die rolling and HW system

From: Steve Lieb <steve_at_...>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 21:27:45 -0500

> > The more I look at this, the more I wonder which way the next game
session
> > goes. I still think that AP/extended contests allow lucky streaks to
have
> a
> > great effect.
>
> And this system doesn't ?!?
>
> *Any* rules that require you to throw dice to resolve actions allows
"lucky
> streaks to have a great effect". This system gives you (the player) no
> control on the combat after the decision to attack/don't attack. Might as
> well be playing D&D...
>

Just the $.02 of a die hard (pun intended) wargamer: note that any system that requires you to roll MORE dice will tend to be decided most likely by the modifiers. If a system requires FEWER dice it's more decided by luck.

If I'm not clear enough, here's an example: if you & I are in a dice rolling contest, with d6's, and I have a +1 to my rolls, the more rolls that take place, the more this +1 will eventually come to matter. If we roll once, I'm only slightly more likely to win than lose. If we roll 1000 d6's, then it's almost a certainty I'll win, since the results of a larger sample will eventually distribute themselves along the curve of possibilities.

I'm sure a statistician on the list can verify this; it's a truism in the wargaming world. More dice=more "predictable" outcomes.

Ergo, I've always seen the obviousness of the philosophy of the extended contest put forth on the list. Characters with a higher skill to start would always want to minimum bid the situation (to increase the number of rolls in a given contest) while low-skill are much better served by the hail-mary bidding. I think it makes sense.

But I like the quick & dirty combat previously described. People should just understand that simpler combat resolution will result in more pencil-necked geeks beating up conan, statistically speaking.

-Steve