Timing/Effect Redux, the complete picture.

[Klaus Kipling]

There's been a lot of debate about the Time/Effect mechanic. I wanted to have a full look at all the possible outcomes with a series of bonuses and penalties, so I've mapped out all the possible rolls on 2D and how the numbers work on mods -5 through +5.

The table below shows the potential Effects die for every roll on 2D (2-12) and it's corresponding timing die, and how the mods affect the final Effect die result. The difference between a Fail and a Success is indicated by an F and an S respectively.

I have not capped the Effects result to between 1 and 6, as it is this definition that is causing the results to skew towards Exceptional successes and therefore it is this part of the rule that needs tweaking. My suggestion will appear below, with commentary.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

[EDIT] First post had a few misprints. Also here is the distribution at each 2D value of my proposed fix categories.

First line is fails - bad/regular/near miss
Second line is success - mediocre/regular/excellent

TWELVE (12)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________            
 6     6      F1   S2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10  S11           0/1/0
___________________________________________________________________           3/4/3
___________________________________________________________________

ELEVEN (11)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 5     6      F0   F1   S2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10           1/2/0
 6     5      F1   F2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10  S11           5/8/5
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

TEN (10)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 4     6      F-1  F0   F1   S2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9            3/6/0
 5     5      F0   F1   F2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10           6/12/6
 6     4      F1   F2   F3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10  S11
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

NINE (9)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 3     6      F-2  F-1  F0   F1   S2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8            6/10/0
 4     5      F-1  F0   F1   F2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9            6/16/6
 5     4      F0   F1   F2   F3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10
 6     3      F1   F2   F3   F4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10  S11
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

EIGHT (8)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 2     6      F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   S2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7           10/14/1
 3     5      F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8           6/18/6
 4     4      F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9
 5     3      F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10
 6     2      F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10  S11
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

SEVEN (7)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 1     6      F-4  F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   S2   S3   S4   S5   S6           15/18/3
 2     5      F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   S3   S4   S5   S6   S7           6/18/6
 3     4      F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   S4   S5   S6   S7   S8
 4     3      F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   S5   S6   S7   S8   S9
 5     2      F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   S6   S7   S8   S9   S10
 6     1      F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   F6   S7   S8   S9   S10  S11
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

SIX (6)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 1     5      F-4  F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   S3   S4   S5   S6           15/17/3
 2     4      F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   S4   S5   S6   S7           3/14/3
 3     3      F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   S5   S6   S7   S8
 4     2      F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   S6   S7   S8   S9
 5     1      F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   F6   S7   S8   S9   S10
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

FIVE (5)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 1     4      F-4  F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   S4   S5   S6           13/15/3
 2     3      F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   S5   S6   S7           1/10/1
 3     2      F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   S6   S7   S8
 4     1      F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   F6   S7   S8   S9
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

FOUR (4)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 1     3      F-4  F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   S5   S6           11/12/3
 2     2      F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   S6   S7           0/6/0
 3     1      F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   F6   S7   S8
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

THREE (3)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 1     2      F-4  F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   S6           9/8/3
 2     1      F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   F6   S7           0/2/0
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________

TWO (2)

Eff   Tim     -5   -4   -3   -2   -1    0   +1   +2   +3   +4   +5
___________________________________________________________________
 1     1      F-4  F-3  F-2  F-1  F0   F1   F2   F3   F4   F5   F6           5/4/2
___________________________________________________________________          0/0/0
___________________________________________________________________

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Remember, Time/Effect is actually an addendum to the universal mechanic, roll 8+ on 2D.

So a player first has to achieve this on 2D, with modifiers.

What the modifiers describe is the margin of error. A negative mod gives the character a narrow window of opportunity (WOO), they have to be sharp to succedd, while a positive mod expands the WOO, meaning they can be complacent and still succeed.

The roll itself is how well the character performs at the task. A low roll means they've been a bit of a klutz, whereas a high roll indicates performing to the best of their abilities. The player always knows, no matter what the mod is, that rolling high is always better than rolling low, even if the roll is a failure.

So rolling high, even in failure, will at least give them a good timing, and mitigate any effects of a failure. Succeeding with a high mod while rolling low the player can get a decent, mid-range, effect while being able to ensure a good timing too.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Notice the number range of effect is a continuum at whatever die result is chosen, from -4 to 11, and it is the difficulty of the task that dictates when an F flips to an S.

(F3 goes to S4, F1 goes to S2, F5 goes to S6, etc).

So what do the modifiers mean?

Basically, a bonus indicates skill and/or native ability and/or favourable circumstances. So skillful or easy or both. That the higher results are more common in this case is natural.

A penalty indicates lack of skill and or difficult circumstances. In such cases the best results are not achievable, and if failed the failure could be a bad one.

Now the range if tabulated here is -5 to +5. Higher or lower net modifiers are going to be unusual in the extreme in any game (as in normal circumstances it is an auto hit or fail), and most commonly the mods will be in the range -2 to +2.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

So the problem as written with Effect is that success is capped at 6 and fail is capped at 1.

The majority of successes will be magnificent and most failures abject. What is at fault here is the definitions of these results, not the mechanic itself.

So basically, my suggested fix is to do away with the caps altogether.

Effect will max out at +11, and bottom out at -4. So....

