Post by Eden on Aug 1, 2015 19:47:10 GMT -8
It seems that with the current dice roll system there is a rather high level of luck involved. Critical hits/misses appear to happen rather often. The way I understand the current dice system is that 1-100 is rolled every time, in the event someone has a rank a number of dice equal to rank are rolled and added into the sum. Each rank dice being 10 possible sides.
So it appears that currently someone unranked has a potential roll outcome of 1-100, Rank 1 is 2-110, Rank 9 would be 10-190. So please correct me if this is wrong.
This leads to such a high level of variance that a rank 1 fighter could strike a rank 9 reflex a fair number of times with a moderately lucky roll versus the rank 9's normal or slightly unlucky roll, as well as there is a very high probability of gaps in opposing rolls >50, meaning crits occur very often.
My thought was why not make it much more simple and in my opinion an accurate representation of skill differences. If the dice were say 20 sided for an attacker to hit, and their rank was 5, you could simply do the 1-20 roll +5 giving this rank 5 attacker a potential roll range of 6-25. The opposite end would be to eliminate the need for a defender to roll at all, assuming they always attempt to resist in some way. To do this if they had a reflex of 5 you would simply use the rank 5 reflex and add 10, making the total 15 to beat by the attacker. My wording feels a little confusing as I read this so I will break it down quickly below.
Attacker: Fighting Rank 5, rolls 1-20 +5
Defender: Reflex Rank 5, defense value of 15
This would give an attacker of equal rank a 50% chance to strike their target if the target were of equal skill defending and eliminate the need for the defender to roll at all, returning focus on the roleplay and reducing the high level variance in opposing rolls.
The chance for a rank 1 to strike a rank 9 defender would be 10%
The chance for a rank 9 to strike a rank 1 defender would be 90%
The chance for a rank 5 to strike a rank 9 defender would be 30%
The chance for a rank 9 to strike a rank 5 defender would be 70%
The chance for a rank 1 to strike a rank 10 defender would be 5%
The chance for a rank 10 to strike a rank 1 defender would be 95%
In the case of an unranked attacker striking a rank 10 defender or the rank 10 being the attacker, It could be said it would simply not be possible for the unranked to succeed in either case due to the skill and remarkable ability of the rank 10.
So, please let me know what you think, maybe add your own ideas, or shoot this down entirely. ^_^
So it appears that currently someone unranked has a potential roll outcome of 1-100, Rank 1 is 2-110, Rank 9 would be 10-190. So please correct me if this is wrong.
This leads to such a high level of variance that a rank 1 fighter could strike a rank 9 reflex a fair number of times with a moderately lucky roll versus the rank 9's normal or slightly unlucky roll, as well as there is a very high probability of gaps in opposing rolls >50, meaning crits occur very often.
My thought was why not make it much more simple and in my opinion an accurate representation of skill differences. If the dice were say 20 sided for an attacker to hit, and their rank was 5, you could simply do the 1-20 roll +5 giving this rank 5 attacker a potential roll range of 6-25. The opposite end would be to eliminate the need for a defender to roll at all, assuming they always attempt to resist in some way. To do this if they had a reflex of 5 you would simply use the rank 5 reflex and add 10, making the total 15 to beat by the attacker. My wording feels a little confusing as I read this so I will break it down quickly below.
Attacker: Fighting Rank 5, rolls 1-20 +5
Defender: Reflex Rank 5, defense value of 15
This would give an attacker of equal rank a 50% chance to strike their target if the target were of equal skill defending and eliminate the need for the defender to roll at all, returning focus on the roleplay and reducing the high level variance in opposing rolls.
The chance for a rank 1 to strike a rank 9 defender would be 10%
The chance for a rank 9 to strike a rank 1 defender would be 90%
The chance for a rank 5 to strike a rank 9 defender would be 30%
The chance for a rank 9 to strike a rank 5 defender would be 70%
The chance for a rank 1 to strike a rank 10 defender would be 5%
The chance for a rank 10 to strike a rank 1 defender would be 95%
In the case of an unranked attacker striking a rank 10 defender or the rank 10 being the attacker, It could be said it would simply not be possible for the unranked to succeed in either case due to the skill and remarkable ability of the rank 10.
So, please let me know what you think, maybe add your own ideas, or shoot this down entirely. ^_^
