ShadoPrism
 member, 1376 posts
 OCGD-Obsessive-Compulsive
 Gamer-Disorder
Sat 1 May 2021
at 21:50
Cultural issues
From what I have seen, they just keep trying to reinvent the horse with AD&D. so to speak.
SunRuanEr
 subscriber, 387 posts
Sat 1 May 2021
at 22:02
AD&D
Well, if they don't keep trying to reinvent the horse, how else can they keep strong-arming people into buying new "improved" horses?

It's obnoxious behaviour, really. I'm all for new content from the games I play, but 'new content' isn't/shouldn't be 'an entirely new way of doing things that renders everything you already own useless and in need of replacement'. They might as well just scream 'GIVE US YOUR MONEY!' directly.
pawndream
 member, 191 posts
Sat 1 May 2021
at 22:45
Cultural issues
In reply to Piestar (msg # 1805):

I started with descending AC and didn't think anything of it. No issues. That's just the way it was and I never gave it too much though. In 1e, I used a to-hit matrix. In 2e I never warmed to THAC0 and usually made a to-hit matrix so I didn't have to do the math.

3e came along and brought ascending AC. To-hit charts were no longer needed. Adding numbers to a dice roll and comparing it to a target number is intuitive; whereas, before you would add numbers to a d20 roll (to hit modifers, magic bonuses, etc.) to come up with a total number. Then, with that total number, you reverse engineer the number you need to hit descending AC. It's an unnecessary step. That's why I dislike it. I can do the math. I just don't want to.

I view it similar to how when I was a kid I used to type reports on a manual typewriter. At some point, I got an electric typewriter, and then a word processing program. When I didn't know about electric typewriters or word processors, manual typewriters were fine. Not so great after, other than for nostalgia.
praguepride
 member, 1803 posts
 "Hugs for the Hugs God!"
 - Warhammer Fluffy-K
Sun 2 May 2021
at 00:44
Cultural issues
The problem with THAC0 is that you want an overall direction with your game for easy reference. Positives are good, negatives are bad (or vice versa). In AD&D it was kind of a hodgepodge where you wanted to roll high but you also wanted your THAC0 to be low. In a vacuum it's not hard but remember that a +1 to sword is good but +1 to armor is bad kind of wrecks people.
Piestar
 member, 871 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Sun 2 May 2021
at 01:13
Re: Cultural issues
DeeYin:
In reply to Piestar (msg # 1805):
While I wish no harm to anyone, when someone says they cannot understand THAC0 at all, I always imagine their head would explode if they were to look at a golf leader board.


Hahaha, too funny. I like that thought... and scoring for bowling must really confuse them.
Piestar
 member, 872 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Sun 2 May 2021
at 01:16
Re: Cultural issues
praguepride:
The problem with THAC0 is that you want an overall direction with your game for easy reference. Positives are good, negatives are bad (or vice versa). In AD&D it was kind of a hodgepodge where you wanted to roll high but you also wanted your THAC0 to be low. In a vacuum it's not hard but remember that a +1 to sword is good but +1 to armor is bad kind of wrecks people.


That might be the crux of the difference for me, I like high and low to be good in different situations. Stat checks were a breeze because you wanted to roll under your stat number, obviously the higher your ability the easier it was to pass. I do on occasion run in to games who can't quite wrap their heads around that, but I always liked it.
Zag24
 supporter, 688 posts
Sun 2 May 2021
at 04:41
Constantly the victim lol
Haha!  Back when I was young and stupid (early 1980's), I built my own system, because I was unsatisfied with existing ones.  In my system, everything was a percentage roll.  When you started out, still low level characters, you wanted to roll under your skill percentage, and under half or a third of your percentage was a critical.  But once you were veterans facing tougher opponents, you would have to roll under half just to connect, and under a third or a fourth to do real damage.  The idea was that really great characters would eventually get their skills into the 200's, such that rolling under a quarter of their ability was not incredibly surprising, and they even would roll under a sixth or and eighth sometimes.

It was horrendously complicated, as you might have guessed.  We played it for about 4 sessions and everyone revolted, sending us back to AD&D with its THAC0's.
Piestar
 member, 873 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Sun 2 May 2021
at 04:58
Constantly the victim lol
In reply to Zag24 (msg # 1814):

Very creative of you, given time I'll bet it could have become something really great. Just think, with more supportive friends, you might be putting out 5th Ed. versions of your books.

