Degree of Success Levels

[mavikfelna]

There are 2 different methods used in the V2 books for determining Degree of Success; the even/odd method and the 50% method (used in the diplomatic rules). There really should be only 1 methodology used throughout the rules and I would recommend the 50% method.

The first reason is dice simplification. What I mean by that is that for some reason, % dice scare people but regular numbered dice do not. So if you can reduce everything to 5% brackets an easy simplification is to use a d20. Using the even/odd method with d20 does work, but you get a fairer distribution with the 50% method. This is a very minor reason to use the 50% method but I thought I'd mention it.

The primary reason I would recommend it is because of flexibility. Some tasks may be easy to perform but hard to truly get outstanding success at, so you may want to make them 30/70 distributions. Or the chance of a major failure may be much greater than major success, giving a 50% on success but 70% on failure. It also leaves open the opportunity for other things to influence the degree of success (DoS) that don't affect the base chance of success. IE a legendary science officer may have an ability that grants +10 to DoS for sensor checks, while an officer with an unreliability penalty may affect failure DoS for diplomacy by +5

Mostly I personally don't like the even/odd mechanic, so I admit bias, but that doesn't mean the 50% method is wrong either.

--Mav

[Tyrel Lohr]

Yeah, that was part of the "great Skill Check debate" back in September, otherwise known as the black hole that a month of VBAM development fell into. Some of the rules still use one system while others use another.

We have generally been trying to limit ourselves to D10 and D6 dice in this book, but you do bring up a good point that using a D20 for 5% steps might be a better way to go. I will look over the rules again to make sure, but I think there are several instances where we are multiplying base values by 5 anyway; if that is a fairly universal constant across the rules, then a D20 *would* make more sense.

I also admit that the even/odd mechanic is a bit goofy, but was preferable to the other option for simplicity's sake.

-Tyrel

[wminsing]

My only complaint on the even/odd mechanic is that sometimes the difference between a minor/major result is quite large. For exploration, if I roll a minor failure I make no progress, but if I roll a major failure I could lose the whole squadron? Since the difference between those two results could 1, I find it somewhat frustrating.

-Will

[mavikfelna]

My only complaint on the even/odd mechanic is that sometimes the difference between a minor/major result is quite large. For exploration, if I roll a minor failure I make no progress, but if I roll a major failure I could lose the whole squadron? Since the difference between those two results could 1, I find it somewhat frustrating.

-Will

That is also a major complaint I have with the system.

--Mav

[Gareth_Perkins]

My only complaint on the even/odd mechanic is that sometimes the difference between a minor/major result is quite large. For exploration, if I roll a minor failure I make no progress, but if I roll a major failure I could lose the whole squadron? Since the difference between those two results could 1, I find it somewhat frustrating.

Maybe the solution there is to temper the Major failure results to accommodate the fact that 50% of rolls will be either a Major Success or Major Failure (i.e.: change the exploration result to "lose 1D3 vessels" or similar perhaps)?

Either that or have some sort of sub-chart for major results (it could even be based upon the die result in some way - if odd results are "major" then unit results of 1 or 3 (i.e. 91 or 53) could be Serious/Good, results of 5 or 7 could be very serious/very good and results of 9 could be catastrophic/awesome)?

[wminsing]

Either that or have some sort of sub-chart for major results (it could even be based upon the die result in some way - if odd results are "major" then unit results of 1 or 3 (i.e. 91 or 53) could be Serious/Good, results of 5 or 7 could be very serious/very good and results of 9 could be catastrophic/awesome)?

Exploration does something like this- there's a second chart to see what exactly happens (other than 'force in peril'), so it's not always a total disaster. It does make every roll somewhat nerve wracking though.

Also, as a more general suggestion, since in the campaign check system low results are better, I'd see about making all charts similar- low results are the 'best'.

-Will

[mavikfelna]

Exploration does something like this- there's a second chart to see what exactly happens (other than 'force in peril'), so it's not always a total disaster. It does make every roll somewhat nerve wracking though.

Also, as a more general suggestion, since in the campaign check system low results are better, I'd see about making all charts similar- low results are the 'best'.

-Will

Consistency would be nice. There should definately only be one mechanism if at all possible and it needs to be applied across all sections. The occasional exception is ok if there is a REALLY good reason for it but most of the time those sorts of things can be avoided. This applies to how you apply modifiers as well as the base roll system. IE, if you start out by modifier being applied to the base chanse of success, then they should always be applied to the base chance of success, not the roll.

But I still have problems with the odd/even success system. It greatly reduces the ability of legendary officers and crew to mitigate bad results or improve good results and it doesn't allow for much in the way of situational adjustments. It seems very arbitrary in its results.

I would much rather say something along the lines of, any roll that succeeds or fails by 50% is a major success/failure. If the chance of success/failure is equal to or less than 5% than any roll from 1-5/95-100 cannot be a major success/failure. And possibly, the chance of major success or failure may not be greater than 50. IE, even if the chance of success is 125%, a major success will only occur on a roll of 50 or less.

So in example, the chance of success is 35% (and we're assuming lower is good) than a roll of 17 or less is a major success and a roll of greater than 68 is a major failure. if you had, let's say, a legendary sensor operator with a +10 to sensor checks trying to make the roll, he'd make the chance 45%, thereby raising the major success chance to 22 and reducing the major failure chance to 73.

There is a little more math this way but I think the payoff is much greater.

--Mav

[Gareth_Perkins]

But I still have problems with the odd/even success system. It greatly reduces the ability of legendary officers and crew to mitigate bad results or improve good results and it doesn't allow for much in the way of situational adjustments. It seems very arbitrary in its results.

Well it is a dice roll, it is arbitrary in nature

To some extent shouldn't legendary officers etc affect the basic chance of success - with the knock-on effect that even with the odd/even system the odds of getting a major fail drop (and a major success rise)?

There is a little more math this way but I think the payoff is much greater.

I'm very much a proponent of "simpler is better" for the die roll mechanic - it comes up a lot in the game so you don't want it complex (I'm also not really a proponent of using a D100 for the roll),

Also, that doesn't really cover the gap between minor and major failure - just papers over the crack so to speak,

I'm not quite sure I get your system? It seems to be a variant of the old system, just tones down a little (i.e.: halve the TN for major success, double it for major failure)? My issue with that was that it makes the likelihood of major results insanely high at times (you have covered that to some extent by restricting the odds to 50% - but that's still a lot of major results),

I would almost rather see a 2D10 system with average difficulties set at around 8+, and 2 or less or 20+ (as well as natural 2's and 20's) being major results (1% of each with no mods),

Total Mods would then need to be in the range of -9 - +6 or so, and if wanted then special characters could alter these thresholds slightly,