On a Success:

4 or less - mediocre success (unlikely if skilled/easy)

5 to 8 - regular success (the most common kind of success)

9 or more - great success (not possible unless net mod is +3)

On a Fail:

0 or less - bad failure (only possible when low/unskilled or difficult; also, not the same as a Fumble!)

1 to 4 - regular fail

5 or more - near fail (impossible on any mod worse than -1)

As for Fumbles, I'd suggest they only occur on Snake-Eyes (as per usual). However, if the fail is bad, they become Bad Fumbles...

So, a regular (F1-4) Fumble could be: left on the safety catch, dumbass!
A Bad Fumble: you drop your weapon, eedyit! (only possible with a net penalty, so hard or unskilled).

With a high mod (+5 or +6), it's poss to get a Good Fumble - (a butterfly lands on your rifle's muzzle, causing you to miss..?)

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Actually, I think this fix fits the intention of the rules as written quite well.

If the final success effect is divided by 2, and round up, you get a number between 1 and 6. It's a bit fussier for a fail: divide by 2, round up, and add 3).

Those calculations are too fussy for me (work fine in software), and there's an added bonus to having the uncapped effect number.

That is, the currently puny-seeming weapon damage is boosted to more like CT levels of deadliness. Those added damage bonuses need bringing down, most likely, and armour might need a bit of beefing up.

This means higher skilled folk do more damage than less skilled folk.

Now, to those probabilities....

On a range of -5 to +5, there's 396 possible results, each one with an equal chance of occuring (if the net difficulty had a smooth distribution; in fact, net difficulty is essentially unpredictable, as it depends on in game circumstances, so the only fair comparison of all the mods is an one where they have an equal share of the rolls).


NB: couple of mistypes in the above table - fixed numbers + distribution of effect results as per my suggested fix on the way.

 

[SableWyvern]

On a cursory overview, that seems like a reasonable analysis, and your conclusions appear sound.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Ok, the numbers. From good success to bad fail.

(ok these should add up to 396 but they only add to 395 - obviously I've miscounted somewhere but a margin of error of 1 in a sample of 396 ain't so bad, and the comments stand)

'Good' Successes = 36 (only possible on a +3)
'Regular' Successes = 108
'Bad' Successes = 36

'Good' Fails = 18
'Regular' Fails = 107 (prob 108)
'Bad' Fails = 90 (only possible with a negative modifier)

'Good' success = 9.09%
'Regular' success = 27.27%
'Bad' success = 9.09%
'Good' fail = 4.55%
'Regular' fail = 27.27%
'Bad' fail = 22.73%

On this modifier spread, success happens 45.45% of the time, which isn't that far away from the base chance of getting 8+ on an unmodified roll.

20% of successes are bad, 20% are good, 60% are regular.

Near misses are rare, and if a roll fails there's a 40% it's a bad fail.

So a bad fail should probably not be described as abject failure - this should only occur on a fumble (a 2).

But since a bad fail can only happen when a modifier is less than 0, which denotes a difficult task or lack of skill, this makes sense.

A good success can only occur on a +3 or better, so high skill or favourable circumstances are needed.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

So, in summary, there is nothing wrong at all with the core mechanic of time/effect, and far from being unfixable, a simple reassessment of the definitions of exceptional, regular, etc, make it work as (it seems to be) intended in the playtest doc.

The 2D roll measures the amount of vim/effort/prowess the character puts in to the task, and the modifier gives you the margin of error, effectively the amount of pressure put on the character. when the margin of error is small, only a really good roll will achieve success. This is why successes will be quicker when the pressure is high - in those circumstances you gotta be sh*t-hot to succeed.

This in many ways is analogous to the way action rpg's on computers work: character skill + players ability. The mod represents the 'skill level' of the player's avatar, which increases as per the game rules, and the 2D roll mimics the players own skill at playing videogames.

The large sample of bad failures when the mod is negative might indicate an elementary (schoolboy) error that high skill characters are not going to make. In essence this does not have a mechanical effect, it will have mainly a descriptive influence or a minor side effect, as it is up to the ref.

Now fumbles can be abject fumbles (no skill, very difficult), the ones where you trip over your shoelaces or drop your weapon, or normal fumbles, forgot to cock the weapon or accidently snick the safety catch on, or 'good' fumbles, forgot to reset the sights.

So I will stand by my opinion that time/effect is a sublime mechanic. in fact, it is far more subtle than I expected.

 

[SableWyvern]

Adds a lot of weight to what AKAramis has been asking for all along - uncapped Effect.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Your argument is certainly persuasive.

How would uncapping the EFFECT result change the damage to weapons?

Perhaps if someone could give a few examples of the changes from current v3.2 values, then Gar could make the changes on the rest of the weapons. This is really out of my comfort zone, so I will leave it to the weaponmeisters.

 

[Klaus Kipling]

Your argument is certainly persuasive.

How would uncapping the EFFECT result change the damage to weapons?

Perhaps if someone could give a few examples of the changes from current v3.2 values, then Gar could make the changes on the rest of the weapons. This is really out of my comfort zone, so I will leave it to the weaponmeisters.

Weapon damage is a effect x multiplier + fixed modifier. A caped effect will have a max of 6 x mult., with most results being at the high end.

Currently, an auto-pistol, for example, has a damage of 1x + 3, so capped the range is 4-9, with 9 being very common. Ct damge, for example, was 3D, therefore 3-18.

Uncapped, the damage goes from 5-14, with a better probability spread, being more equivalent to CT/MT based damage results.

Now you're getting me off topic!