Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Early Access Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[rusty_shackleford]

For most rolls using a 2d10 or 3d6 over a 1d20 doesn't actually do much, it's a misunderstanding of statistics and probability. I already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

???
The median curve is much more skewed towards averages when rolling multiple dice, unlike the complete flat randomness of the d20.
Thing is, that die is iconic so it's never getting changed, although other solutions would be better since they make skills/proficiency more relevant

Correct me if I'm wrong but RNGes of skills and prof is a MAJOR complaint regarding bg3 rolls? Aka RNG rules over shitty skills.

This is an issue with 5E, not the dice. The bonuses at low levels are so small that the dice roll easily overpowers them.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

For most rolls using a 2d10 or 3d6 over a 1d20 doesn't actually do much, it's a misunderstanding of statistics and probability. I already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

???
The median curve is much more skewed towards averages when rolling multiple dice, unlike the complete flat randomness of the d20.
Thing is, that die is iconic so it's never getting changed, although other solutions would be better since they make skills/proficiency more relevant

Correct me if I'm wrong but RNGes of skills and prof is a MAJOR complaint regarding bg3 rolls? Aka RNG rules over shitty skills.

This is an issue with 5E, not the dice. The bonuses at low levels are so small that the dice roll easily overpowers them.

decent rundown on it btw:
https://dmdavid.com/tag/in-dd-next-ability-modifiers-are-too-small-for-the-ability-check-mechanic/

The bonuses at lower levels in 3.5E were much bigger(relatively) so you didn't see this issue.

 

[Galdred]

It's not a misunderstanding like someone else explained if I remember correctly. It creates a bell curve which is what is needed.

For most rolls using a 2d10 or 3d6 over a 1d20 doesn't actually do much, it's a misunderstanding of statistics and probability. I already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

???
The median curve is much more skewed towards averages when rolling multiple dice, unlike the complete flat randomness of the d20.
Thing is, that die is iconic so it's never getting changed, although other solutions would be better since they make skills/proficiency more relevant

The problem is that you're viewing the rolls in a vacuum rather than what they're actually used for.
2d10, 3d6, etc., are just an attempt to model a normal curve using dice.

You'd see probably 1-2 changed outcomes from an entire session. It's nowhere near as big as people seem to think it is.

But the standard deviation of 3D6(2.96) is much lower than the standard deviation of a D20(5.77).

But it is true that the current issue of the 5th edition is the small ability ranges rather than the standard deviation of the D20.
In D20 5, getting advantages/disadvantages make the ability modifiers stand out more.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It's not a misunderstanding like someone else explained if I remember correctly. It creates a bell curve which is what is needed.

For most rolls using a 2d10 or 3d6 over a 1d20 doesn't actually do much, it's a misunderstanding of statistics and probability. I already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

???
The median curve is much more skewed towards averages when rolling multiple dice, unlike the complete flat randomness of the d20.
Thing is, that die is iconic so it's never getting changed, although other solutions would be better since they make skills/proficiency more relevant

The problem is that you're viewing the rolls in a vacuum rather than what they're actually used for.
2d10, 3d6, etc., are just an attempt to model a normal curve using dice.

You'd see probably 1-2 changed outcomes from an entire session. It's nowhere near as big as people seem to think it is.

But the standard deviation of 3D6(2.96) is much lower than the standard deviation of a D20(5.77).

But it is true that the current issue of the 5th edition is the small ability ranges rather than the standard deviation of the D20.
In D20 5, getting advantages/disadvantages make the ability modifiers stand out more.

Did you even read my post? You just did exactly what I described.

Unless you're really trying to hit a specific number(hint: this is basically never the goal in an RPG,) you should be graphing "at least N".

 

[Galdred]

It's not a misunderstanding like someone else explained if I remember correctly. It creates a bell curve which is what is needed.

