Hi!
You are correct; the problem is that 15 "feels" like it should be 50% better than 10, but it's not. But again, since they have to be reduced to numbers somehow, I think that there is probably no way around this.
Thanks,
David.
>
> I don't agree with this, not quite.
>
> If you are rolling a d20, 15 "should be" 25% better, not 50% better.
> If you are rolling a d15, 15 is 33% better, since it succeeds 100% of the
> time and 10 succeeds 66% of the time.
> On percentile dice, you would hardly say that 15 is different than 10, since
> it only succeeds 5% of the time more often.
>
> You still have to look at the skill number in relation to the range you are
> tolling
>
> Of course, this is just the simplistic look of "did the roll succeed", not
> the true examination of rolling a contest. If you are saying that it is very
> hard to intuit the degree of advantage without crunching the odds, I totally
> agree. Welcome to statistics!
>
> --Todd
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 1:57 PM, roadsgoeveron <daveolloyd_at_...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I think that the problem is that once they are reduced to numbers, you look
> > at it and say wow, my skill of 15 should be 50% better than his skill of 10.
> > But this type of issue is probably inherent to any rules set.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David.
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>