. Until of course you visit the town cleric
> > who can repair permanent damage via the power of the gods (for
> > a substantial donation of course).
>
> That wouldn;t work in the World of Shadows tough -- Magic isn't such a
> day to day experience as in other worlds :-/. And there are no clerics
> (and no Gods, anyway). The least you could do is visit Techron (an
> alternative plane of existence) and get a biomechanical replacement, but
> you would have to be very lucky to know of it's existence, second to the
> fact that you would need really powerful magic to get there ;-)
Sounds like a tough world! I like the idea of a replacement eye.
I can imagine a patch-work hero at the end of a RL about to
ascend with only about 60% original parts
--
ABCGi abcgi@yahoo.com http://abcgi.fly.to S14 D15 I17 W12 C9
GCS/IT$/L/B$ d+(-) s: a? C++ ULUSU-- 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++(home office!) r++ y++* BAS-----
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
Christophe Cavalaria wrote:
> Timothy Pruett wrote:
>
>
>>John wrote:
>>
>>>On 2005-06-03, Christophe Cavalaria <chris.cavalaria@free.fr> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I'd allow it, but with a success rate far, far lower - maybe a roll of
>>>>>250 or greater with an "open-ended" d100 system like the above.
>>>>
>>>>On the other hand, an open ended damage roll is really dangerous for the
>>>>players since you can always get instakilled if you are unlucky.
>>>
>>>
>>>In my game, weapons have a certain strength based on what they are made
>>>out of, if they are of superior construction, and if they are magical.
>>>
>>>If you deal more damage with the weapon than its strength then there is a
>>>chance the weapons breaks. The higher the damage the higher the chance.
>>>If that happens then only the weapons strength is dealt as damage (and
>>>you have no weapon anymore).
>>>
>>>This combined with the ability to parry and dodge makes kobold-player
>>>insta-kills almost impossible. If your hit points are over the point
>>>where the break chance is 100% then it is impossible.
>>
>>I don't know whether this is an original idea of yours, or borrowed
>>from a P&P system, but I like it. A lot. Hope you don't mind if I
>>borrow it for future projects of mine. ;-)
>>
>>It seems to be a rather fantastic blend of reality and gameplay. It
>>really brings up some interesting possibilities, as well. For
>>example, if I was playing some sort of muscle-bound barbarian, and all
>>I had was a flimsy dagger, I might purposely try to not hit as hard as
>>I could, to keep it from breaking. Interesting approach. Really adds
>>a new level of depth to combat. Great idea.
>
>
> Well, it probably gives a good gameplay ( if you like breaking weapons at
> random ) but it is hardly realistic. I don't expect a puny goblin to be
> able to break a good weapon just because ofa lucky roll. And also, in the
> case of swords the damage doesn't come from brute strength which is what is
> required to break a weapon but from careful placement around vital points.
Never said it was completely realistic, just that it had some
realistic elements. Weapons can and do break if swung with enough
force. In your example concerning a puny goblin being able to break a
good weapon because of a lucky roll, well, that would likely be a rare
event. A puny goblin would probably be unable to swing with enough
force to deal enough damage to raise a good weapon's chance of getting
broken.
And also, sword damage can certainly come from brute strength. While
certain types of swords aren't used this way, some of the more common
and readily available swords are frequently used for both slashing and
stabbing, depending on one's foe. Not to mention the fact that some
swords (especially poorly crafted ones) have been known to
occasionally break off inside one's opponent. If the sword isn't
withdrawn properly after a stabbing attack, there's a fair chance of
the tip breaking off of a poorly constructed sword, and even with a
fairly well-made sword, the chance of the hilt seperating is still
plausible. Also, against a heavily armored opponent, there are plenty
of opportunities for even well-made weapons to recieve damage. Even
if you do manage to successfully stab between their armor plates, if
the sword gets twisted upon its withdrawl, it can have a great deal of
pressure exerted on it, at its structurally weakest point, possibly
causing the top half of the sword to break off inside of the target.
Once again, not a wholy realistic system, but it seems to me to be a
fairly nice balance between realism and gameplay.
