Does it bother anyone else that 7's can't be rolled? I assume I'm not the first person to suggest an alternative but what I've done with my group that works well is to substitute D8's.
Rule of 6 becomes rule of 7, rule of 1 becomes rule of 0, and all 8's are treated as rolls of 0. The curve is altered slightly, but its altered for everyone. So far its worked like a charm. Anyone else have ideas?
Full Version: D7 rather than D6
How do you account for rolling zeros in Shadowrun? You've basically doubled the chance for the Rule of One, and increased failures in general (maybe, probably offset by adding the 7 result).
Not at all, the rule of zero replaces the rule of one, the larger spread of 8 digits per die actually makes failure or spectacular success less, though only to a small degree.
So, really, you've replaced the Rule of 6 with the Rule of Seven. And changed 1s from automatic failures to zero. (And ones still fail because no TN can be lower then 2) Now you can't roll 8s. Doesn't seem worth it to me, unless you just like the additional possibilities of a real TN 7.
If you roll a 7, then reroll that seven and roll a 1 you get an 8. If you roll a 7 and then reroll an 8 you get a 7 as all 8's = 0. Is this making sense?
True 7=6 for SR, but using another die effectively creates the same problem.
I really like SR's dice system, the Rule of Six is a very different approach than most of games have tried.
Just let go an accpet it for what it is.
I really like SR's dice system, the Rule of Six is a very different approach than most of games have tried.
Just let go an accpet it for what it is.
So what if you roll an 8 on the first die? Are you applying the 8 sided rules just to the bonus rolls?
I used to use a version where a roll of '6' was treated as '5+reroll'. Hence a rerolled 1 would equal a total of 6, '2' would equal '7', etc. If another '6' was rolled with the reroll it would also be treated as '5+reroll', etc.
This can tend to severely screw with high TNs, making them even more difficult to achieve.
In the end I decided that Shadowrun contains enough modifiers to TN that this was really unnecessary.
This can tend to severely screw with high TNs, making them even more difficult to achieve.
In the end I decided that Shadowrun contains enough modifiers to TN that this was really unnecessary.
I respect your opinion Grinder, but I don't agree with it. Most folks stick with the D6, but its the part of the game I don't like.
Whenever you roll an 8 it equalls a 0. Like I said, it drives the curve up, but not signifigantly, and it drives it up for everyone. The extra low digit is offset by the extra high digit (the 7) and what it does is to dilute the number of rules of 0 and rules of 7 you end up with out of a typical roll of the dice.
Whenever you roll an 8 it equalls a 0. Like I said, it drives the curve up, but not signifigantly, and it drives it up for everyone. The extra low digit is offset by the extra high digit (the 7) and what it does is to dilute the number of rules of 0 and rules of 7 you end up with out of a typical roll of the dice.
I dunno, it seems you really end up having the same problem, just with 8s, and now twice as many automatic failures.
I'm not sure I see the merit in doing this one either.
First off, you've just moved the 6-7 problem to a 7-8 problem. That seems insignificant to me.
Second off, are you allowing difficulty one target numbers now? Can a 1 succeed on a test? If not, you've just increased the chance of failure on easy tasks dramatically. (Difficulty 2 goes from 87% chance to 75% chance on 1 die.)
Third off, are you altering weapon damage codes or character attributes? If not, then guns are a good 10% less lethal, and human max attributes don't align with the dice anymore. (You've got max die roll = 7, but max attribute = 6. That's going to have some concordance problems.)
I suspect there's other issues you're not noticing also.
First off, you've just moved the 6-7 problem to a 7-8 problem. That seems insignificant to me.
Second off, are you allowing difficulty one target numbers now? Can a 1 succeed on a test? If not, you've just increased the chance of failure on easy tasks dramatically. (Difficulty 2 goes from 87% chance to 75% chance on 1 die.)
Third off, are you altering weapon damage codes or character attributes? If not, then guns are a good 10% less lethal, and human max attributes don't align with the dice anymore. (You've got max die roll = 7, but max attribute = 6. That's going to have some concordance problems.)
I suspect there's other issues you're not noticing also.
| QUOTE (the_dunner) |
| I'm not sure I see the merit in doing this one either. First off, you've just moved the 6-7 problem to a 7-8 problem. That seems insignificant to me. Second off, are you allowing difficulty one target numbers now? Can a 1 succeed on a test? If not, you've just increased the chance of failure on easy tasks dramatically. (Difficulty 2 goes from 87% chance to 75% chance on 1 die.) Third off, are you altering weapon damage codes or character attributes? If not, then guns are a good 10% less lethal, and human max attributes don't align with the dice anymore. (You've got max die roll = 7, but max attribute = 6. That's going to have some concordance problems.) I suspect there's other issues you're not noticing also. |
No, there is no 7-8 problem. If you roll a 7 the first roll, and then reroll and add to it, now you can actually roll a 7 by rolling an 8 the second time, which is equal to 0, and thus 7+0 is 7.
