Randomity and low rolls

From: Jimmie Pursell <pursell_at_...>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 12:32:15 z (MST)

>
> >In general I prefer the AP based mechanics for non-combat
> >"exchanges", but I still miss the utter randomness of the other
> >combat system.
>
> HW not random enough for you? Some people are never satisfied... ;-)
>
>

Indeed, my biggest concern with the contest resolution system is the major point where it deviates from Pendragon, i.e., that the LOW roll wins in cases where both players roll successes. This change serves to INCREASE randomity, decrease predictability, and give a lower skilled contestant a better chance of winning. In 17 v. 5, if the 5 gets a success, all the skill points possessed by the 17 in excess of the other roll are worthless. (Was that clear?). To break out statistics, in a 15 v. 5 (easier math) simple contest, the 15 has a 62.5% chance of winning, and a 37.5% chance of losing. (I'm not counting the chance of a tie). If done the Pendragon way, the 15 has only a 12.5% chance of losing, and an 87.5% chance of winning, again discounting the possibility of a tie. Someone check my math, but this seems to be roughly correct.

I think my biggest concern is that the HW system discounts the value of the marginal skill difference. In other words, in the case of a 19 v. 15,the extra 4 points are worth less in HW. If I the 19 should roll an 18, then all the 15 has to do is succeed in order to win. On the other hand, in Pendragon, the 19 rolling an 18 is a guaranteed win, unless the 15 criticals.

On the whole, I strongly dislike the low roll wins rule and intend to change it in my campaign. Any thoughts?



This email was sent using Inficad(r)
Communications' Free wEb-Mail service!
http://www.inficad.com/mail

Powered by hypermail