01-30-2016, 08:56 PM | #1 | |
Join Date: Jan 2016
|
Success rolls: effective skill below 3
Hello,
I am in the process of learning the basic rules and have just stumbled on the following (B345): Quote:
But perhaps I am missing something here. Let me know if you think this is a rule that can be ignored without any impact. Last edited by Flinx; 01-30-2016 at 09:02 PM. Reason: Typo in title; also added tag to title |
|
01-30-2016, 09:47 PM | #2 | |
Join Date: Sep 2011
|
Re: Success roles: effective skill below 3
Quote:
That said, it doesn't seem likely to break the game if you ignore the rule but you do need to determine whether success that often, under conditions that adverse, is going to break your suspension of disbelief. The other thing to consider is that you've essentially opened the door for rolls when effective skill is reduced to 0 or a negative number. The argument can be made (and has a certain mathematical validity),that if you allow a roll for impossible results like a 1 or 2, you should also permit them for the equally impossible values of 0 and -1, for example. |
|
01-30-2016, 10:46 PM | #3 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Montréal, Québec
|
Re: Success roles: effective skill below 3
Yeah, mostly it's so you can't succeed 1-in-50 with effective skill -2714.
Other than that, feel free to ignore it. GURPS is a tool box. |
01-30-2016, 11:42 PM | #4 | ||||
Join Date: Jan 2016
|
Re: Success rolls: effective skill below 3
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I guess this quickly becomes more a discussion about game design than about application of rules. I am inclined to leave out the rule when explaining the mechanics in favor of simplicity and consistency. Should a player ever want to try their luck I will hand out hard consequences for a critical failure and warn them about it. Thank you for your thoughts on the topic. |
||||
01-30-2016, 11:50 PM | #5 |
Dog of Lysdexics
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Melbourne FL, Formerly Wellington NZ
|
Re: Success rolls: effective skill below 3
Which is why Skill level 16 opens the option of "No Nuisance rolls" perk for the skill.
|
01-31-2016, 01:56 AM | #6 | |
Join Date: Jan 2016
|
Re: Success rolls: effective skill below 3
Quote:
As a matter of principle I think that if a roll is appropriate at all, it’s interpretation should be true to the normal distribution it approximates, which includes only asymptotically approaching zero in both directions and so always leaving a slight chance of both success and failure under all circumstances. And on a more practical note it just makes for a better gaming experience. If a character who has never used a bow wants to pick one up and shoot an opponent’s eye out, I don’t want to say „you can’t do that“, I want to say „you can certainly try but there is a high chance you will hit one of your companions instead”. |
|
01-31-2016, 03:00 AM | #7 |
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ellicott City, MD
|
Re: Success roles: effective skill below 3
If somebody using Bow at default wants yo shoot somebody in the eye, they should end up with at least an effective skill of 3 by using a full Aim.
|
01-31-2016, 05:51 AM | #8 |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Success roles: effective skill below 3
What hasn't been mentioned yet is that the chance of Critical Failure keeps increasing. If your effective skill is 0, then a roll of 10 or more is a critical failure. Once effective skill is -6 or -7 the Critical Success and Critical Failure ranges will overlap!
The thing is, from a game design perspective, this isn't a symmetrical situation. People seek to maximise success, while minimising failure. Thus Critical Success range expands, then stops, to prevent an I win button. A 16 is the maximum you can roll as this encourages you to use modifiers to diversify skill use, but also has no effect on margin of success if the check uses that instead of simple success. Meanwhile, few people would want a Critical Failure 50% of the time. The cap of 3 means Critical Failure is at worse around 20%. |
01-31-2016, 05:54 AM | #9 |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: Success roles: effective skill below 3
All I see is that someone could argue a bonus from range being less than 2 yards when aimed. It's not in the rules, but seems more justifiable to me then 100 yard, 10 yard, and 1 inch shots to the eye ending up with the same chance.
|
01-31-2016, 06:30 AM | #10 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denmark
|
Re: Success roles: effective skill below 3
In my experience this rule is really important in two situations.
1) When the PC's can keep trying. For instance, picking "an impossible to pick"-lock might only require a few minutes of time but have a -10 penalty to attempt. repeated attempts are at -1. WITHOUT this rule there wouldn't be much difference between someone with skill 15 or someone defaulting to skill 6. They could both keep attempting and will open the lock in a few hours. Maybe faster depending on luck. WITH this rule the person at default couldn't even hope to try, and the other person have maybe one shot at it, and should probably take all the "spend extra time" and al sort of other situational modifiers to try to get to a place where they might actually succeed. Of course a sensible GM might just declare "No you can't no matter how much you try". But I know several type of gamers who might start arguing if the rules say "you can always attempt and succeed on a roll of 3". 2) In combat. The only thing preventing my archer from shooting you in the eye at 500y in darkness is the -30 or so penalty. WITHOUT this rule I might as well try (assuming I have enough arrows). Other similar situations where you are heavily penalized in combat. Then you might as well "go for the eye" as IF you then hit, it's much worse. Of course some GM's and players might like this. I do not as it, in my experience, lead to players attempting stupid things only because the rules allow it, not because "that is what my character would do". |
Tags |
rules |
|
|