--
My projects are currently on hold, but I do have
some junk at the site below.
http://www.freewebs.com/timsrl/index.htm
--
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
On 2005-06-04, Christophe Cavalaria <chris.cavalaria@free.fr> wrote:
> Well, it probably gives a good gameplay ( if you like breaking weapons at
> random ) but it is hardly realistic. I don't expect a puny goblin to be
> able to break a good weapon just because ofa lucky roll. And also, in the
> case of swords the damage doesn't come from brute strength which is what is
> required to break a weapon but from careful placement around vital points.
I should also mention that critical roles aren't unbounded -- you can't
get x100 damage. How many times a 20 can increase your damage is
determined by which fighting form you have and how high a level you are.
So not only is a first level kobold not going to insta-kill but he won't
be able to critical for a damage high enough to break his weapon.
There is also a player controlled option that specified whether or not you
are swinging full force. So you can have the game not swing hard enough to
break your weapon if you want -- for those times you really, really don't
want to lose your weapon.
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
ABCGi wrote:
> On 2005-06-03 12:30:23, Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> wrote:
>>That wouldn;t work in the World of Shadows tough -- Magic isn't such a
>>day to day experience as in other worlds :-/. And there are no clerics
>>(and no Gods, anyway). The least you could do is visit Techron (an
>>alternative plane of existence) and get a biomechanical replacement, but
>>you would have to be very lucky to know of it's existence, second to the
>>fact that you would need really powerful magic to get there ;-)
>
>
> Sounds like a tough world!
Hell it is...
> I like the idea of a replacement eye.
Those are realy rare tough. Think "The Hand of Oberon" by Zelazny.
> I can imagine a patch-work hero at the end of a RL about to
> ascend with only about 60% original parts
Given the rarity, and the fact that there will be no ascentions in GR --
quite impossible. ;-)
--
At your service,
Kornel Kisielewicz (charonATmagma-net.pl) [http://chaos.magma-net.pl]
Carceri -- A prelude to GenRogue... Coming Soon
Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.development (More info?)
Kornel Kisielewicz wrote:
> ABCGi wrote:
>
>> On 2005-06-03 12:30:23, Kornel Kisielewicz <kisielewicz@gazeta.pl> wrote:
>>
>>> That wouldn;t work in the World of Shadows tough -- Magic isn't such a
>>> day to day experience as in other worlds :-/. And there are no clerics
>>> (and no Gods, anyway). The least you could do is visit Techron (an
>>> alternative plane of existence) and get a biomechanical replacement, but
>>> you would have to be very lucky to know of it's existence, second to the
>>> fact that you would need really powerful magic to get there ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds like a tough world!
>
>
> Hell it is...
>
>> I like the idea of a replacement eye.
I'm playing Golden Eye - Rogue Agent on the XBox right now where you
have your eye shot out and replaced with a much superior tech one.
>
>
> Those are realy rare tough. Think "The Hand of Oberon" by Zelazny.
>
>> I can imagine a patch-work hero at the end of a RL about to ascend
>> with only about 60% original parts
>
>
> Given the rarity, and the fact that there will be no ascentions in GR --
> quite impossible. ;-)
--
ABCGi ---- (abcgi@yahoo.com) ---- http://codemonkey.sunsite.dk
..Hajo's H-World - RogueLike/RPG Engine SourceForge Project...
.......Downloads - https://sourceforge.net/projects/h-world...
............Home - http://h-world.simugraph.com...............
Please mind
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.
Sponsored links
Ad
Related Topics
- YAGBU: Healing, Regenration Rates *spoily*
- WTB: Eight Ball Deluxe Plastic that goes to the right of t..
- WTB: ToM Right Ramp
- Tech: IJ Right Flipper Switch Hits Ball Launcher
- FA: NOS STTNG Head Decals (Left & Right)
- Poll..Do ppl have a right to abuse games on location?
- WTB: T2 Right Ramp
- Number of consecutive right ramp shots on TSPP?
- Issue with right flipper on Pinbot
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
- 21:57 brockh won the Sophmore badge
- 01:00 xpax won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 Mizoguchi won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 technuttso won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 checkitoutnow won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 avg-joe won the Freshman badge
- 01:00 AsAnAtheist won the Spy badge
- 18:34 Soul_keeper won the Sophmore badge
- 01:00 Hellboy won the Spy badge
- 01:00 pijoto won the Freshman badge