Reaction roll range compacting method

[Eukie]

It's fairly easy to stack modifiers for Reaction rolls in GURPS, which can make Reaction rolls give somewhat strange results; Very Beautiful + Voice + Charisma 2 + applicable Reputation +1 + 1 point in Diplomacy makes for something like a +12 modifier to all Reaction rolls where you're visible, speaking, etc.

This means that unless there are other modifiers (and the positive, inherent modifiers stack so incredibly much faster than the usually task-dependent negative modifiers) the results for an average reaction roll are:

00.46% Good
08.80% Very Good
90.74% Excellent

And I think this is perhaps a little too good?

So I propose replacing the Reaction modifier with extra dice, at one die per final ±2, and picking the 3 highest dice for Reaction rolls with a positive modifier, and the 3 lowest dice for Reaction rolls with a negative modifier.

This way, the Reaction table gets a powerful effect of diminishing returns that I think should feel more verisimilitudinous for large modifiers.

4d6-drop-lowest is almost-but-not-quite the same as 3d6+2, so for low modifiers the results should be roughly the same (consider alternatively 2d per +3), while for high modifiers the effect is powerful but not overpowering. For the example of +12 on a reaction roll, the result becomes:

With 1d/+2:
00.03%: Poor
05.14%: Neutral
32.25%: Good
62.28%: Very Good

With 2d/+3:
00.07%: Poor
02.06%: Neutral
22.75%: Good
75.12%: Very Good

Which still makes high Reaction modifiers powerful, but allows greater variation in the outcomes and avoids the at times ridiculously useful Excellent results and 20+ rolls on the initial Loyalty scale (so you can't get people willing to die for you simply by talking to them once).

This also applies to heavily penalized rolls; no Disastrous rolls, but a greater range of results rather than the blithe denial and rejection that a high negative Reaction modifier usually results in.

[vicky_molokh]

I have a very mixed opinion about the proposed change.

I agree that Reaction Rolls are calibrated not as well as they could be, going too quickly from 'meh, no difference' to 'whoa, all the time'.

However, I'm seeing several drawbacks in the proposed system:

1. It contributes to the 'GURPS is overengineered/overly complicated and GURPS GMs are making it even more overengineered' stereotype. But me saying this probably won't change anything, so onward I go.

2. One of the big reasons why people take high [whatever] is to be able to do things that people with normal [whatever] cannot do. In case of skills, that's often accepting a -10 TDM and still having a chance to succeed. For Reactions, it's having a chance at an Excellent reaction.

3. It makes trait value hard to estimate, which on top of the already nonlinear probability curve is inconvenient. 4e ditched non-linear costs for a reason, and seems to keep nonlinearity in check where it allows it at all. Roll-and-keep . . . is way beyond that level of being under control.

4. There's already an argument that reaction roll mechanics to stop being a special snowflake (and while I originally was meh about it, I'm thinking about it more and seeing it as more positive). Roll-and-keep . . . is even more snowflake.

5. Forgot.

----

So based on that, some ideas that may or may not be of interest to you:

1. Perhaps instead of making the modifiers suffer from diminishing returns, make the table have diminishing returns? As in, keep the Poor/Neutral/Good reactions compacted closer than they are by RAW, while making more disastrous/more excellent-like reactions take up more numbers, e.g. requiring 25 for Excellent?

2. If we're rehauling reactions anyway, it would be nice to, much like there are criticals on skill rolls, have Excellent and Disastrous reactions possible critical-like results even if they cannot be reached 'conventionally' through modifiers alone. It would also be nice to have extreme modifiers change the chance of critical reactions (e.g. like Skill 16 makes Good Crits go on 3-6 instead of 3-4 and Bad Crits on an 18 instead of 17-18), without making them guaranteed without Super Luck. In fact maybe make a special reaction level that is only achieved by criticals.

[khorboth]

I think you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

The situation you're describing is like if Nicole Scherzinger was talking about producing music. Or if The Rock was talking about bodybuilding. (fame notwithstanding). I think a high reaction is pretty much inevitable even from people who had only heard of them by reputation.

In game terms, you have characters who have spent... (checks books) around 40 points on these social advantages to improve reactions. And they get some mook loyalty. I would consider "combat environment" and "asking the NPC to do something hazardous" to be strong mitigating factors worth some negatives. Additionally, any combat-hardened NPC would involve more role-playing than a simple reaction roll for true loyalty. So... the charismatic leader can inspire the troops, raise the peasants, and get people to follow him into battle. I see this as the reward for spending all those points.

Note also that the only situation where dying for the PC is mentioned is under loyalty which is applicable mostly to hirelings. For general reactions, people are just extremely impressed.