For most rolls using a 2d10 or 3d6 over a 1d20 doesn't actually do much, it's a misunderstanding of statistics and probability. I already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

???
The median curve is much more skewed towards averages when rolling multiple dice, unlike the complete flat randomness of the d20.
Thing is, that die is iconic so it's never getting changed, although other solutions would be better since they make skills/proficiency more relevant

The problem is that you're viewing the rolls in a vacuum rather than what they're actually used for.
2d10, 3d6, etc., are just an attempt to model a normal curve using dice.

You'd see probably 1-2 changed outcomes from an entire session. It's nowhere near as big as people seem to think it is.

But the standard deviation of 3D6(2.96) is much lower than the standard deviation of a D20(5.77).

But it is true that the current issue of the 5th edition is the small ability ranges rather than the standard deviation of the D20.
In D20 5, getting advantages/disadvantages make the ability modifiers stand out more.

Did you even read my post? You just did exactly what I described.

Unless you're really trying to hit a specific number(hint: this is basically never the goal in an RPG,) you should be graphing "at least N".

Even using this representation, the curbs are nowhere near similar:

Relative failure rate:
4+: 32
5+: 10.8
6+: 5.4
7+: 3.2
8+:2.2
9+:1.54
10+: 1.0
Then they get inverted above 10

So your chance of failing a 4+ on D20 is 32 times higher than with 3D6
The chance of failing 5+ is 10.8 times higher on a D20 than on 3D6 and so on...

 

[Reinhardt]

DDO, today -

 

[Ontopoly]

I feel like I'm in a Josh sawyer twitch stream with all this talk of dice roll odds.

ADnD is better than 5th edition for the simple fact that it doesn't have the disadvantage/advantage system. Seems like something larian would come up with which makes their new partnership make sense.

Ultimately, Pathfinder and 3.5 reign supreme.

 

[Lacrymas]

Advantage/Disadvantage is a very elegant and clever system.

 

[Saravan]

Very disappointed that the IQ bell curve war ended by just one page. I was getting the popcorn ready for 5-pages of in depth analysis and expected at least one reference to a peer-reviewed study.

 

[Lacrymas]

There's nothing to discuss, he's simply wrong.

 

[Cryomancer]

Thanks to Larian, CRPG's are popular again.

Correction. Thanks to DECLINE, Larian games are popular. The best Larian game is Divine Divinity and DD just can't compete with other games from early 00s. And if modern game journos like Larian games, is a indicative that their games are bad, not that they are good.

A game journo reaction when he tries good RPG's>


How the SAME game journo reviewing DOS2

The genre was dead before DOS1.

Nope. was Pillars of Eternity who resurrected the genre. Showed that there is a demand for CRPG's. I don't like PoE but if wasn't by PoE, we would't have much better games like Kingmaker.

 

[Reinhardt]

A game journo reaction when he tries good RPG's>

ENHANCED EDITION

 

[Heroic Liberator]

You're turning into Ontopoly, Meredoth.

 

[Oberon]

I disagree that 5E is too basic for a CRPG. If 2E was good for CRPG's, then so is 5E

Imagine that the same people who think "5E is too simple" worship at the altar of 2E. The cognitive incongruence of these people never ceases to amaze me

imo 3.5 is the best, but the main reason I prefer 2e over 5e is that 5e feels like a gaiaonline rp, while 2e is pure grognard-core

 

[Thac0]

I am not always supportive to D&D ideas of Lacrymas, but this one is ok.
It is not first time when this idea surfaces on Codex (I am not even sure this idea is brought by Lacrymas in first place), because sometimes RNG in D&D feels like gambling than part of RPG system.
Sure, overwhelming success or failure is part of the tabletop experience, but it should depends a bit more on player investment in skills/stats than blind luck. It is an RPG after all.
Also it is possible to use 1d20 and 2d10 for different kind of rollls, don't see a problem here.

One "problem" would be, that it slightly raises success chance from all rolls across the boards. Average of 1d20 is 10,5. Average of 2d10 is 11. That 0,5 will pull a lot of weight long term.
That said modern 5e is fundamentally a powerfantasy ruleset. Making the PCs better at everything by letting them roll 2d10, while the DM rolls 1d20 for NPCs would not be catastrophal.
However it also significantly reduces the amount of critical hits that appear, and players love those.
So you do not only curb the distribution to more standard rolls, you also get some secondary effects you should be aware off.