I always enjoyed having a reason to have a variety of dice though, systems can become too bare-bones, it seems to me.
praguepride
 member, 1804 posts
 "Hugs for the Hugs God!"
 - Warhammer Fluffy-K
Sun 2 May 2021
at 12:46
Constantly the victim lol
Someone pointed out to me that a d20 is actually a really simple approximation of a percentage roll because 5% increments are easy to wrap your head around.

It's so obvious but it also kind of blew my mind when I realized that was why D&D switched to a d20 system as opposed to a d100 percentage you see in other systems.

Nobody cares about the difference between 84% and 83% but the difference 85% and 80% that is something you can intuitively understand.
Piestar
 member, 879 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Sun 2 May 2021
at 12:49
Constantly the victim lol
In reply to praguepride (msg # 1816):

You never played rolemaster I am guessing. The difference between 84% and 83% could be significant! I loved that rule set, but could find no one willing to play it. Sad.
Zag24
 supporter, 689 posts
Sun 2 May 2021
at 20:29
Skin in the Game
Piestar:
Very creative of you, given time I'll bet it could have become something really great. Just think, with more supportive friends, you might be putting out 5th Ed. versions of your books.

Heh heh, no.  One good aspect of the system was that there was no damage roll.  Your weapon did a base amount of damage -- ranging from 2 points for fist to 8 points for great axe -- and then you multiplied that times the "crit number" which was the reciprocal of the fraction you had rolled under.   For the less math-inclined, if you were under 1/2 your percent, your crit number is 2.  If you were under 1/5 your percent, your crit number is 5.  Maximum crit number is 10, so that a roll of 1 doesn't mean 60 times damage.

Armor worked like damage resistance, so would be subtracted from the roll.  That's why, when fighting a dragon, say, with an armor of 15, you can't even scratch him with a crit value of 1 or 2, you need to be rolling triple or quadruple damage to hurt him.

This much wouldn't have been so bad.  However, I also tried to incorporate hit locations a la early Runequest.  It was a hot mess.
V_V
 member, 937 posts
 Resting. I hope to find
 peace and vigor return.
Mon 3 May 2021
at 00:03
Constantly the victim lol
In reply to praguepride (msg # 1816):

Don't go to a casino. ;) I'm being cheeky. I agree with you to an extent. A 10% chance and a 5% chance are very different, as is a 95% and 90% chance. Heck even a 55% chance is significant over 50%. I've long since viewed d20 as % based. That's just how I process dice systems. So it was insane the number of people I had to argue with (kindly) over the fact rolling a 10 9and that succeeding) was a 55% chance of success. It took a long time, for such a simple process of saying, "Yes, 10 is half of 20, but 9 fails, 10 doesn't". This was critical in scenes where the DC was obvious.

CoK (or CoC) use % systems and I liked that aspect...just preferred the former's tone and intention.
Piestar
 member, 880 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Mon 3 May 2021
at 01:16
Skin in the Game
In reply to Zag24 (msg # 1818):

I don't know, sounds awesome to me. I suspect every really good game started as a hot mess.
V_V
 member, 939 posts
 Resting. I hope to find
 peace and vigor return.
Mon 3 May 2021
at 07:20
Skin in the Game
Look at D&D! Wait...I'm thinking...
Piestar
 member, 893 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Mon 3 May 2021
at 07:33
Constantly the victim lol
In reply to V_V (msg # 1819):

Funny how people don't seem to grasp the basic numbers behind D&D. I remember a debate I was having with a guy over what you should be able to accomplish with a natural twenty. He wanted the result to be miraculous. I suggested that miracles shouldn't happen, five percent of the time. He clearly had never connected a natural 20 with 5%.
I always like the idea that special results should come from extended rolls, and second natural twenty, or some such, for a special result.
Sir Swindle
 member, 314 posts
Mon 3 May 2021
at 11:45
Re: Constantly the victim lol
Piestar:
In reply to praguepride (msg # 1816):

You never played rolemaster I am guessing. The difference between 84% and 83% could be significant! I loved that rule set, but could find no one willing to play it. Sad.