TN's below 2: Well, look at it this way. No target number can start off below a 2. But, with modifiers they can become below 2. For example, a smartlink. (This is not canon, but a way to change things so that there are TN's below 2)
Altered probability curves: The probability curve of the d8, when rolled in the above stated fashion, is remarkably similiar to the probability curve of the d6 when rolled using the rule of six. Also, who said max attribute is 6? Maybe for a human, with no cyber and bio ware, and no edges that increase his attributes, and only at the start of the game, but with a little karma, or as an orc, or with cyber/bioware, or with magic, attributes go above 6 easily. This is Shadowrun, after all.
There are not really any other issues, other than getting used to reading the dice. My old group played with d8's for about a year, and it worked out very well.
Finally, for more information on the subject, go here: http://tss.dumpshock.com/html/tss-13/index.htm
which is an old TSS article about SR D8.
It works.
Actually, there is one drawback....you can't raid old Monopoly and Yahtzee games to find d8's, like you can with six siders
Derek
Okay, I expected resistance but thought I might find someone who had at least tried this, or something similar. I ran my game with this dice system when I was playing 5 years ago and it worked quite well. The problem wasn't moved to 7-8's, it was eliminated (though as I said the curve changed slightly). Both 7's and 8's are now possible as legitimate roll results wheras before one digit was completly lost.
Yes you may now gain a success on a 1, wheras 0 (camoflauged as an
always fails. Damage/Drain/Matrix codes remain the same, its way to much work to change them and the game played quite well without touching them. I will take my pet house rule and polish it behind my back now. 
Yes you may now gain a success on a 1, wheras 0 (camoflauged as an
always fails. Damage/Drain/Matrix codes remain the same, its way to much work to change them and the game played quite well without touching them. I will take my pet house rule and polish it behind my back now.
You are of course free to use whatever house rules you like. 
Just because some of us ask questions or point out issues doesn't mean it's a bad idea, just an idea some of us wouldn't use. Entirely subjective.
Just because some of us ask questions or point out issues doesn't mean it's a bad idea, just an idea some of us wouldn't use. Entirely subjective.
| QUOTE (Derek) |
| [QUOTE=the_dunner,Oct 4 2004, 09:13 AM] Finally, for more information on the subject, go here: http://tss.dumpshock.com/html/tss-13/index.htm which is an old TSS article about SR D8. It works. Actually, there is one drawback....you can't raid old Monopoly and Yahtzee games to find d8's, like you can with six siders Derek |
Thanks for the support Derek... but now you've shown me that this wasn't my idea first. Actually I had guessed that someone else may have thought of it (one of the reasons for the post), but seeing it in blazing print was a bit of a shocker.
| QUOTE (twofalls) |
| Okay, I expected resistance but thought I might find someone who had at least tried this, or something similar. I ran my game with this dice system when I was playing 5 years ago and it worked quite well. The problem wasn't moved to 7-8's, it was eliminated (though as I said the curve changed slightly). Both 7's and 8's are now possible as legitimate roll results wheras before one digit was completly lost. Yes you may now gain a success on a 1, wheras 0 (camoflauged as an always fails. Damage/Drain/Matrix codes remain the same, its way to much work to change them and the game played quite well without touching them. I will take my pet house rule and polish it behind my back now. |
We all have things about our games we like to change, the nice thing is, we can do it, which is a far cry from computer FRPG where you must obey what is programmed.
We house rule things that are gray-areas, and overlook some rules for simplier (or more realistic) gameplay. Make it your game.
Enjoy.
WTF
It would work if you also allowed target numbers of 1 (instead of 1 always being a fail) but WHY. I don’t see it actually improving everything.
Predicted changes.
Open tests no change.
Low TN slightly easier
High TN a lot harder
I assume that the 7-8 problem will not be present because the second roll can be 0 (
I never actually had a problem with the TN 6-7 issue.
Edward
It would work if you also allowed target numbers of 1 (instead of 1 always being a fail) but WHY. I don’t see it actually improving everything.
Predicted changes.
Open tests no change.
Low TN slightly easier
High TN a lot harder
I assume that the 7-8 problem will not be present because the second roll can be 0 (
I never actually had a problem with the TN 6-7 issue.
Edward
| QUOTE (twofalls) |
| Does it bother anyone else that 7's can't be rolled? |
They can, it's sixes that can't. And no, it doesn't bother me. Should it?
| QUOTE |
| I assume I'm not the first person to suggest an alternative but what I've done with my group that works well is to substitute D8's. |
Seen it before, there are threads around. I think the last one was… I want to say May. I know there were a few last winter, too.
~J
Yah, it's definately a recuring topic. Using d6s and treating a roll of '1' through '5' as that value and a roll of '6' as 5+next roll is a more common (and much less expensive) solution than breaking out the d8s. There are people around here that have put this into practice. I think there might also be an article in some archive page about this? Bull's?
There was an earlier discussion where I posted the probability tables for both D8s and D10s. IIRC the D10s produced a much nicer curve that the D8s did. Using 0-9 and adding 1 to all the standard TNs (or not, if you want a slight bias toward success) works fine.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.