Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: shadowrun d10
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
hi guys

since i started SR ive always had a problem with the dice rolling system:
difficulty 6 being twice as hard as 5, 7 being the same as 6 ...

ive seen a nice looking conversin to d8 , with the 8 being counted as 0
however, my group doesnt have any d8, only d6 from SR and d10 from some other gaming world with vampires and mages and stuff , so i thought about using the d10 for SR
howerver, even with the 10 counting as 0, this would affect the game balance

shor comparison chart, chance to succeed at diff. numbers from 1 to 18 with 1 die

diff.       d6      d10     d8
1         100      90     87.5
2         83.3     80     75
3         66.6     70     62.5
4          50      60      50
5         33.3     50     37.5
6         16.6     40     25
7         16.6     30     12.5
8         13.3     20     10.9
9         11.1     10     9.4
10         8.3       9      7.8
11         5,5       8      6.3
12         2.7       7      4.7
13         2.7       6      3.1
14         2.3       5      1.6
15         1.8       4      1.4
16         1.4       3      1.1
17         0.9       2       1
18         0.5       1      0.8

as we see, test would get quite a bit easier, but since this affects bo9th players and NPCs i dont think its such a big problem

Initiative however would be quite out of balance when using d10...

well, thats my thoughts on that subject for now, i would like to know if anyone has tried this already, and can help me
any input welcome
flamers beware, i dont take "d6 are sacred!" as a valid discussion argument

(edit) added propabilitys for Shadowrun D8, courtesy of David Buehrer
wobble.gif Actually I have no problem with your idea at all. I actually feel a little sheepish for not having thought of it myself since I have also experienced said game "with vampires and mages and stuff". My players regularly take the fact that in SR 6=7 and 12=13 to their advantage. If you can get the TN to 7 why sacrifice anything to get it to 6?
How is rolling a 6 twice as hard as rolling a 5 on a d6? Its a random number generating device there for any side of said dice has a 1 in 6 chance of coming up. As for the higher numbers 7 and so forth sure they are more difficult to get but then again if every test in Shadowrun was a success the game would become pretty damn boring and pointless to play. hell you might as well make it diceless at that point.

Tests are supposed to be hard sometimes, and shadowrunners are supposed to fail sometimes as is security meant to stop them. Its a dark and gritty game not a walk through a park.

Roll different dice if you must but try to come up with a better reason than the one you give. The system works fine as is.
Ol' Scratch
d10 is insane. A target number of 6 is supposed to be a tough one to hit, yet with a d10 it becomes as easy as a 4. Unopposed Tests in particular will become a nightmare of munchiness.

The variable chance of success at different target numbers is one of the charms of the Shadowrun system. You never really know what your chance of success is because the system is so non-linear that trying to calculate it on the fly requires a slide rule, so you're left just throwing the dice and hoping for the best.

If you want a mechanic that eliminates the 6=7 phenomenon that doesn't also require a complete reworking of target numbers, just assume that any roll of a 6 really means "5 + Reroll" whenever the target number is higher than 6. Only the probabilities for target numbers higher than 6 will be mildly affected, and then again with each increment of 6 beyond that.

But if you insist on using d10s, you're really going to need to revamp target numbers throughout the entire game because it grossly simplifies many of the most basic tests the game has.
Ol' Scratch
QUOTE (D.Generate @ Aug 7 2004, 08:16 AM)
How is rolling a 6 twice as hard as rolling a 5 on a d6?

Hitting a target number of 5 is accomplished on a roll of 5 or 6 on 1d6. Hitting a target number of 6 is accomplished only on a roll of 6 on 1d6. Two numbers vs. one number makes it twice as hard. The same is true of rolling a 9 vs. rolling a 10 on 1d10, however. I don't know why KYA thinks using a d10 will solve that.
That makes sense Dr. Funk. But it still doesn't make it twice as hard sure its a bit harder but not twice. And if he uses his idea of 10=0 then that changes the everythign too since 1's are auto failures. so now your chances of failing outright become "twice" as much. Also the chances of a critical failure becomes higher. So really he's just creating more problems and not really solving anything.
Austere Emancipator
QUOTE (D.Generate)
But it still doesn't make it twice as hard sure its a bit harder but not twice.

The probability of rolling any particular number on a six sided die is 1/6. The probability of rolling either of any two numbers on a six sided die is 1/3.

The probability of rolling either 5 or 6 is 1/3. The probability of rolling a 6 is 1/6.