I put a 5% tolerance on all absolutes. no one (-+5%) cares about 1% and 1% never (-+5%) matters. Also the universe is empty (-+5%) and no portion (-+5%) of the earths population lives in Nebraska.
Ski-Bird
 subscriber, 168 posts
Mon 3 May 2021
at 12:23
Skin in the Game


^^ This reminds me of when I had to learn about statistics, chi squares and margins of error.  Up until that point, I thought I was fair-to-middling at math.  It just about broke my brain.
V_V
 member, 940 posts
 Resting. I hope to find
 peace and vigor return.
Mon 3 May 2021
at 13:56
Re: Constantly the victim lol
In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 1823):

*Literally smh* *sigh*
Ski-Bird
 subscriber, 169 posts
Mon 3 May 2021
at 14:11
Cultural issues
Zag24:
One good aspect of the system was that there was no damage roll.


Hot mess aside, I think the idea of fixed damage multiplied by how well you hit is pretty neat.  Easily scalable too (as in the dragon example).
Sir Swindle
 member, 315 posts
Mon 3 May 2021
at 14:12
Re: Constantly the victim lol
V_V:
In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 1823):

*Literally smh* *sigh*

Hang with too many pedants.

Me: "All crows are black."
Jerks: "Well actually albino crows exist."
Me: "STFU you know that all means all -+5%! Now give me all the chips.
Jerks: "Can..."
Me: "YES YOU CAN HAVE A FEW!"
V_V
 member, 941 posts
 Resting. I hope to find
 peace and vigor return.
Mon 3 May 2021
at 15:00
Re: Constantly the victim lol
Gotcha. So you've never (-+5%) played rolemaster. Neither have I.

This message was lightly edited by the user at 15:01, Mon 03 May.

PCO.Spvnky
 member, 470 posts
Mon 3 May 2021
at 15:03
Re: Skin in the Game
Ski-Bird:


^^ This reminds me of when I had to learn about statistics, chi squares and margins of error.  Up until that point, I thought I was fair-to-middling at math.  It just about broke my brain.

Stats is magic with numbers, lol.
praguepride
 member, 1807 posts
 "Hugs for the Hugs God!"
 - Warhammer Fluffy-K
Tue 4 May 2021
at 21:02
Re: Constantly the victim lol
V_V:
In reply to praguepride (msg # 1816):

Don't go to a casino. ;)


1% makes a difference over large numbers but even in a heavy combat session we're probably not even rolling dice 100 times so 2-4 hours a week/100 rolls a week just doesn't see that volume.

I read somewhere that for people who count cards and grind things out as professional gamblers usually end up making about minimum wage on average. You might get some hot or cold streaks but in general with $5,000 in your bankroll and a 1% edge minus expenses/tips/taxes etc.

In theory pure optimal at $5,000 an hour at 1% edge you should average $50/hr but you cannot play for 24 hours a day nonstop perfectly. Eventually you start making mistakes, have to take a break, need to eat, use the restroom etc. which all cuts into your grind time. Dealers have to swap out, slow/drunk players will sit down and screw the flow up etc.

The "Harvard Card Counting Team" didn't make great returns but what people don't realize is they collected funds like an IC and raised nearly $100,000 to gamble with so that 1% return was much much higher for them and even still they ended up only hitting about $162/hr which means that 1% edge translated into only 0.2% profits.

uhhhh...what were we talking about?
SunRuanEr
 subscriber, 388 posts
Wed 5 May 2021
at 00:47
Argh
Dear child of mine that just excitedly shared a picture of your engagement ring:

"It's very pretty" is the best I can do, sorry. I pray you won't regret this, but I fear you will, because right now you're not remembering one bit how many times in the past six months you've sat at my kitchen table/stood in my driveway and contemplated kicking your SO out of your shared housing situation because living with them drives you nuts. If you don't want to live with them now because of their obnoxious habits, you're not going to want to live with them five years from now, either. If they've not improved over the previous three years you've been dating, they aren't going to improve one bit once they no longer have to do much of anything to keep you around.

...and let's not even get into the way you feel about their family. That won't get any better with time, either. I speak from experience, here.

/headdesks

Deep down, I know this is a terrible idea, for about a thousand reasons - but I feel like I have no recourse but to cross my fingers and hope it's not the utter dumpster fire that I just know it's going to be. If I even remotely try to point out reasons to wait on this decision, it's just going to push them to make it faster.
Piestar
 member, 894 posts
 once upon a time...
 ...there was a little pie
Wed 5 May 2021
at 02:53
Argh
In reply to SunRuanEr (msg # 1831):

Wow, that is sad. The myth that a bad relationship will magically become a good one with a ring and a ceremony has caused so much pain over the years.