But still getting butthurt at your players refusing to change the core dice is retardo, because that is what DnD is. DnD is gambling, most D20 based systems are. If the players come to the table with the expectation to play DnD, with all that entails, they also expect the very high volatility of the D20.

I would change the ruleset before I change the D20. It is not like there is a lack of viable rulesets nowadays.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Nope. Is vastly superior;

Too bad a sweater smell turd is still a turd.

Muh "bad games"

Thanks to Larian, CRPG's are popular again. Larian paved the way for Owlcuck games and all the rest. The genre was dead before DOS1.

Everyone besides codex autist neckbeards find DOS2 to be a great game, hell you mongoloids even voted it to be RPG of the year. Yet retarded contrarians want to be edgy now and hate on the now big dog, meanwhile the gopniks from owlcuck games are now the underdog.

"Muh reviews." People enjoy rank shit like BG3 and Divinity 2 and their mobile game inspired drag and drop engine. On top of that, no more than 11% of people who own the game completed it (even on the easiest mode). No more than 29% of players every got off the second map. Only 50% of players even got of the prison island. That's according to the Steam achievements. Steam reviews aren't an argument for anything. Most of those reviewers probably didn't even get past the second island let alone complete the game. Their reviews are worthless. I doubt the people on metacritic even got of the tutorial boat.

 

[Saravan]

Nope.

Nope.

Nope.

Nope. Nope.

Nope.

 

[Riddler]

Very disappointed that the IQ bell curve war ended by just one page. I was getting the popcorn ready for 5-pages of in depth analysis and expected at least one reference to a peer-reviewed study.

You can always revisit the old classic if you want to expand your brain: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=107926751&page=1

 

[Thonius]

Nope. Is vastly superior;

Too bad a sweater smell turd is still a turd.

Muh "bad games"

Thanks to Larian, CRPG's are popular again. Larian paved the way for Owlcuck games and all the rest. The genre was dead before DOS1.

Everyone besides codex autist neckbeards find DOS2 to be a great game, hell you mongoloids even voted it to be RPG of the year. Yet retarded contrarians want to be edgy now and hate on the now big dog, meanwhile the gopniks from owlcuck games are now the underdog.

"Muh reviews." People enjoy rank shit like BG3 and Divinity 2 and their mobile game inspired drag and drop engine. On top of that, no more than 11% of people who own the game completed it (even on the easiest mode). No more than 29% of players every got off the second map. Only 50% of players even got of the prison island. That's according to the Steam achievements. Steam reviews aren't an argument for anything. Most of those reviewers probably didn't even get past the second island let alone complete the game. Their reviews are worthless. I doubt the people on metacritic even got of the tutorial boat.

Are those actual numbers? Achievement wise I mean, because it seems that PFK despite being less popular got a higher rate.
BTW I still can't believe they made a skeleton shapeshifting race and were like, yes that's a cool race. And then added romances....

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Are those actual numbers? Achievement wise I mean, because it seems that PFK despite being less popular got a higher rate.
BTW I still can't believe they made a skeleton shapeshifting race and were like, yes that's a cool race. And then added romances....

Yeah. Those are about the actual numbers for the steam achievements.

 

[Lacrymas]

One "problem" would be, that it slightly raises success chance from all rolls across the boards. Average of 1d20 is 10,5. Average of 2d10 is 11. That 0,5 will pull a lot of weight long term.
That said modern 5e is fundamentally a powerfantasy ruleset. Making the PCs better at everything by letting them roll 2d10, while the DM rolls 1d20 for NPCs would not be catastrophal.
However it also significantly reduces the amount of critical hits that appear, and players love those.
So you do not only curb the distribution to more standard rolls, you also get some secondary effects you should be aware off.