So yes, math most certainly does make it twice as hard to roll a 6 as it is to roll a 5 or a 6.
Yea, so the chance of rolling a success against a TN 6 is twice as hard as a TN5, but the chance of rolling a 5 is the same as rolling a 6. Probably just a little confusion there.
It's the difference of trying hit a golf ball 150 yards, or at least 150 yards.

And yes i agree with Dr Funk, if you change the dice you have to change the whole Tn system.
John Campbell
QUOTE (D.Generate)
That makes sense Dr. Funk.  But it still doesn't make it twice as hard sure its a bit harder but not twice.

No, it's exactly twice as hard. You're twice as likely to roll a 5 or a 6 as you are to roll a 6.

And if he uses his idea of 10=0 then that changes the everythign too since 1's are auto failures. so now your chances of failing outright become "twice" as much.

The chance of failing at a TN of 2 becomes higher, but not twice as high. While rolling a 0 or a 1 on a d10 is twice as likely as rolling a 1 on a d10, the switch from d6 to d10 also changes the probabilities. You have 2 chances in 10 of rolling a 0 or a 1 on a d10, or a 20% chance. You have 1 chance in 6 of rolling a 1 on a d6, or a 16.7% chance.

Also the chances of a critical failure becomes higher.

Yes, assuming that the Rule of Ones becomes the Rule of Ones or Zeros, and not just the Rule of Zeros. But only 3.3% higher. And if only 0s are counted for critical failures, the chances for a single die drop from 16.7% to 10%, and the chances with multiple dice drop accordingly.

So really he's just creating more problems and not really solving anything.

I wouldn't say that. I think the finer target number resolution possible with larger dice could be very useful. It would require revamping every single TN in the game, though, which I consider not worth the effort. I'm not sure it's even possible, in fact, because there are some numbers that are used both as numbers of dice to roll and as target numbers, depending on the circumstance, and adjusting them to be TNs under a d10 system would throw things out of whack in the other direction when they're being used to determine available dice.
Cynic project
Or you could change the roll of six. Making each and evrytime you roll a six, you can reroll said die.If you beat the target number before you pick up the die and reroll it, go on as if ut was a new die. Making 6 and 7 different on a small scale. As in if you roll a six, you have a one in six chance of getting another six,and thus two succus from "one die".And if you are going for seven, when rolling a six, yes you will always get a succus, but you have to roll two more sixes to get two succuss.(At witch point you would have had three succusses with six)

A really luckily players rolls with one dice 6,6,6,4.
At TN 2-4, that is four succusses .He rolled over 2 with his 6.Seeing as he rolled over the TN he picks the die up and rolls it.It counted as a new die. He repeats this until he doesn't roll 6. You only get a new die, if the last number you rolled was hihger than your TN and the die is showing a 6.

AT 5-6, he would have gotten three succuses.

7-10, that is two.

11-20, that is one.
If you want to fix the 6-7 problem in Shadowrun, it's really not very hard. Just make the rule of 6 be "re-roll the die, adding 5 to the result" instead of 6 to the result. This makes high target numbers a little harder to hit, so you might want to take them down a bit, but completely solves the 6-7 problem (since 6 = 6 then 1, but 7 = 6 then 2). You can't avoid the part about 5 being twice as easy to hit as 6... that's true in all dice configurations (on a d8 7 is twice as easy as 8, for example).

well i like the idea because it makes the probabilitys so much neater rotfl.gif
all those neat and tidy tens....
unlike those messy sixes...
for target numbers from 1 to 10 use -> 1-(TN-1)/10
for target numbers from 11 to 20 use -> (1-{TN-11}/10)X1/10
for target numbers from 21 to 30 use -> (1-{TN-21}/10)X1/100

this will provide the probability of sucess from a single die, rerolling on a 10

for all those messy sixes
for target numbers from 1 to 6-> 1-(TN-1)/6
for target numbers from 7 to 12-> [1-(TN-1)/6]X1/6
for target numbers from 13 to 18->[1-(TN-1)/6]X1/6X1/6
for target numbers from 19 to 24->[1-(TN-1)/6]X1/6X1/6X1/6
this will provide the probability of sucess from a single die, rerolling on a 6
Hida Tsuzua
Another problem with the Rule of Six in Shadowrun now is that there is a small barrier between "extremely easy" to "insanely hard" for TNs. My group tried to expand the "difficult but possible" range of numbers though different ways ranging from simply increasing dice rolled to D8s. Finally keeping with the old D6 standard of Shadowrun, we created what I call the D56 system in that you reroll with a 5 or a 6 pushing allowable TNs up to 13s. Somewhere I have the charts about the chances of success and the like with the different systems if some are curious.
about rerolling on 5s and 6s, i actually tried working it out and i like the result.
it makes the higher target numbers not impossible biggrin.gif
but seriously i really like what it does to the probability tables.
for example a TN of 12 has a 10.65% chance of success when you reroll 5s and 6s as opposed to a 2.8% chance of success rerolling 6s only

