So what's left?

[atgxtg]

Just to through another idea into the mix, but why not just do something along the following lines.

if
Attacking Skill is 140
Defending Skill is 60

Then do two opposed tests and sum the results (somehow).

100 vs 60 and then the remaining 40 vs 0

Anyone can do the maths, and it would reflect the entirety of the skill ratings. Just a thought.

It works, but I hate to think of what the game would be like when players hit the high numbers. I really don't want to use four die rolls to resolve an action from a character with a 320% skill. I won't use eight die rolls for the 320 vs 360 option.

BTW, Instead of summing I'd simply let the player made the second roll and take the better of the results and use it agaist the 60.

 

[King Amenjar]

I would think that [dropping a zero] would screw the high skill worse than halving. With the way opposed skills work the lower the scores the more of a coin flip the odds become. A 35 vs 20 contest is a lot closer to 50/50 than a 95 vs 80 contest. With halving the higher skill is never going to drop below 50, which is a pretty big penalty already. Reducing 350 vs 250 to a 35 vs 25 contest penalizes the high score even more.

But if you're dealing with insanely high scores anyway, you'll have to halve, halve and halve again to get them both down below 100 anyway, so you'd only be swapping division by 10 for division by 8 in the end.

 

[atgxtg]

I would think that [dropping a zero] would screw the high skill worse than halving. With the way opposed skills work the lower the scores the more of a coin flip the odds become. A 35 vs 20 contest is a lot closer to 50/50 than a 95 vs 80 contest. With halving the higher skill is never going to drop below 50, which is a pretty big penalty already. Reducing 350 vs 250 to a 35 vs 25 contest penalizes the high score even more.

But if you're dealing with insanely high scores anyway, you'll have to halve, halve and halve again to get them both down below 100 anyway, so you'd only be swapping division by 10 for division by 8 in the end.

Yes, but that doesn't give any improvment overr the halving problem. In fact it is 25% worse (10 vs 8).

 

[atgxtg]

How about...

We let the one who gets halved below the 100 threshold decide which die is the tens didgit after the roll.?

For example, in the 120 vs. 30 example, we halve to 60 vs 15.

The both roll. If the one who was halved (the 60) rolls a 7 and a 3 on his dice he can read it as a 73 or a 37 (duh!). THis would help the skilled character a lot and be easy to implement.

 

[Rurik]

How about...

We let the one who gets halved below the 100 threshold decide which die is the tens didgit after the roll.?

For example, in the 120 vs. 30 example, we halve to 60 vs 15.

The both roll. If the one who was halved (the 60) rolls a 7 and a 3 on his dice he can read it as a 73 or a 37 (duh!). THis would help the skilled character a lot and be easy to implement.

You know i tried figuring iut the math behind that one, and it gets a little weird, but Ithink it might work.

The fact that there is no additional math beyond halving and no additional rolls are big plusses. I was figuring out my other curves and going to taclke this one but it gets weird, I think it may REALLY favor the high skilled character. Could be wrong though. Will crunch in free time).

 

[Rurik]

How about...

We let the one who gets halved below the 100 threshold decide which die is the tens didgit after the roll.?

For example, in the 120 vs. 30 example, we halve to 60 vs 15.

The both roll. If the one who was halved (the 60) rolls a 7 and a 3 on his dice he can read it as a 73 or a 37 (duh!). THis would help the skilled character a lot and be easy to implement.

Also, what happens when both are halved? say 160 vs 120, do both get to flip. If so, who decides first - because that could determine what the otcome is (lower should decide first I guess).

 

[atgxtg]

How about...

We let the one who gets halved below the 100 threshold decide which die is the tens didgit after the roll.?

For example, in the 120 vs. 30 example, we halve to 60 vs 15.

The both roll. If the one who was halved (the 60) rolls a 7 and a 3 on his dice he can read it as a 73 or a 37 (duh!). THis would help the skilled character a lot and be easy to implement.

You know i tried figuring iut the math behind that one, and it gets a little weird, but Ithink it might work.

The fact that there is no additional math beyond halving and no additional rolls are big plusses. I was figuring out my other curves and going to taclke this one but it gets weird, I think it may REALLY favor the high skilled character. Could be wrong though. Will crunch in free time).

As we have been going with more and more complicated models, and running into more and more problems, I sort of switched directed and tried to simplfiy things more.

This essentially turns a halved 120 (60) into an 80, but also gives the higher skilled character a better quality roll becuase of situations like this:

120 vs.80, halved to 60 vs 40.

THe first character rolls a 24 ; the seond rolls a 33

Normally this would be a "both succeed high roll wins" so B would win. But with the "dice switching" rule character A could turn the 24 into a 42 and win.

Yes it favors the high skilled characters, but the low skilled character still has a chance, and that chance imporoves with his skill. And the attacker could always roll an 11!


Guess I made more work for Bluejay. :shock:

 

[Lord Twig]

Just to through another idea into the mix, but why not just do something along the following lines.

if
Attacking Skill is 140
Defending Skill is 60

Then do two opposed tests and sum the results (somehow).

100 vs 60 and then the remaining 40 vs 0

Anyone can do the maths, and it would reflect the entirety of the skill ratings. Just a thought.

It works, but I hate to think of what the game would be like when players hit the high numbers. I really don't want to use four die rolls to resolve an action from a character with a 320% skill. I won't use eight die rolls for the 320 vs 360 option.

BTW, Instead of summing I'd simply let the player made the second roll and take the better of the results and use it agaist the 60.

This is exactly what I suggested earlier, but really with a 120 vs. 60 you may only need to roll once each. It is only if the 120 would lose that he would roll again to see if he could pull off a win. This is exactly like using a Hero Point to re-roll except it involves addition. I know, math is hard!

If you have a 320 vs. 360 you are playing at a whole different level anyway. I don't see a problem with rolling several times to get your result. Plus it is cool to say, "I rolled a 268! What did you get?" But that is just me.

 

[frobisher]

BTW, Instead of summing I'd simply let the player made the second roll and take the better of the results and use it agaist the 60.

Ah, perhaps I should have been clearer - I didn't mean take the sum of the die rolls, but the "sum" of the results ie the sucess and fails.

 

[atgxtg]

BTW, Instead of summing I'd simply let the player made the second roll and take the better of the results and use it agaist the 60.

Ah, perhaps I should have been clearer - I didn't mean take the sum of the die rolls, but the "sum" of the results ie the sucess and fails.

Ahhh. THat's a different kettle of fish.

 

[simonh]

Reading all the discussion about skills over 100%, I've been running Gloranthan games using the Elric rules, with RQ3 magic, since 1995. Here are the rules conversions from Elric to Glorantha: Elric RQ.


Simon Hibbs