2d10 For Better RNG

[rqwertwylker]

Add an option to swap the d20 for 2d10. Change the range for critical roles to make up for lower odds. I'm a huge fan of RNG but consistent characters are less frustrating to play.

[rqwertwylker]

Auburn2 の投稿を引用：

It is not miraculous. If your DC is a 3 there is a significant, real chance you fail .... and you should fail frequently in a game with as many checks as BG3. If you are not failing 15% of the time you are not doing it consistent with your skill set.

Same thing if you need a 20 - That is 5%, you are rolling hundreds of times in 3 hour session, it should happen often. The only "miraculous" effect is when you need higher than a 20 to hit something and still manage it because you roll a 20.

A DC of 5 is a "Very Easy" task according to rulebook. So you're really telling me that you should be failing a DC of 3, 1 out of 6-ish times?

The 2d10 curve would change that to 1 failure every 33 rolls. Rolling hundreds of times would mean 5 - 10 really bad failures in a 3 hour session.

And I already suggested changing the range for critical success to match the odds of rolling 20 on a d20. Basically an 18/19/20 would be a crit.

[zero]

khes_bah_lah の投稿を引用：

Auburn2 の投稿を引用：

It is not miraculous. If your DC is a 3 there is a significant, real chance you fail .... and you should fail frequently in a game with as many checks as BG3. If you are not failing 15% of the time you are not doing it consistent with your skill set.

Same thing if you need a 20 - That is 5%, you are rolling hundreds of times in 3 hour session, it should happen often. The only "miraculous" effect is when you need higher than a 20 to hit something and still manage it because you roll a 20.

A DC of 5 is a "Very Easy" task according to rulebook. So you're really telling me that you should be failing a DC of 3, 1 out of 6-ish times?

The 2d10 curve would change that to 1 failure every 33 rolls. Rolling hundreds of times would mean 5 - 10 really bad failures in a 3 hour session.

And I already suggested changing the range for critical success to match the odds of rolling 20 on a d20. Basically an 18/19/20 would be a crit.

a dc or 3 means you have a 10% chance of failing, 1/10

that said, a very hard DC is 15-20, if the DC is 18, you have just over 7% chance of getting it with the 2d6 system, as opposed to the default 15.

[Dorok]

OP suggestion isn't D&D, D&D is just about an event has x% chance to be achieved, so DC is Y. And character skills increase/decrease the chance to do such action type, so the malus/bonus is z% so W and DC is Y + W.

And then there's just a %chance to achieve it, nothing more.

DC 5 is 25% so 75% chance of win for an average character. DC of 15 is 75% so 25% chance of win for an average character.

The character is quite skilled and increase the roll of 3, so 15% higher chance, for him there's 40% chance to achieve the action.

OP doesn't care of the percentage chance aspect and consider only the chance to win a roll, and a skill level in that action type, and want favor medium values. There isn't any more direct percentage chance but a skill check system. And he is right it changes the system, but it's not D&D.

[rqwertwylker]

With a d20 a +1 always means 5% better odds
With 2d10 a +1 means anywhere between 2% - 10%

I'm not really sure how often in a campaign a character's actions are separated from the DC required by such a wide gap. What I mean is, no matter what level you are or how specialized a skill is, no matter what disadvantages are stacked against you. The game is literally formulated to where the average d20 roll (10.5) is sufficient to accomplish tasks.

All the math of stacked bonuses and disadvantages is tabulated BEFORE the roll. Which means all else aside, a level 1 +1 should behave the same as a level 10 +4 because the goal is to roll a 10 or higher on your dice. The idea of leveling and class specialization is that certain tasks are only suited towards certain players. I should feel like I have an advantage on my characters strengths, and gain even more as my character progresses through the storyline.

A lot of the scenarios used in this thread to illustrate the effect changing dice can have on gameplay mention a +5 modifier. And I feel like that's because most commonly actions attempted by players, are within one difficulty class the player is suited for. A +/-5 modifier always translates to a 25% change in odds for d20. With 2d10 the largest that change could be is 44%.

A +/-6 modifier is always a 30% change in odds with d20. With 2d10 it maxes out at 51%.

+/-7 with d20 is 35%, 2d10; 58%

This trend continues until it reaches its furthest disparity at +/-9. A d20 is 45% and the 2d10 is 70%. After this the odds retract nearer to each other.

Keep in mind we're talking about how much your base success rate (for a set DC) Increases or decreases due to modifiers.

Blah blah blah, I just want to feel like my character is good at what they're good at. Failed rolls shouldn't be so common they break that immersion.

[Dorok]

The 2 D10 system just average chances in middle, a great character won't perform much better than a good character.

A system of threshold is perhaps more what you would want. Or it's RNG that bother you entirely, but the 2 D10 will still be high RNG.

[Lord Dralisz]

just make it to flip a coin, head you pass the skillcheck if not then failed... playing with a charisma character over the whole game i failed most of the checks , i didn't feel like that having lots of charisma had anything to do with the outcome at all