TN#/ reroll only on 6s/ reroll on 5s and 6s
i made it bigger so you could see the decimals without going blind

and an all new statistical hang up wobble.gif not only does 6=7 but now 5=6 as well grinbig.gif

i might go on and do the list up to 18 tomorrow but i have got tired of typing

any way i think that it offers a much different scale of hardness. not as destablilising as using a d10 but enough to make a large difference.
Ol' Scratch
It's funny you mentioned that. I once experimented with using that very mechanic with the Aptitude edge (you get to reroll 5's and 6's when using the listed skill) instead of the target modifier in a higher-power game and it worked well for the power level. I wouldn't use it in a standard game, though, since it seemed to greatly lessen the impact of common target modifiers.
Hida Tsuzua
It also helps we are complete redoing TNs along with everything else. biggrin.gif While 5 is now the same as 6, all the other numbers have different chances of making it however slim (typically a 1% difference), as you can be rerolling off a 5 or 6 (or two or three).
all that 5/6 confusions could been easily solved by rereading my post:
difficulty 6 being twice as hard as 5
(emphasis added)

i know that using d10 mages a big problem with all the uncontested difficulty numbers out of the book, especially everything in the area 5-7
but i think i have enough GMin experience in my hat to improvise new target numbers where necessary

hmm, i think ill expand my propadility chart to d8 as well now (done)

also i dislike the "reroll on 5 and 6" idea, since it makes the TNs 5, 6 and 7 practically the same, increasing the problem i tried to fix

since im on vacation, it will take some time before i can playtest it with my group, but so far my players are not opposed to it

also, for the problem of the small barrier between easy and hard, thats what i want to fix the most, but it should make the dice system more diversified, not more simple

the d8 system is quite nice, except for the fact that diffs from 7 to 9 are even harder than in normal SR
You sir, are a glutton for punishment!

I don't see why you want to bother, you'd need to make alot of adjustments to the TN system to get it close to what SR uses. That and d6 are ALOT easier to find that d10 IMO.

I've considered using an d10-SR-type skill system, but it would be an different game.
Also you have to think... Dozens of hours of work for something that essentially ends up being the same system with a different die and slightly different probabilities. What's the point? It doesn't solve anyting it just moves it. a 10 is still twice as hard as a 9, same problem different breakpoint.
Having played a d20 system and a d10 system, using larger dice will give you the option of more flexibility in that you have a wider array of possible TNs.

Difficulty 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30+

Which allows for more situational modifiers if you so choose.

But if you're looking for complexity and detail, you might want to just use another game system entirely and drop the SR theme on it.

It'll be less pain in the long run.

6/7 isn't a problem just like sub-2 TNs aren't a problem. Well, unless your game never uses modifiers. Sure, that 7 may be "good enough", but all it takes is a point of negative mod from something to kick it up to 8, while someone at 6 has that point of leeway.

Ol' Scratch
The problem there is that it's odd that the guy facing a TN of 7 suffers a notable increase in his chance of failure for the exact same situational modifier that the TN 6 fellow is facing in the same situation. It works the same way in reverse, too. If they both have an Aptitude, TN 7 guy is having just as hard a time with his test as he did without the edge, while TN 6 guy has a significant improvement at succeeding in his.

But, again, the "6 = 5 + Reroll" houserule I've been using for a long while completely eliminates that without significantly impacting the value of target numbers or modifiers until you get to the really high numbers, at which point it's a lost cause anyway.
QUOTE (Siege)
But if you're looking for complexity and detail, you might want to just use another game system entirely and drop the SR theme on it.

Right. I've always liked d10 for the simple fact it tends to make the math easier to figured out vs. a d6 or even a d20. Pushing the game into "percentages" to me seemed to make more sense and leave more room for finer detail adjustments. Maybe that was the whole point of SR to "wash over" the finer-detail and just make the game "fit together" without leaving huge gaps between TNs. You have to admit, SR has a fairly solid game mechanic.

Entertaining my non-SR thoughts for a minute...

I always wanted to incorporate percentage skills (using d10 vs. d6) with SR style "degree of success" tests , for example:

It would need some refinement, but you'd make 2 tests:

1) to hit
2) to determine how well.

Skills would have 2 parts:

1) Skill % (Pistols 80%, Car 75%, etc.)
2) Skill dice (Pistols 80% = 8, Car 75% = 7, etc.)