One modifier I did come up with off-the-cuff that has stayed around though... Someone wearing inflexible body armor only gets half their appearance bonus. If they are concealing their face (as with a helmet) they loos half again. If they're doing both, they get no bonus. This came up in my TL10 game where the leader was wearing the battlesuit, but is really just s applicable to plate mail.

[Eukie]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

1. Perhaps instead of making the modifiers suffer from diminishing returns, make the table have diminishing returns? As in, keep the Poor/Neutral/Good reactions compacted closer than they are by RAW, while making more disastrous/more excellent-like reactions take up more numbers, e.g. requiring 25 for Excellent?

2. If we're rehauling reactions anyway, it would be nice to, much like there are criticals on skill rolls, have Excellent and Disastrous reactions possible critical-like results even if they cannot be reached 'conventionally' through modifiers alone. It would also be nice to have extreme modifiers change the chance of critical reactions (e.g. like Skill 16 makes Good Crits go on 3-6 instead of 3-4 and Bad Crits on an 18 instead of 17-18), without making them guaranteed without Super Luck. In fact maybe make a special reaction level that is only achieved by criticals.

There is the Influence Table from p. SE31, where the MOS is used to determine the Reaction. If you substitute 10+Reaction modifiers for the Influence skill, it means you can handle Reaction rolls as a simple skill roll - it even suggests that Criticals can be Disastrous/Excellent

I'm not entirely sure how it works in practice; as written the Excellent result is just as obtainable with high Reaction modifiers as it is when using the Reaction table, which doesn't solve my primary objection. I think your suggestion of adding more diminishing returns to the table (or increasing the required MOS/MOF for extreme results) is better for that, certainly.

But isn't the skew you get from Nd6k3 just so much more elegant? :P

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Eukie

But isn't the skew you get from Nd6k3 just so much more elegant? :P

"Elegant" is gamer shorthand for "I like it". With the absence[1] of that kind of mechanic in GURPS, I don't know how nice a reception it would receive if introduced for one special kind of roll.

Adjusting the table is, to me, a simpler and more obvious way to change things; it will be transparent to the player. the Xd6kY mechanic isn't transparent at all.

[1] Semi-exception, Luck reroll but it's "Roll your whatever dice three times, keep one set" and it's already controversial like that.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Eukie

There is the Influence Table from p. SE31, where the MOS is used to determine the Reaction. If you substitute 10+Reaction modifiers for the Influence skill, it means you can handle Reaction rolls as a simple skill roll - it even suggests that Criticals can be Disastrous/Excellent

I'm not entirely sure how it works in practice; as written the Excellent result is just as obtainable with high Reaction modifiers as it is when using the Reaction table, which doesn't solve my primary objection. I think your suggestion of adding more diminishing returns to the table (or increasing the required MOS/MOF for extreme results) is better for that, certainly.

Thing is, Excellent shouldn't be unachievable, as that would defeat its purpose. It should be hard to achieve and/or rare. But it's one of the ways Crowning Moments of Awesome are made in SE.

It can be made harder/rarer by altering the reaction table itself, setting the more critical results further apart.

Originally Posted by Eukie

But isn't the skew you get from Nd6k3 just so much more elegant? :P

No. It's a variable dice pool and a roll-vs-keep mechanic. That's almost the exact opposite of elegant (the other candidates being Weapons of the Gods and Exalted 3e). Don't you remember other math geeks dissecting 7th Sea's mechanics and gasping?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Thing is, Excellent shouldn't be unachievable, as that would defeat its purpose. It should be hard to achieve and/or rare. But it's one of the ways Crowning Moments of Awesome are made in SE.

Excellent should not be achievable with a simple reaction roll; it should be something you work towards.

My usual solution to reaction rolls is to just never make them; if I want random reactions I'll call for an Influence roll.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Excellent should not be achievable with a simple reaction roll; it should be something you work towards.

My usual solution to reaction rolls is to just never make them; if I want random reactions I'll call for an Influence roll.

It's pretty much a definition of a critical success on a 'how do people react' roll. Extraordinary events should definitely be a thing in RPGs, since RPGs tend not to be about the totally ordinary.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

It's pretty much a definition of a critical success on a 'how do people react' roll.

A 'very good' reaction is strong enough to be a totally plausible critical success.

[whswhs]

If, in your case, you are rolling 9d and choosing the best 3, it is very likely that you'll get a Very Good result (16-18). But 18 is the highest possible roll. You can never get a 19 or above. So it will never be possible for you to get an Excellent reaction, no matter how many dice you roll.