But still getting butthurt at your players refusing to change the core dice is retardo, because that is what DnD is. DnD is gambling, most D20 based systems are. If the players come to the table with the expectation to play DnD, with all that entails, they also expect the very high volatility of the D20.

I would change the ruleset before I change the D20. It is not like there is a lack of viable rulesets nowadays.

The difference is that it's easier to get that average with a 2d10 than it is with a d20, which is just a flat distribution and it has no "average" in that sense. Redistributing AC values within a 2d10 system would be more practical and intuitive. I do not see any downsides to this at all outside of an assault on purism.

 

[Cryomancer]

I do not see any downsides to this at all outside of an assault on purism.

Why not gurps style 3d6?

"but criticals would be too rare, you have 0.46%(1/6*1/6*1/6) chances of getting a 18". Make crit on 17 and 18. Would't be as common as d20 critical(5%), but would exist non the less.

The main advantage of GURPS is that you only need d6 to play it.

ENHANCED EDITION

EE on story mode was too much for the game journo who loved DOS2.

I like how you've still not played 5E tabletop, lol.

I am trying to find a group to play Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea, sadly here in codex only one person send me a char sheet yet. I am trying to get more people to play on discord. BTW, you would probably enjoy AS&SH. Is much more lower magical setting than any D&D setting. The level cap is 12 and things like revive has a lot of risks and downsides. Magic users takes more XP to level up and are much more specialized than D&D magic users with unique spell lists for pyromancers, necromancers, cryomancers, illusionists and witches.

Playing in table takes a lot of time and effort. I wanna play retroclones if I will have that much work.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

You can always revisit the old classic if you want to expand your brain: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=107926751&page=1

Holy shit, please everybody stop arguing about 2E vs. 5E and read this golden thread and let's laugh at it together.

I don't even know why we're arguing, everybody knows 2E and 3.5 are the best anyways.

manspreads

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

For most rolls using a 2d10 or 3d6 over a 1d20 doesn't actually do much, it's a misunderstanding of statistics and probability. I already pointed this out earlier in the thread.

Unless you're really trying to hit a specific number(hint: this is basically never the goal in an RPG,) you should be graphing "at least N".

Probability of achieving a hit (or other success), which depends on rolling at least N, with 1d20 versus 2d10:

 %Success     %Success
N 1d20   2d10  2d10    Ratio Difference
1 100%   0.00  100%    1.00     0%
2  95%   0.01  100%    1.05    -5%
3  90%   0.02   99%    1.10    -9%
4  85%   0.03   97%    1.14   -12%
5  80%   0.04   94%    1.18   -14%
6  75%   0.05   90%    1.20   -15%
7  70%   0.06   85%    1.21   -15%
8  65%   0.07   79%    1.22   -14%
9  60%   0.08   72%    1.20   -12%
10 55%   0.09   64%    1.16    -9%
11 50%   0.10   55%    1.1     -5%
12 45%   0.09   45%    1.00     0%
13 40%   0.08   36%    0.90     4%
14 35%   0.07   28%    0.80     7%
15 30%   0.06   21%    0.70     9%
16 25%   0.05   15%    0.60    10%
17 20%   0.04   10%    0.50    10%
18 15%   0.03    6%    0.40     9%
19 10%   0.02    3%    0.30     7%
20 5%    0.01    1%    0.20     4%

The difference, expressed in percentage points, shows the proportion of time the outcome will change (the sign indicates the direction of the change), given a particular N needed to hit, by shifting between 1d20 and 2d10. Overall, 2d10 is 2.5 percentage points more likely to hit.

 

[agris]

You can always revisit the old classic if you want to expand your brain: https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=107926751&page=1

Holy shit, please everybody stop arguing about 2E vs. 5E and read this golden thread and let's laugh at it together.

I don't even know why we're arguing, everybody knows 2E and 3.5 are the best anyways.

manspreads

BG3 will be unmitigated shit because Larian don’t know how to make a crpg that isn’t a crayola daydream lootfest with horrible writing…

…BUT goddamn was that a funny thread.