Pistols Skill 80% = 80% chance to hit (+/- modifiers and such) and once hit, roll the skill dice (8) vs. a TN (the armor rating) to determine the effects of the hit. It draws distinct lines between hitting the target (light, movement, conditions, wounds, etc.) and ammo vs. armor (armor piercing rounds, hardened armor, etc.).

Staging would be similar, but make each success do something instead of pairs of successes. I'd also want to make the condition monitor 100 instead of just 10 to help reflect the level of detail that would be available.

I like the "Power Level-Damage type" of coding, but would use numbers vs. names for more detail like "10-45" or "8-40". Maybe ammo type would determine the effects of staging instead of a generic number, so reg ammo. would be 5 dmg/success, explosive 8 dmg/success, APDS 10 dmg/success, etc. all subject to change vs. type of armor.

Ares Predator would be something like "13-30", Uzi III maybe "11-25", perhaps Sniper Rifle something like "21-65", but you can see the room that is allowed for detail.

Good thing is, your could apply this method to all the SR tests. Bad part is it would require two TN, first for just doing the task, and second for what the effects would be.

Thanks for listening.
I was always bothered by TN 6 and 7 (12/13 etc.) having the same probability, but never did anything about it. But there are some really good ideas here, and I played around with them to get something I like.

Here's the idea: I reroll 5 and 6, but I make the 5 'weak' meaning that it counts only 1 + new roll. That means, I can score another success against TN 6 by rerolling the 5 and getting a 5 or 6. I can score another success against TN 7 by rerolling the 5 and getting a 6. From TN 8+ I only reroll the 6, because I can't get past 7 with the 5es.

What I get is a smaller difference between 5 and 6, and a difference between 6 and 7. All other probabilities stay the same (until 12/13, ...).

5 33.3
6 22
7 19.4
8 13.8

Contra: It's a little more complicated, of course. But not too much.
Or you could play Cyberpunk and leave the Shadowruners alone...
QUOTE (Quix)
Initiative however would be quite out of balance when using d10...

I haven't played shadowrun YET so don't shoot me if I make an error.
As I see get it Shadowrun uses only D6s and you want to replace them with D10s. This can very well be doable but there is in my oppinion no reason to be limited to 1 type of dice. If you look at D&D you'll see that it uses all sorts of dice (D3,D4,D6,D8,D10,D12,D20,D100). So, I would suggest using the type of D most appropriate for the situation. So if a D6 does the trick for initiative than why would you change it?
In other words... Don't fix it if it isn't broken. And don't get stuck on a predetermined type of dice.

Hopefully I will be able to contribute more once I have my Shadowrun books.
If you want to keep the "look and feel" and maintain a balance going from d6 to d10, you're going to create a real nightmare for yourself. Yes, the probabilities are a lot nicer to think about, but the under the hood work is going to become a real nightmare. Here's a few consequences that you might want to consider:

Changing from d6's to d10's, is OK for skills where you can just tweak the target numbers, but what about opposed tests?

In order to carry the same "feel" you'll need to switch skills and attributes over to a 1-10 scale instead of a 1-6 scale.

To do that properly, as a ballpark figure, you could increase starting stat, skill, and spell points by 50%. Similarly, you'd need to bump up all of the basic target number mechanics for the game. (This includes Critter stats, Barrier values, Weapon and Armor stats, etc.)

Base to hit for ranged attacks would probably need to be a 6 instead of a 4. (You could argue a 7, it's a dark world, after all.) All +2 difficulty modifiers would need to be bumped to at least +3.

Changing your stat values from a base 6 to a base 10, is also going to make a real mess of cyberwear. After all, all of the essence values are now off. While you could just leave starting essence, at 6, that creates a real problem for mages. Why? 'Cuz they're going to need to start off at Magic 10 in order for spells to be balanced against a max body of 10. And, if you don't modify essence costs, then it suddenly becomes a LOT more economical for Mages to get wired. (Adept powers would need to be modified in the same way.) Further, losing a point of magic from injury becomes *less* of a threat when you've got 10 points to play with instead of 6.

When characters get around to advancing, you're going to need to tweak Karma awards -- again, probalby a 50% increase. And, you'll need to keep in mind that every grade of initiation is only worth about 66% of what it would be d6 shadowrun. (1 point of magic on a d10 <> 1 point of magic on a d6 scale.) So, you'll need to probably DROP the cost of initiation, in spite of the fact that you've RAISED the karma award.

The more I think about this, the more it seems like a really bad idea.
The probabilities aren't really much nicer, though, especially if you think of everything in terms of expected successes as opposed to flat probability of success. TN 6, 12 dice? Two expected successes. TN 10, 6 dice? Half a success expected. It really doesn't get simpler than that; the savings to go to d10 increments are trivial.

The easiest way to fix the 6/7 is to apply all appropriate modifiers. 6 and 7 are essentially the same until you apply the +2 TN for not being properly equipped or the -1 for having a charisma of 6.
Are we trying to simplify the overall dice mechanic?

Are we trying to move from throwing a handful of dice to one with modifications?

Are we trying to expand the available modifications to a die roll?

Looking at the first post, the objective is to move from D6 to D10.

(Note: less self-explanitory than it may seem, as if the objective were, say, mechanic simplification other dieshapes or non-die techniques could be used)

Eyeless Blond
I think what they're trying to do is change the probability curve for hitting certain TNs. See, with the d6 system the difficulty of hitting a specific TN becomes exponentially more difficult with a linear increase in TN. I suppose this "d10 system" is supposed to change that, making the curve less "steep".

The problem is that it doesn't work, and is in fact even worse than the current d6 system. Instead of multiplying the difficulty by 6 for every +6 to TN, you're multiplying the difficulty by 10 for every +10 to TN, so the end behavior is the same. All that changing from d6s to d10s does is make the local behavior weirder.

I'm putting far more hope in that "d6, reroll 5s and 6s" system someone mentioned above. The local behavior is even smoother than the current SR system, and it looks like the end behavior will be better as well, although trying to prove it is reminding me of those nightmares I had in college of drowning in greek symbols. nyahnyah.gif
The White Dwarf
Yea, thats it in nutshell.

Shadowrun has a *linear* tn advancement, but the difficulty of getting said tn is *exponential*. Which isnt even a problem, and in fact I rather like that conecpt. However HERES the problem:

TN modifiers dont scale.

Guy taking called shot at short range is tn 6. Guy with smartlink on same shot is tn 4. Guy with smartlink-2 on same shot is tn 2. Nice linear scale there, in both TNs and success chance. Throw the target behind cover, and you wind up with tn10, tn8, and tn6. Not too bad of a change. Now add in another +4 for visiblity, wounds, movment, whatever. Tn14, tn12, tn10. The original scaling is pretty much gone.

The point being that a -2 or +2 tn isnt the same change across the board, it varies depending on what else is being done. The -2 for smartlink (in this example) makes a big difference on clear shots and much less difference on harder shots, but its the same modifier.

The big advantage of using bigger dice (be it d10 or d20 or whatever) is that a bigger die doesnt eliminate break points... it evens out modifers. One of the best things about the d20 system, is that a 20 sided die is large enough that within the context of the system, a +2 is a +2 is a +2 no matter how many bonuses or penalties you have and where theyre coming from.

In SR, a +2 to drain tns isnt the same as a +2 to shooting tns or a +2 to damage resistance tns or a +2 on atheltics tests. Because the tns change all the time, and the die used is small, the modifers bump the tns into and out of drastically different success scales; when the actions are very similar.

Down with non-even modifiers =(
Capt. Dave
I love D6. I don't want, or need any blasted White Wolf or "that game's" dice mucking about with my beloved Shadowrun.
As soon as that happens, you start seeing street sams with +2 pistols of wounding and chaotic evil deckers.

Keep Shadowrun pure! cyber.gif
Necro Tech
QUOTE (The White Dwarf)
Guy taking called shot at short range is tn 6.  Guy with smartlink on same shot is tn 4.  Guy with smartlink-2 on same shot is tn 2.  Nice linear scale there, in both TNs and success chance.  Throw the target behind cover, and you wind up with tn10, tn8, and tn6.  Not too bad of a change.  Now add in another +4 for visiblity, wounds, movment, whatever.  Tn14, tn12, tn10.  The original scaling is pretty much gone.

A guy making a called shot at short range is 8. Short (4) + called (4). Point remains the same. wink.gif
The White Dwarf
Er, ya, thanks! Mind totally blanked on the basic math in light of harder math like probablity /gasp. Guess all those tns should be 2 higher but ya same point =)
Heh - actually, I'd enjoy seeing a full D&D + Shadowrun conversion just for a night of giggles.

"Hah! I slay the CE Corporator with my Flaming Burst Ingram Smartgun!"

GM: "You mean EX-X rounds?"

Player: "No, I mean my Flaming Burst Ingram SMG - but yes, it does have EX-X ammo!"


twirl.gif grinbig.gif spin.gif
lol siege

well, i'll playtest my ideas next week, and see how gamebalance changes
TN changes will be improvised on the fly, where needed
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012